Romans 5:7

Rom_5:7-8

For scarcely for a righteous man will one die … but God commendeth His love.

Human and Divine love contrasted

I. The love of man to his fellow creatures (Rom_5:7). You may find in history generosity and gratitude manifested by the greatest of all sacrifices--that of life. But such instances are rare. We read of dangers encountered, sufferings endured, for the purpose of rescuing others from destruction; but seldom of devotion to death, in order to deliver a fellow mortal from the heaviest calamity, or to procure for him the most precious privilege. When such an instance has occurred it has been uniformly a tribute paid to distinguished excellence, or an acknowledgment of obligations too strong and sacred to be fulfilled by a less noble or costly recompense.

1. Suppose an individual distinguished for honour and integrity, who had exerted himself on all occasions to maintain the rights, and redress the wrongs of others, whose righteous deportment, fidelity, and defence of truth had rendered him the object of profound and universal veneration; suppose that such a person, by the decree of despotism, were doomed to expiate an imaginary crime on an ignominious scaffold, would you step forward to save his life by the sacrifice of your own? No; nor can we imagine anyone doing it.

2. But, supposing that to righteousness we add benevolence--all that is melting in tenderness, winning in compassion, god-like in beneficence, would there be any among those to whom such characters are dearest, or any, even of those who had shared his kindness, that would agree to be his substitute? Yes; you may conceive such cases to occur. Still, however, the apostle speaks correctly; it is only some who would thus die for a good man--that, even for this act of chivalry daring would be required--and that after all, the fact must be qualified with a peradventure. To the statement of the apostle we may add that of our Lord, that greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends: This is the utmost limit to which human affection can go. And this may be still more readily admitted, if we consider friendship as comprehending those relationships which, binding husband and wife, parent and child, brother and sister, by a thousand endearments, instinctively prompt to efforts and endurances, from whose ample range even the terrors of death are not excluded.

3. But supposing a person iniquitous and hostile, condemned to die for his iniquity and rebellion, and under his sentence, cherished as bitter an enmity against his benefactor as he had ever done before, would that benefactor consent to suffer his judicial fate, in order to send him back again to the life and liberty he had so justly forfeited? Ah! no; that is a height of love which humanity has never reached, and of which humanity is utterly incapable. And were it ever to occur, we should be compelled to rank it amongst the greatest miracles.

II. The love of God to man is illustrated by two circumstances.

1. Christ died for us. The apostle could not speak of God dying for us, for death cannot possibly be predicted of Him who alone hath immortality. We must remember, therefore, who Christ was, as well as what He did. But in viewing His death as a manifestation of Divine love, we must recollect the connection which God had with it. The scheme, of which it formed the leading feature and the essential principle, was altogether of His appointment (Joh_3:16). And while God was thus so gracious, it becomes us to think of the relation in which Christ stood to Him. Christ was not the creature, nor the mere servant of God, but His only begotten and well beloved Son, the brightness of His glory, and the express image of His person. Yet God did not spare Him.

2. But the principal evidence of Gods love is that Christ died for us, while we were yet sinners. Had man been such as that the eye of God could have looked on him with complacency, or having fallen, had the feelings of penitence pervaded his heart, and made him willing to return, we should not have been amazed at Gods condescending love. But the marvel lies in this, that there was no good whatever to attract the regards of a holy being, and to invite a willing interposition of His benevolence. On the contrary, there was worthlessness and guilt to such a degree as to provoke a just indignation, to warrant an utter exclusion from happiness and hope. We were yet sinners when Christ died for us. There are resources in the eternal mind which are equally beyond our reach and our comprehension. There is a power, a magnitude, and a richness in the love of God towards those upon whom it is set which, to the experience of the creature, presents a theme of wondering gratitude and praise. Man loves his fellows; but he never did, and never can love them like God. Had He only loved us as man loves, there would have been no salvation, no heaven, no glad tidings to cheer our hearts. But behold! God is love itself. Guilt, which forbids and represses mans love, awakens, and kindles, and secures Gods. Death for the guilty is too wide a gulf for mans love to pass over. Gods love to the guilty is infinitely stronger than death. God forgives, where man would condemn and punish. God saves, where man would destroy. My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways My ways. Herein is love, etc. (A. Thomson, D. D.)

Christ and the martyrs

It was a principle in the breast of every Roman that he owed his life to his country. This being the spirit of the people, gave birth to many illustrious and heroic actions. The spirit of patriotism glowed among the people for many ages of the republic; one hero sprung from the ashes of another, and great men arose from age to age who devoted themselves to death for the public good. These being the most celebrated actions in the history of mankind, the apostle here compares them with the death of Jesus Christ.

I. Those who devoted themselves to death for their friends or their country, submitted to a fate which they must one day have suffered; but Jesus Christ, who is the true God, and possesseth eternal life, submitted to death for our redemption.

II. Those among the sons of men who devoted themselves to death for the good of others, made the sacrifice for their friends, for those by whom they were beloved; but Jesus died for his enemies.

III. He who dies a martyr for the public good, departs with honour; but Jesus made His departure with ignominy and shame. (J. Logan.)

The love of God the motive to mans salvation

I. The supreme dignity of Him who undertook the work of our salvation.

II. The state of humiliation to which He consented to be degraded in order to accomplish our redemption.

III. The relation borne to Him by those for whom this amazing testimony of loving kindness was enterprised and perfected. Inasmuch as we are by nature sinners, we are also by nature enemies of God. If it be the act of an enemy to slight, resist, and renounce the authority of our lawful sovereign; if it be the act of an enemy to range ourselves under the banners of a potentate in open hostility to our own; we who are by nature the children of disobedience, in subjection to the powers of darkness, alienated from the life of God, and the ministers and slaves of sin, are by an obvious inference the natural enemies of God. And standing in this relation to God, as rebels, it evidently appears how inefficacious anything in us could have been towards meriting our redemption and influencing Him to redeem us. There was in us, indeed, that which well deserved the wrath of God, and might well have left us exposed to the severity of His displeasure.

Conclusion:

1. The contemplation of this surprising love of God towards us ought to warm and expand our hearts and fill them with the most earnest love towards Him in return, and with the most zealous determination to obey Him.

2. The contemplation of the love of God, as having already interposed to save us by the sending of His Son, should fill us with a devout confidence in Him; persuaded that He who has conferred upon us of His free grace the greatest of all blessings will not withhold from us others which He may know to be for our good.

3. A third inference to be drawn from a contemplation of the love of God exemplified in the work of our salvation, is a further confidence that He will not leave it imperfect; but that if we love Him and keep His commandments, He which hath begun a good work in us will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ.

4. The contemplation of the love of God employed for our redemption, and the persuasion that our salvation is the gift of God, connected with the belief that we all had sinned and come short of His glory, etc.

5. But, then, whilst we renounce all hopes of salvation as merited by our works, we must be cautious not to disregard them as if they were not necessary to our salvation. (Bp. Mant.)

Unparalleled love

The grand doctrine of the Bible is that God loves apostate man. Nowhere else do we learn this. Nature teaches that God loves His creatures, but the volume of nature was written before the Fall, and it says nothing as to His affection towards man as a sinner. In every conceivable form the Bible impresses us with the fact that God loves man though a sinner. Note--

I. That man has, constitutionally, a kind affection for his species. The apostle is speaking here of men generally, and he says that in some cases the generous instincts of human nature would prompt to the utmost self-sacrifice. That man has this social kindness I maintain in the face of all the oppression and cruelty that make up a large portion of history. Notwithstanding the Pharaohs, Herods, Neros, Napoleons, there is a spring of kindness in human nature.

1. The tendency of sin is to destroy this element. Had sin not entered into the world, this element would have united all races in the bonds of a loving brotherhood.

2. The tendency of Christianity is to develop this element. Christianity recognises it, appeals to it, strengthens it. Blessed be God, bad as the world is, there is a fountain of love in its heart.

II. That some characters have a greater power to excite this affection than others.

1. The righteous man is not likely to excite it. Scarcely. Who is a righteous man? He is one who conforms rigorously to the outward forms of morality: he pays all that is demanded of him, and he will be paid to the utmost fraction of his due. He is what the cold mercantile world would call a respectable man. He has no generous impulses, no heart, and therefore cannot awaken love in others. The just man is not a very popular character.

2. The good man has power to excite it--the kind man--the man of warm sympathies, who can weep with those who weep. Such a man evokes the sympathies of others. He has often done so. Job opening, by his kindness, the heart of his age; Pythias enduring the punishment for Damon; and Jonathan and David, are cases in point.

III. That the sacrifice of life is the highest expression of affection. There is nothing man values so much as life. Friends, property, health, reputation, all are held cheap in comparison with life. To give life, therefore, is to give that which he feels to be of all the dearest things most dear. A man may express his affection by language, toil, gifts, but such expressions are weak compared with the sacrifice of life, which demonstrates powerfully both the intensity and the sincerity of that affection.

IV. That Christs death is the mightiest demonstration of affection. This will appear if you consider--

1. The characters for whom He died--sinners.

2. The circumstances under which He died. Not amid the gratitude of those He loved, but amid their imprecations.

3. The freedom with which He died. He was not compelled.

4. The preciousness of the life He sacrificed.

Conclusion: Learn--

1. The moral grandeur of Christianity. There is no such manifestation of love in the universe.

2. The moral power of Christianity. The motive it employs to break the heart of the world is this wonderful love. (D. Thomas, D. D.)

Self-sacrificing love for friends

Damon was sentenced to die on a certain day, and sought permission of Dionysius of Syracuse to visit his family in the interim. It was granted on condition of securing a hostage for himself. Pythias heard of it, and volunteered to stand in his friends place. The king visited him in prison, and conversed with him about the motive of his conduct; affirming his disbelief in the influence of friendship. Pythias expressed his wish to die that his friends honour might be vindicated. He prayed the gods to delay the return of Damon till after his own execution in his stead. The fatal day arrived. Dionysius sat on a moving throne drawn by six white horses, Pythias mounted the scaffold, and calmly addressed the spectators: My prayer is heard; the gods are propitious, for the winds have been contrary till yesterday. Damon could not come; he could not conquer impossibilities; he will be here tomorrow, and the blood which is shed today shall have ransomed the life of my friend. Oh! could I erase from your bosoms every mean suspicion of the honour of Damon, I should go to my death as I would to my bridal. My friend will be found noble, his truth unimpeachable; he will speedily prove it; he is now on his way, accusing himself, the adverse elements, and the gods; but I haste to prevent his speed. Executioner, do your office. As he closed, a voice in the distance cried, Stop the execution! which was repeated by the whole assembly. A man rode up at full speed, mounted the scaffold, and embraced Pythias, crying, You are safe, my beloved friend! I now have nothing but death to suffer, and am delivered from reproaches for having endangered a life so much dearer than my own. Damon replied, Fatal haste, cruel impatience! What envious powers have wrought impossibilities in your favour? But I will not be wholly disappointed. Since I cannot die to save, I will not survive you. The king heard, and was moved to tears. Ascending the scaffold, he cried, Live, live, ye incomparable pair! Ye have borne unquestionable testimony to the existence of virtue; and that virtue equally evinces the existence of a God to reward it. Live happy, live renowned, and oh! form me by your precepts, as ye have invited me by your example, to be worthy of the participation of so sacred a friendship.

Self- sacrificing love for a father

While Octavius was at Samos, after the battle of Actium, which made him master of the universe, he held a council to examine the prisoners who had been engaged in Antonys party. Among the rest there was brought before him an old man, Metellus, oppressed with years and infirmities, disfigured with a long beard, a neglected head of hair, and tattered clothes. The son of this Metellus was one of the judges; but it was with great difficulty he knew his father in the deplorable condition in which he saw him. At last, however, having recollected his features, instead of being ashamed to own him, he ran to embrace him. Then turning towards the tribunal, he said, Caesar, my father has been your enemy, and I your officer; he deserved to be punished, and I to be rewarded. One favour I desire of you; it is, either to save him on my account, or order me to be put to death with him. All the judges were touched with compassion at this affecting scene; Octavius himself relented, and granted to old Metellus his life and liberty.

Divine love

There are three gradations in which the love of God is here exhibited--

I. The love of infinite compassion. Contemplate--

1. The aspect under which man appeared to the most holy God. Paul tells us that men were--

(1) Sinners.

(2) Ungodly, i.e., living without God.

(3) Enemies.

(4) Objects of the Divine wrath.

2. The aspect under which the blessed God ought to be viewed by sinful man. Shall any hard thought of God be allowed a dwelling place in your hearts? Will you call in question His clemency? Is it possible for you to imagine that He takes delight in the death of a sinner? Herein is love, etc.

II. The love displayed in the exercise of that mercy which secures from the danger of future condemnation (verse 9). Consider--

1. The extent of privilege actually attained by every believer in the Lord Jesus Christ. He is justified by the blood of Christ--that is, God, in the capacity of a righteous lawgiver and judge, pronounces him righteous.

2. The security from final condemnation arising out of the state already attained. Much more … we shall be saved from wrath through Him.

III. The love displayed in complacency toward those who are in a state of reconciliation (verse 10). The life of Christ in heaven secures to the believer all needful resources during his progress towards the enjoyment of consummated salvation if you consider--

1. That His presence in heaven secures His continual and prevailing intercession on behalf of His people.

2. The perpetual communications of His grace as secured to us by His life in glory. All things are delivered unto Him by the Father--that is, for the use of His people. It hath pleased the Father that in Him shall all fulness dwell; therefore it pleased the Father that from His fulness should every needy disciple receive an abundant supply; so that of His fulness we, who have believed, do receive even grace for grace.

3. The interposition promised and pledged for the coming hour of our greatest emergency. The death and the life of Christ gives to the believer indeed no security against death, but full security in death and after death. (H. F. Burder, D. D.)

Divine love for sinners

We infer--

I. That God has love. He is not sheer intellect: He has a heart, and that heart is not malign but benevolent. He has love, not merely as an attribute, but in essence. Love is not a mere element in His nature; it is His nature. The moral code by which He governs the universe is but love speaking in the imperative mood. His wrath is but love uprooting and consuming whatever obstructs the happiness of His creation.

II. That God has love for sinners. Then--

1. This is not a love that is revealed in nature. It is exclusively the doctrine of the Bible.

2. This is not the love of moral esteem. The Holy One cannot love the corrupt character; it is the love of compassion--compassion deep, tender, boundless.

III. That Gods love for sinners is demonstrated in the death of Christ. This demonstration is--

1. The mightiest. The strength of love is proved by the sacrifice it makes. God gave His only begotten Son.

2. The most indispensable. The only way to consume enmity is to carry conviction that he whom I have hated loves me. This conviction will turn my enmity into love. God knows the human soul, knows how to break its corrupt heart; hence He has given the demonstration of His love in the death of Christ. (D. Thomas, D. D.)

Gods unparalleled love

1. Sacrifice is the true test of love.

2. Life is the greatest sacrifice man can make.

3. Such a sacrifice is possible, but exceedingly rare.

4. Supposes strong inducements.

5. But Christ died for His enemies.

6. He thus commends the love of God--because He is God--and is the gift of God. (J. Lyth, D. D.)

The love of God commended

I. By its objects--without strength--ungodly--sinners--enemies.

II. By its display--Christ died--for us.

III. By its purpose--our justification--reconciliation with God--final salvation.

IV. By its effect--joy in God. (Ibid.)

Self-sacrificing love

That young sailor who, when the last place in the lifeboat was offered him, drew back, saying, Save my mate here, for he has a wife and children, and went down himself with the sinking ship; that brave soldier who, in the moment of deadly peril, threw himself in front of his old masters son and fell dead with a smile upon his lips, the fatal bullet in his heart; that poor outcast woman, out in the wild winter night, who wrapped her baby in her own scanty dress and shawl, and patiently lay down in the snow to die, saving her childs life at the cost of her own; the pilot dying at his post on the burning steamer; the Russian servant casting himself among the wolves to save his master; the poor child dying in a New York garret with the pathetic words, Im glad I am going to die, because now my brothers and sisters will have enough to eat--these, and hundreds of true hearts like these, proclaim with the clearness of a voice from heaven, The hand that made us is Divine; and in our Fathers heart are higher heights of love, deeper depths of pity and self-sacrifice. (Ellen Wonnacott.)

Disinterested friendship

Edwin, one of the best and greatest of the Anglo-Saxon kings, flourished in the beginning of the seventh century. He was in imminent danger of perishing by the hand of an assassin, who had gained access to him under the guise of an ambassador. In the midst of his address the villain pulled out a dagger and aimed a violent blow at the king. But Edwin was preserved from danger by the generous and heroic conduct of Tilla, one of his courtiers, who intercepted the blow with his own body, and fell down dead on the spot. Thus did he cheerfully resign his own life to preserve that of his sovereign, whom he loved. But this instance of disinterested friendship loses all its charms, and sinks into insignificance when contrasted with the love wherewith Christ hath loved us. For God commendeth His love to us in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us.

Nature does not reveal Gods love

Nature does not reveal Gods love. We find His power there, undeviating cause and effect, irresistible force, iron law. But no love. The ocean, grand as it is, and beautiful even, will crush the egg shell you call your ship; the lightning kills; the torrent engulfs; the beautiful twilight air chills you; the lovely flower conceals poison under its gorgeous petals; a weak spot in a girder of iron precipitates a hundred people to an awful death; the sun strikes with deadly sickness; and who can stand before Gods cold? Careless or ignorant of her laws, man is a leaf underfoot, or a bubble on the wave. You may search ocean, air, and desert; you may traverse the whole universe of matter, and know all the secrets of science, and you can find no Christ. There is no hint of mercy, or love, or pardon, in the whole realm of nature. Gods might and majesty are there; but the love of God was manifested in this, that He sent His Son into the world that we might live through Him.

The love of Gods unspeakable gift

A crew of explorers penetrate far within the Arctic circles in search of other expeditions that had gone before them--gone and never returned. Failing to find the missing men, and yet unwilling to abandon hope, they leave supplies of food, carefully covered with stones, on some prominent headlands, with the necessary intimations graven for safety on plates of brass. If the original adventurers survive, and, on their homeward journey, faint yet pursuing, fall in with these treasures, at once hidden and revealed, the food, when found, will seem to those famished men the smaller blessing. The proof which the food supplies that their country cares for them is sweeter than the food. So the proof that God cares for us is placed beyond a doubt; the unspeakable gift of His Son to be our Saviour should melt any dark suspicion to the contrary from our hearts. (W. Arnot.)

The love of God commended

The manifestations of Gods love are many and various. If I look forth upon our glorious world I cannot but feel that God displays His love in the dwelling place which He hath given to the children of men. If I contemplate the succession of seasons, and observe how the sunbeam and the shower unite in the production of sustenance, I recognise love in the workings of Gods providence. Thus also, if I think upon man, the creature of mighty capacity, but of mightier destiny, I am necessarily conscious that infinite love presided originally over his formation. And, if I yet further remember that man, whose creation had thus been dictated by love, returned despite for benevolence, I might marvel, if I did not know that love rose superior to outrage, and, in place of forsaking the alien, suggested redemption. Note:--

I. How Christs sufferings were aggravated by the sinfulness of those amongst whom He suffered.

1. He possessed infinite perceptions of the nature of sin. He saw it without any of the varnish which it draws from human passion or sophistry; and He discerned that the least acting of impurity struck so vehemently against the bosses of the Almightys attributes, that it rebounded in vengeance, which must eternally crush the transgressor.

2. Now to this capacity of estimating sin, add

(1) The love which He bore to the Father. It would have accorded well with the longings of His heart, that He should succeed in bringing back the earth into obedience, so that the Almighty might draw His full revenue of honour. But when, from the contradiction of sinners against Himself, it became palpable that generations would yet do despite to His heavenly Father, this must inexpressibly have lacerated His soul.

(2) But vast also was His love to mankind; and here again His apprehensions of sin come into the account. It would be idle to enlarge on the greatness of that benevolence which had prompted the Mediator to undertake our rescue. The simple exhibition of Christ appearing as the surety of mankind remains ever the overwhelming and immeasurable prodigy. Yet when He beheld the beings, for every one of whom He was content to endure ignominy and death, pursuing obstinately the courses of unrighteousness, throwing from them the proffered boon of deliverance, it must have entered like a poisoned arrow into His pure and affectionate heart, and lacerating and cauterising wherever it touched, have made an inlet for sorrow where there never could be found admission for sin.

3. If an artist study to set forth the Christs sufferings, he has recourse to the outward paraphernalia of woe. Yet there is more in the simple expression that Christ died for us whilst we were yet sinners, than in all that the crayon ever produced, when the genius of a Raphael guided its strokes. We look in at the soul of the Redeemer--we are admitted as spectators of the solemn and tremendous workings of His spirit.

4. We attempt not to examine too nicely into the awful matter of the Mediators sufferings, suffice it that there is not one amongst us who was not a direct contributor to that weight of sorrow which seemed for a time to confound Him and to crush Him.

II. How completely these sufferings were irrespective of all claim on the part of those for whom they were endured. In the commencement of His dealings with our race, God had proceeded according to the strictest benevolence. He had appointed that Adam should stand as a federal head or representative of all men; had Adam obeyed, all men would have obeyed in him--just as when Adam disobeyed, all men disobeyed in him. We were not, in the strictest sense, parties to this transaction, but I hold that if we had had the power of electing we should have elected Adam, and that there would have been a wisdom in such procedure, which is vainly looked for in any other. And if this appointment cannot be arraigned, then it must be idle to speak of any claims which the fallen have upon the Creator; and whatsoever is done on their behalf must be in the largest sense gratuitous. If the arrangement were one into which the love which prompted the creation of man gathered and condensed its fulness, and its tenderness, then we lay it down that the compassions of the Most High towards our race might have closed themselves up, and, nevertheless, the inscription, God is love would have been graven upon our archives, and the lying tongue of blasphemy alone would have dared to throw doubt on its accuracy. But the love of God was a love which could not be content with having just done enough--it was a love which must commend itself--which must triumph over everything which could quench love. We were sinners, but, nevertheless, God loved us in our degradation, in our ruin. We were unworthy the least mercy, we had no claim to it--the minutest benefit, we had no right to it--but God commended His love towards us (H. Melvill, B. D.)

The love of God commended

Several considerations tend to enhance the greatness of the love of God towards us--

I. The dignity of the Saviour. He was no other than the eternal Son of God, coequal with the Father, infinitely endeared to Him by an ineffable union, and a full participation in all the attributes of the Divine nature. Hence when the death of Christ is mentioned great stress is laid on the dignity of His character, as that which gives worth and efficacy to His sufferings (Heb_1:3; 1Pe_1:19; 1Jn_1:7).

II. The Divine agency employed in Christs death. God did not spare His own Son, but freely delivered Him up as a victim in our stead, and called upon justice to make Him a sacrifice for us. Nor was the Divine agency employed merely in this part of our Saviours sufferings; it was also engaged in their actual infliction. Men crucified His body, but it was the Lord who made His soul an offering for sin; or it pleased the Lord to bruise Him, and put Him to grief; and herein is expressed the most astonishing wrath, and the most astonishing love.

III. The character of those for whom Christ died. While as yet no change was wrought in us, no good performed by us; while inveterate enemies to God, then it was that Christ died for us. It was also while we were yet without strength, either to do the will of God, or to deliver ourselves out of the hands of infinite justice. The patriot dies for his country; but Christ died for His enemies.

IV. The voluntary nature of Christs sufferings. His death was foreordained, and He had received a commandment of the Father that He should lay down His life for the sheep; yet He had power to lay down His life, and power to take it up again, and no one could take it from Him.

V. If we compare this manifestation with every other we shall here find its highest commendation. The blessings of Providence are incessant and innumerable; but of all His gifts, none is to be compared with the gift of Christ. This is the unspeakable gift.

VI. The constant efficacy of the death of Christ affords additional evidence of the magnitude of the gift and of the love of God in its bestowment. His righteousness forever avails for our justification; His sacrifice retains its cleansing virtue for our sanctification; and in the discharge of all His mediatorial offices He is the same yesterday, today, and forever. Hence He is able to save to the uttermost them that come unto God by Him, and to do for us exceeding abundantly above all that we can ask or think. The gift of Christ includes every other gift; for He that spared not His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all, how shall He not with Him also freely give us all things. Improvement:

1. This subject affords encouragement to serious inquirers. The gospel is the religion of sinners, the only one that can afford relief to the troubled conscience.

2. The gospel, notwithstanding, affords no ground of hope or encouragement to those who continue to live in sin. Though Christ died for sinners, it was that they might repent, believe, and be saved.

3. To all true believers, the gospel becomes a source of abundant joy. (B. Beddome, M. A.)

The love of God commended

Gods manifestations of Himself invariably carry with them the commendation of some distinguishing perfection. He is manifested--

1. In the universe, and the heavens declare the glory of His wisdom and power.

2. In conscience, which commends His righteousness.

3. In the Bible, which commends His truth.

4. In history, which commends His sovereignty.

5. In Christ, who by His life and death, but especially in the latter, commends His love. It is the glory of Christianity to give love to this commendation. Other religions profess to reveal God in this or that aspect of His character, but none as love. Note--

I. The time when this commendation was made (verse 6). In due time. The time was most appropriate. No other period would have done so well. This will be seen if we consider that then--

1. The world most needed it. Read chap. 1, and what contemporary writers said about the sinfulness, misery, and hopelessness of mankind.

2. The world had exhausted all its resources in the vain hope of working out its own salvation. Philosophers had taught, priests had sacrificed, governors had ruled with a view to this; but the worlds wisdom, religion, and policy had all failed.

3. The world was now as it had never been before prepared for the wide diffusion of this commendation. The dispersion of the Jews who carried their Messianic hopes with them; the conquests of Alexander which disseminated a language in which this commendation might be couched; the universal supremacy of Roman power and civilisation, which provided ample means for the widespread commendation of the gospel, combined to prepare a way for the Lord.

II. The persons to whom it was made. Sinners. That God should commend His love to angels, to unfallen Adam, or to conspicuous saints, would be but natural, and that that love in a general way should be displayed in nature is not to be wondered at, for the fountain of love must overflow; but that God should commend His love to sinners as such is wonderful indeed. The wonder heightens as we follow the apostles analysis. Men were--

1. Without strength. Once they were strong, but lured by the devil they fell from the breezy heights of righteousness, and were maimed and paralysed by the fall. None could have complained if God had left them in that condition, but pitying their inability to rise He laid help on One who was mighty, who was able to restore them to moral soundness and a righteous status.

2. Ungodly. Men had severed their connection with the source of righteousness and bliss, and so were plunged in sin and misery. God did not withdraw from man, but man from God. No blame could have attached to God had He made the separation eternal. But He commends His love in the gift of the Mediator, God-man, who could lay His hand on both and bring both together again.

3. Sinners. Men who had missed the mark. Mans chief end is to glorify God and enjoy Him forever. Mans blessedness is to aim at this, and in reaching it to find his true rest. But men failed to even aim at this. Their aspirations were after inferior objects, and they missed even them. So the earth is strewn with moral wrecks. God commendeth His love in that He gave His Son to save these wrecks, and to enable man to aspire after and to reach the true end of life.

4. Enemies. In one sense men were moral failures to be pitied; in another moral antagonists to God and goodness, hence the objects of Gods wrath. But instead of commending His anger He commends His love through Christ, who saves from wrath and reconciles to God.

III. The manner of this commendation.

1. Christ died. God commended His love, indeed, in Christs incarnation, life, teaching, deeds, example. For God to visit, abide in, and do good to the inhabitants of His revolted province, was a singular display of affection. Reason asks, why not come with legions of angels to destroy? But all this regard would have fallen short of what was needed; so love was displayed in an unstinted manner. God spared not His own Son. Spared Him nothing that was necessary to save a lost world; i.e., God gave all He could to commend His love. The riches of the Divine mercy were practically exhausted on the Cross (Rom_8:32).

2. For us.

(1) In our room and stead. He bore our sins with their curse and punishment on the tree.

(2) For our benefit. To remove our condemnation were much; but Christs death for us involves much more--justification, sonship, holiness, heaven. (J. W. Burn.)

Gods love commended

I. To our consideration.

II. To our admiration.

III. To our esteem.

IV. To our gratitude.

V. To our imitation. (T. Robinson, D. D.)

The love of God commended

Some years ago a young English lady, moving in the highest circles of fashion in Paris, happened one day to be slightly indisposed and lying upon her bed, when her sisters came into the room in a state of great merriment, and said to her, There is a mad fellow come over here from England--a revival preacher. They say it is the greatest joke in the world; he goes ranting away in English, and one of the French pastors does his best to interpret what he says into French. All the world is going, and we are going too, and off they went. They had no sooner gone than this girl, as she lay in her bed, felt an indescribable desire to hear him too. She rang the bell for her maid, and said, I want to hear this revival preacher; dress me and order a carriage. Her servant expostulated with her: You really should not think of it, maam; I am sure you are not fit to go. But she would not be put off. So she went, and was shown to a seat in front of the platform and there sat directly in front of the preacher. By the time the hymn was sung and the prayer over I suppose she began to feel somewhat solemnised. Then came the sermon, and the preacher stepped right to the front of the platform, and looked her full in the face with a keen, searching glance, and said, Poor sinner, God loves you! I do not know what other words he may have spoken, she afterwards said. I dare say he said a great deal, for he preached a long time; but all I know is that I sat there before him with my head buried in my hands, sobbing, sobbing as if my heart would break. My whole life passed in review before me. I thought how I had lost it and wasted it, and all my life had turned my back upon God, to live for sin, and worldliness, and folly. I had spurned His entreaty and rejected His call; and yet, O my God, is it true, is it true, that all the while Thou hast been loving me? These words kept re-echoing over and over again through my mind, Poor sinner, God loves thee! I do not know how I found my way home. The next thing I remember is that I was lying prostrate upon my face before God, the tears still streaming from my eyes, as I lifted up my heart to God, and said, It is true, it is true. Thou hast been loving me all the time, and now Thy love hath triumphed. O mighty Love, Thou hast won my poor heart! Great God, from this moment forward I am Thine. (W. Hay Aitken, M. A.)

Loves commendation

Gods commendation of His love is not in words, but in deeds. God commendeth His love not in an eloquent oration, but by an act. If thou wouldst commend thyself to thy fellows, go and do--not go and say; and if before God thou wouldst show that thy faith and love are real, remember, it is no fawning words, uttered either in prayer or praise, but it is the pious deed, the holy act, which is the justification of thy faith. Paul gives us a double commendation of Gods love.

I. Christ died for us. Note--

1. That it was Christ who died.

2. That Christ died for us. It was much love when Christ stripped Himself of the glories of His Godhead to become an infant in the manger of Bethlehem; when He lived a holy and a suffering life for us; when He gave us a perfect example by His spotless life; but the commendation of love lieth here--that Christ died for us. All that death could mean Christ endured. Consider the circumstances which attended His death. It was no common death; it was a death of ignominy; it was a death of unutterable pain; it was a tong protracted death.

II. Christ died for us while we were yet sinners.

1. Consider what sort of sinners many of us have been, and then we shall see the marvellous grace of Christ. Consider--

(1) I levy many of us have been continual sinners. Have not sinned once, but ten thousand times.

(2) That our sins were aggravated. When you sin you do not sin so cheap as others: when you sin against the convictions of your consciences, against the warnings of your friends, against the enlightenment of the times, and against the solemn monitions of your pastors, you sin more grossly than others do. The Hottentot sinneth not as the Briton doth.

(3) That we were sinners against the very Person who died for us. If a man should be injured in the street, if a punishment should be demanded of the person who attacked him, it would be passing strange if the injured man should for loves sake bear the penalty, that the other might go free; but twas even so with Christ.

(4) That we were sinners who for a long time heard this good news, and yet despised it.

2. Inasmuch as Christ died for sinners, it is a special commendation of His love for--

(1) God did not consider mans merit when Christ died; in fact, no merit could have deserved the death of Jesus. Though we had been holy as Adam, we could never have deserved a sacrifice like that of Jesus. But inasmuch as it says, He died for sinners, we are thereby taught that God considered our sin, and not our righteousness.

(2) God had no interest to serve by sending His Son to die. If God had pleased, He might have crushed this nest of rebels, and have made another world all holy.

(3) Christ died for us unasked. If He had died for me as an awakened heir of heaven, then I could have prayed for Him to die; but Christ died for me when I had no power nor will to pray. Where did ye ever hear that man was first in mercy? Nay, rather, it is the other way: Return unto Me, backsliding children, and I will have mercy upon you. (C. H. Spurgeon.)

Love commended

I. How shall man be convinced of Gods love towards him?

1. He is indisposed to believe in it, and is disposed to doubt it. Many do not think of Gods love at all; and others cannot bring themselves to believe that it is a personal affection. But all are exposed to the fatal influence of that arch-deceiver who poisons our mind by suggesting that Gods commands are grievous, and His government unjust.

2. Then we have to consider the nature of our condition down here. God has been pleased to put us into a world where we do not see Him; we are not in a position to enter into direct communication with Him.

3. Perhaps it will suggest itself that God has only to reveal Himself to us, leaving us no longer in any degree of uncertainty about His relations with us. But in order to make such a revelation of Himself, God would first of all have to contravene the fundamental principles of His government. From that time forth we should be walking by sight, no longer by faith, and thus our probation would be ended.

4. But it may be replied that we see that God loves us in that He supplies our outward wants, and those pleasures which make life tolerable. This at first sounds plausible, but--

(1) These effects appear to come to us in the ordinary course of nature, and it is only natural to conclude that, if there be a God at all, His laws will be wise, and such as to render the condition of those creatures whom He has called into existence not wholly intolerable. If God were to create beings without a supply for their natural wants, it would be such an exhibition of folly as would cast a reflection upon His own character and glory.

(2) On the other hand, there are circumstances of sorrow which sometimes produce an opposite impression.

5. Perhaps it may be asked, Is it necessary that man should be convinced of Gods love? If God really loves him, is not that enough? By no means. The love of God, if it be real love, should have a certain practical effect. Many a man may prate about the value of love, and yet be a total stranger to anything like the real affection. It is necessary that Gods love should be made so manifest to me as to produce in me a similar moral attitude towards Him. True love always yearns for reciprocity.

II. In the fulness of time God gives an answer to this question; and it is such an answer as no imagination or genius of man could ever have suggested. It might have been emblazoned upon the starry skies so that all might read it, God is love! These wondrous words might have been uttered by prophet or philosopher, wherever they went, they might have been the watchword of humanity, the battle cry of man in his conflict with all the powers of evil, and yet I apprehend that so strong is the latent suspicion sown in the heart of man by the great enemy, that we should still have remained indisposed to yield it full credence. God is not content to commit this truth to mere testimony; it is true St. John wrote these words, but he would never have written them if Christ had not first of all written them in His own life, and sealed the record by His wondrous death. The truth that God is love was only known to Him, can only be known to us, because Christ has demonstrated it in His own person upon the Cross.

1. Here is Gods own confutation of that ancient doubt of the Divine character and purpose, sowed by the father of lies in the human heart. It is no longer possible that God can be careless of our well-being or indifferent to our happiness, when to secure these He gave His own Son to die.

2. By this we are able to form some conception of the extent and intensity of Gods love. So far as it can be measured, the Cross of Christ is the measure of the love of God.

(1) What sacrifice is there that you would not willingly make for the benefit of your fellow man rather than such a sacrifice as we have here? If the inhabitants of this town were to be saved by some act of heroic self-sacrifice on your part, what is there--you that are a mother--that you would not propose to give up before your own dearly loved child? Yet such a sacrifice did God willingly make for us, and by such a sacrifice does He commend His love to us.

(2) But even this is not all. Why should God require a satisfaction before He lets is goodness take its course? It may well be replied, How much easier would it have been for God to act as His critics would have desired Him! How vast a sacrifice might He have escaped, what sorrow and suffering might the Son of His love have been spared, if He had contented Himself with the exercise of His prerogative of mercy! Was it a sign of greater or of less love that He adopted a more costly means of bringing the desired result about? There is a distinction between love and mercy. Mercy may be exercised without love. The Queen may extend mercy to a condemned felon, but would you say that this proved her love for the felon? You give a copper to a beggar and thereby show mercy, but this is no sign that you love him, perhaps the reverse. But if you put yourself to much trouble in order to make your mercy a real benefit, you are showing yourself to be animated by true feelings of philanthropy. Would the mere exercise of mercy, that costs God nothing, have impressed my mind with such a sense of Divine love as does the Cross of Calvary? Here I see that love has provided not merely for my pardon--mercy might have done that; but for my regeneration--for a change so complete and radical as to constitute me a new creature.

(3) But even this is not all. What if it should be found that in one sense all this amazing self-sacrifice was not absolutely necessary? Might not an Almighty God have guarded against any such necessity, by modifying the conditions of human existence, and placing man, as angels would seem to be placed, beyond the reach of temptation? Probably; but by so doing He would have rendered it impossible for man to rise to that special destiny of glory which is to be his. Was man to lose his true glory, or was the Son of God to die?

(4) But we shall not feel the full force of these considerations until we turn from the race to the individual. He loved me, and gave Himself for me. It is quite true that Gods love is as wide as the world for God so loved the world; but it is equally true that it is as narrow as the individual. What art thou that He should love thee so? How hast thou dealt with Him? (W. Hay Aitken, M. A.)

The Cross, the witness of love

1. A right knowledge of the true God lies at the root of true religion (Joh_17:3). On the other hand, either belief in a false God, or a false view of the true God, is the source of all superstition. Of this we have an illustration in Rom_1:21-23. Men needed a new revelation to recall them from the worship of the works of their own hands. The tendency to invent a god, where the knowledge of the true God is blotted out, reappears under a modified form amongst those who have the light of Divine revelation. Human hopes and fears have led the intellect into two opposite extremes concerning the moral character of God. In the one case, God is regarded as a Being whose only attribute is benevolence: in the other, God is invested with the character of implacability. By the first, the sanctity of God is obscured; by the second, He is viewed as an almighty Tyrant, whom it must be our only endeavour to propitiate.

2. The Cross was a manifestation to meet false views of God as to His sanctity and love. Whilst on the one hand it was the measure of sin marking Gods hatred of evil; on the other it was the witness of love. It harmonised Divine mercy and justice--attributes which seemed before to pursue opposite roads. Let us regard the Cross as witnessing to--

I. The love of God. Our happiness depends on knowing and realising this Love. There are three ways of contemplating God.

1. You may regard Him only as a Being, and occupy your thoughts with the conditions of the Divine life--its infinity, immensity, immutability, and eternity.

2. You may dwell on His absolute perfections without respect to creatures--His power, wisdom, sanctity, perfection, form an august object of contemplation, but do not inflame the affections. To know God only as the great I Am will prevent me from falling down to an idol; but the revelation of the bush must be followed by that of Sinai, and that of Calvary must complete both.

3. Concerning God, the great anxiety is to know His relative perfections. The great necessity in a fallen world is that His love may shine in upon it, and that the creatures who feared His holiness may be convinced of His benignity. Love begets love.

II. The pre-existent love of God. It is necessary to notice this, because language is sometimes used which would seem to imply that the Cross was creative of Divine love. But the conditions and perfections of the Divine life are not varying moods such as creatures are capable of feeling, but fixtures (Mal_3:6). For God to view the human race with wrath until Calvary, with love after Calvary--would be for God to change. For God to love once is for God to love always (Jer_31:3). Ancientness clothes love with a peculiar tenderness. Early friendships and associations cling to us in after life, and have something in them which new ties cannot supply. Love is heightened by the thought that it was poured upon us when we were unconscious, and entirely dependent upon its unrequited lavishness. Oh, wondrous love of the Parent of my soul, the God of my life, bending over the thought of my being! (Psa_139:16). The Cross then witnessed to this pre-existent love. It revealed it anew when the blight upon creation and the heavy penalties of sin had darkened human life. Gods thoughts had been thoughts of peace and not of evil all along, but they needed to be shown in acts. Angels needed no such witness. Creation sufficed when the first estate was preserved. But with the world as we know it--who is there who has not at some time felt the need of a foundation for his tottering faith. When the tempter suggests the thought, whence this suffering? is thy God a God of love? there is but one vision that can sustain the soul--it is the Cross of Christ, for that Cross dispels all doubt as to the goodness of God.

III. The fathers love. All are accustomed to see in the Cross the love of our blessed Lord, yet many fail to discover the Fathers love. The secrecy of the person of the Father, unbegotten and unsent, may tend to produce forgetfulness of the first spring of redeeming love; and cause us to stop short at the love of Jesus. A defect in recognising love is a little evil compared with the sin of substituting anger in its stead. A certain system of theology has this latter error at its base: it portrays the Father as Wrath, the Son as Mercy; and the Son as striving to appease the anger of the enraged and implacable Parent. Hence the love of the Father becomes impossible. The question is--how is the First Person of the Blessed Trinity described in reference to mans salvation? How is He portrayed by our Lord? Does not His description of Him correspond with His name--a name ever associated with tender love? (Luk_6:36; Mat_5:44). In the parables how does the love of the Father Himself shine forth in the patience of the householder with the wicked husbandmen; in the repeated invitations of the king who made a marriage for his son; in the yearnings of the father over the returning prodigal; in the mission to the most unworthy, that they may share in the blessings of the gospel! Then note how He is spoken of by the apostles (2Co_1:3; Col_1:12; 1Pe_1:3; Rom_15:5; Eph_1:17; 1Jn_3:1; Tit_3:4). If we trace redemption to its source, it is the love of the Father which is reached through the Cross. Of Him it is written, that He so loved the world that He gave His only-begotten Son to save it.

IV. The greatness of Divine love. Love is estimated by sacrifice, and heightened by the unworthiness of those for whom the outlay is made. Conclusion: We have regarded the Cross as the witness of the love of God; let us see now what should be the effect of this love on the beholder. This love of God, when realised, has a transforming power on the soul. Love begets love. Love drew God down from heaven to the manger, to the Cross; but it also draws man up to God (Hos_11:4). (W. H. Hatchings, M. A.)

The Cross a revelation

There have been many momentous events in history which have revolutionised society, and opened new paths of effort. But the death of Christ holds a unique position, and has an importance more vital to the well-being of the world than all these events put together. Its value and power lie in the appeal it makes to the higher thoughts of men, in the conception of life it sets before men, in the vision it gives men of loftier hopes, purer sources of satisfaction, grander objects of ambition. For the Cross is a revelation of the things that are highest and best for mankind. It reveals--

I. The place we have in the heart of God. There are times when we feel the want of a perfect love. The heart yearns for something more than things--aches for another heart that can beat in unison with itself. Yes; and that other heart must not be limited in its affection. We all prize human love, but we spoil our enjoyment of it by exacting more than it can give us. This is the immortal spirit within crying out for God. There are influences abroad which seem to baffle this deep yearning. The discoveries of science have brought to view the overwhelming vastness of the material creation; and in presence of it all we are apt to be overpowered by a feeling of our insignificance. Our little lives seem but as motes dancing in the sunbeam. On what ground can we hope that the infinite Ruler of all will have towards us any special interest or affection? The grand corrective to this is the sacrifice of Christ. For that sacrifice makes us feel that we are not so insignificant as we thought; there is an Infinite One who cares for us, and in the Cross is the measure of His care. There is one heart beating for us with tireless love, and that is the heart of God.

II. The importance God attaches to our rescue. From sin. It has always been difficult to get peoples minds rightly aroused to the danger and evil of sin. Not a few settle themselves down to the impression that evil tendencies are inevitable, and must be submitted to in the best way possible, without being allowed too much to disquiet the mind. The shallowness of such ideas is seen in the light which the sacrifice of Christ flashes upon them. It is impossible for anyone to see the Great Sufferer without being touched with a sense of the infinite peril of all things evil. The Cross was the Divine testimony against the balefulness of sin. But more, it displayed the solemn fact that God was willing to make great sacrifice to win men from sin. It is impossible now to doubt the Divine purpose to free the soul from the thraldom of evil.

III. The explanation of many of the things that baffle us in the providences of life. When the infirmities of our character bring us into trouble, when our selfishness defeats itself, when our ambitious successes leave us unsatisfied or load us with heavier cares, it is God seeking to wean us from the pride that constitutes the bane of life. He is striving to effect this grand work of deliverance now. For the Cross makes it clear that God wants an immediate deliverance. He knows--what we only find out by bitter experience--that every wrong thing limits our capacity for present enjoyment, lowers and spoils the quality of our enjoyment, and breeds more evil. He therefore seeks to win men from sin at once, that the corruption of evil may not have time or opportunity to weave itself into their nature, and so poison and degrade them ere they enter into eternity. Some people imagine that they shall undergo a magical transformation the moment they pass into eternity. If anyone is to begin eternity as a spiritual prince, he must have the princely elements of character in him ere he closes his life on earth. And if anyone closes his life on earth as a spiritual beggar, then as a spiritual beggar must he start on his eternal career. Now that is a consideration of tremendous solemnity; and when we ponder it we can surely see the force of that appeal which God made to us in the Cross, to wake up with instant decision to battle against evil, that our character may be rescued while there is time yet to get it purged and sanctified and trained in the elements of goodness by those hallowing influences which the Divine Spirit brings to bear upon us.

IV. The vastness of the benefit which God has in store for us. We may take what God has actually done as the standard of the love He will always show towards us. When you get the keynote you know the strain that must follow. So in the sacrifice of Christ we have the exact pitch of all Gods dealings with us. We can be certain that no act of Gods towards us shall ever fall below the note struck in the sacrifice of Calvary. Everything will harmonise with that. Thus the sublimest note emanates from the Cross. We see there the scale on which God means to bless us.

V. The height of spiritual nobleness to which God seers to raise our character--that spirit of self-sacrifice which the death of Christ exhibits so completely. This, alas! is just the offence of the Cross; but if we stumble at it, our life can never be crowned with the imperishable glory. The crowning joys of life are the outcome of deeds of unselfishness. Your heart throbbed in unison with the heart of Christ then. And it is in that spirit of unselfishness that God is seeking to train us all. It is the greatest blessing He can confer upon us. (G. McHardy, M. A.)

The best thing

I. The best thing commended. Not Gods wisdom, power, holiness, or wealth, but His love, unsolicited, unmerited, free, unparalleled, towards us, the most undeserving of His creatures.

II. The best thing commended by the best Judge. God. God only knows the love of God. A man may know the love of man, an angel may know the love of an angel, but only the Infinite can gauge the Infinite.

III. The best thing commended by the best Judge in the best possible way. In that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. While we were at the worst He did the best for us.

IV. The best thing commended by the best Judge in the best possible way for the best purpose. That we might be justified by His blood; saved from wrath; reconciled to God by the death of His Son, and saved by His life; yea, joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ; in a word, have everlasting life. (D. Brotchie.)

Christ died for us.--

The death of Christ

I. Its character.

1. Real.

2. Violent.

3. Cruel.

4. The same death that was due to us.

II. Its design. It was--

1. The punishment of our sin.

2. The price of our redemption.

3. A sacrifice for sin.

III. Its effects.

1. Our sins by it are expiated and atoned for.

2. The wrath of God is averted from us.

3. We are freed from all guilt.

IV. Application. For Christs great love to us in dying for us, we should love Him--

1. Ardently.

2. Transcendently.

3. Effectually. (D. Clarkson, B. D.)

The death of Christ is

I. The pledge of Gods love to us--He died for us--while yet enemies.

II. The pledge of salvation--it justifies and reconciles us to God. Much more shall we be saved from final wrath and share in the blessedness of life.

III. The pledge of unspeakable happiness in God. Joy in God is the only true happiness--is secured in the reconciliation effected by the atonement. (J. Lyth, D. D.)

The death of Christ, substitutionary

The original meaning is over or above (Lat. super). As if a bird, hovering over her young, warded off a blow from them and bare it herself; if by this act she rescued them from destruction at the sacrifice of her own life, we see how the thought of dying over them is merged in the greater, of dying instead of them. Thus a shield suggests the thought of being over that which it protects, and of receiving the blow instead of that which it defends. The sacrificial relation of Christ to His people involves the fall notion of deliverance and satisfaction by substitution (2Co_5:15). (Webster and Wilkinson.)

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

CRITICAL NOTES

Rom_5:7. Righteous and good.—That is, the one righteous; the other good, merciful, benevolent.

Rom_5:8.—Christ’s death a vicarious death, but not necessarily expressed by the preposition here used. Divine love compared with human. The latter infinitely below the former.

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.—Rom_5:7-8

Incomparable love.—Of one of the daughters of our Queen it was said that she shed sunshine wherever she went. Divine love sheds sunshine in its passage through this cold world. It was thought and said that love incarnate would at once command the admiration of mankind. Divine love was incarnated, and the incarnation was treated with contempt. Divine love has been conspicuously set forth, and yet how many are blind to its excellence! Strange word, “commendeth.” We should as soon expect that the flowers would have need to commend their beauty, the birds their songs, the pearls their chastened lustre, the sun his brightness, the moon her clearness, the stars their brilliance, as God to commend His love. The word means “gives proof of,” “establishes” His love; and yet how suitable the other word when we think how slow men are to appreciate the incomparable love of God! He makes His love glorious above all human love—above and beyond our furthest reach and highest conception of love. The love of God is incomparable:—

I. On account of the greatness of the divine nature.—Love often stretches out towards something higher than itself. Love finds, or thinks it finds, the complement of its nature in the excellence of the person loved. When we love beneath us, it is because we think there is below us a pearl of excellence by which we should be enriched. Love stretches out its tendrils to clasp the tree which has some kind of fruit which we deem needful to our welfare. Love aspires. Whereunto shall the love of God aspire? How shall the infinitely great stretch itself out to something higher and nobler and vaster? Above God there is none, and He alone is great. Below God is none who possesses any greatness which cannot be found in the divine being. Incomparable love, because not drawn out by any superior worth.

II. On account of the self-sufficiency of the divine nature.—How selfish at the best is human love! How often our love for others is but another aspect of self-love! Surely God is for Himself all-sufficient. If indeed He created the world that love might find a fresh channel for its overflow, it could not be that He felt any void. It must have been on account of the exuberance of His benevolence. The vastness of divine love overflowed. Unfallen natures were refreshed by its streams; and though men have sinned, it still flows on with divine fulness and life-giving influences. Incomparable love, because not moved by any inward necessity.

III. On account of the holiness of the divine nature.—We sometimes talk about loving the sinner and hating his sin; but it oft requires something like superhuman power to separate the sinner from his sin. “The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself.” How graphic the touch! The mere word “solidarity” has not yet killed out of society the Pharisees who stand by themselves. Sinners who go beyond respectable sins shut themselves out of respectable society. The word “respectable” is a strong word in certain circles. Respectable sinners we may love; disreputable sinners we shun. And yet we are all sinners. If we could stand on the high plane of the infinite purity, we should see how infinitesimal the difference. The holy God loves the unholy. Sin is the one abominable thing which God hates. “He is not a God that hath pleasure in wickedness; neither shall evil dwell with Him.” Incomparable love, because uninfluenced by moral worth in the objects.

IV. On account of the completeness of the divine relationship.—Mysterious words “God the Father and God the Son.” Two, and yet not separate. Speaking after the manner of men, we say that perfect love subsisted between God the Father and God the Son; and yet the eternal Father gave proof of the incomparable nature of His love by giving His Son. Incomparable love, because it spared not the choicest gift.

V. On account of the extent of the divine sacrifice.—If God had given His Son to walk for thirty-three years with unfallen Adams and sinless Eves in a paradise of perfect beauty, it would have been a demonstration of love—such a demonstration as is received among men with gratitude. The love of a monarch to some distant part of the empire is shown by sending a son, and his sojourn is made a triumphal passage—everything ministers to his delight. God sends His Son, not to a glorious paradise, not to palaces of pleasure, but to a disordered planet, to haunts of sin and of sorrow. We are sometimes told that Jesus came into this world to be a teacher of moral truth. If that were so—which is not here allowed—it would have been a demonstration of divine love. What a task to teach truth to unreceptive natures! To incur the obloquy which is the portion of every moral reformer! If God had thus given His Son for a few years to teach the ignorant sons of men, and had then translated Him back again to His preincarnate condition, it would have been a demonstration of love. But He gave Him up to death. This was purposed in the eternal councils; this was prefigured in the old economy, foretold by the prophets, and kept in view by Jesus Himself as the great object of His mission. What a word is “death”! We do not understand its full significance. Hardened scientists tell us that death is but the taking down of the human house. Does the house think and feel? Is it capable of infinite longings and yearnings? Does it soar beyond the material? Can it dwell in the eternal? Surely death is not a mere material shock, a repulsion of united molecules of matter. Considering the death of the eternal Son, we are lifted out of materialism—at least, ought to be, for too many dwell upon its mere physical aspect. The sublime Sufferer teaches us that death has far more in it than the anatomist’s scalpel can unfold. The death of Jesus, with its infinite anguish, with its intense soul darkness, with its awful sense of a desolate forsaking, is a mournful demonstration of God’s love; for we may be allowed to think of God the Father making a sacrifice in allowing His Son to enter such a gloomy vale.

1. If God has thus shown His love, let us admire;

2. If God thus loves, why should we fear?

3. If God has thus shown His love, let us show our gratitude;

4. If God has thus made love conspicuous, let it be conspicuous in our lives;

5. If love died that love might be pre-eminent, let us not shrink from the sacrifices which love may demand.

God’s commendation of His love.

I. God commends His love to our attention.—To speak of love always secures attention. Proved by the popularity of the modern novel. Word carries thoughts to family circle and its earliest associations—to spots where words are spoken and embraces given and received. Noble deeds of love recorded in ancient and modern story. Is there any love like this?

1. Consider its choice of objects. We choose for excellences real or fancied—fair face, happy temperament, great mind, warm heart. God chooses the unworthy, loves the unlovely. The objects of His love are the “ungodly” (Rom_5:6), the impious, who have no love of Him, no reverence for Him, who try to get rid of the thought of Him. He does not wait till we give signs of coming to a better state of mind; He loves us when “without strength” (Rom_5:6), unable to leave our miserable condition—loves us in our misery. If the Queen were to visit small-pox patients in London garrets, the whole country would be loud in her praise. How much more wonderful the King of kings visiting those stricken down by sin! He has loved “sinners,” active in wickedness. A pure girl thrown into the company of foul-mouthed, brawling drunkards. He has loved “enemies” (Rom_5:10), who hate God so much that they try to get Him out of their thoughts, and reject with proud disdain His offered gift of salvation.

2. Consider what love chooses to do for us. In pity we say, Give money to the miserable wretch, wash his filthy face, and move him to a cleaner house. The love of God goes to the root of the evil. Boy bitten by mad dog—no use putting piece of sticking-plaster on wound. He has saved from “wrath” (Rom_5:9). The word opens before us a dark abyss, which becomes blacker the longer we gaze. God alone knows the depth of that abyss, the contents of that awful blackness. He knew what needed to bring out of the horrible pit. Only one who could go down low enough to meet men at their lowest point of need—His own Son. In love He gave His Son, the Christ, to die for us. No need to perplex ourselves with the theological question how His death removes our penalty. The same God who has so loved us as to give His Son assures us that the death is for all who will take the benefit of it.

II. God commends His love for our approval.—Difference between our relation to other deeds of love and to this. Personal interest—-present interest. Efficacy of Christ’s death as fresh to-day as eighteen centuries ago. Eternal fate depends on our approval or disapproval of this deed of love.

1. Do we approve of the interference of His love—that all the glory of salvation belongs to Him?

2. Do we approve of the course taken by love? Some think less might have sufficed than that the Son of God should take our place before the law and meet all its demands. Am I willing that Christ should take my place and bear my wrath—willing that if there is any praise for salvation He shall have it all? (Rev_1:5-6.)

3. Do we approve of the place given to us in that deed of love—to receive justification as a free gift of God? God demands present response to His appeal. He says, Behold the Substitute. Do I accept of Him? Willing that my sins be laid on Him—to be justified by His blood? For that God is waiting—holding back the fires of wrath, because not willing that any should perish. Jesus Christ is delaying His return, though the Church is pleading “Come quickly,” that sinners may come unto Him and find peace and life through His death for them.—G. Wallace, D.D.

The best thing.

I. The best thing commended.—“The love of God to man.” Not His wisdom, power, holiness, or wealth, but His love, unsolicited, unmerited, free, unparalleled, towards us, the most undeserving of His creatures.

II. The best thing commended by the best Judge.—“God commendeth His love.” “God only knows the love of God.” A man may know the love of man, an angel may know the love of an angel; but only the Infinite can gauge the infinite.

III. The best thing commended by the best Judge in the best possible way.—“In that, while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.” While we were at the worst He did the best for us. “He died for the ungodly.” “He tasted death for every man.” “He came to seek and to save that which was lost.”

IV. The best thing commended by the best Judge in the best possible way, and for the best purpose.—That we might be “justified by His blood,” “saved from wrath,” reconciled to God by the death of His Son,” and “saved by His life”—yea, “joy in God through our Lord Jesus Christ”; in a word, have everlasting life.—D. Brotchie.

Redemption to the right and the secure.—Here are two subjects for useful thought.

I. The moral wrongness and danger of mankind.—The text contains the words “sinners,” representing “men that are in the wrong,” “transgressors of the divine law.” It contains also the word “wrath,” implying “danger” and “danger in consequence of the wrong.” Wrath in God is not an angry passion, but a benevolent antagonism against wrong. It is a benevolent principle, not a malign passion. The opposition of love is for many reasons a more terrible thing than the opposition of anger. Men as sinners oppose God, and God as the all-loving One opposes them, and His opposition is called “wrath,” and wrath because “it is a terrible thing.” The other subject for thought in the text is:—

II. The moral deliverance and rectification of mankind.—There are two words in the text that express these two things, “justified” and “saved.” I take the word “justified” not in a forensic but in a moral sense—the sense of being made right. The word “saved” I take in a spiritual and not in a legal or material sense. It means “the restoration of the soul to lost intelligence, lost purity, lost liberty, lost love, lost friendship, with God.” Now mark how moral rectification and spiritual salvation come:

1. They flow from God’s love. “God commendeth His love [or, as some read, His own love] towards us.” His love is the ultimate cause, the primal font.

2. They come from God’s love through the love of Christ. Christ is at once the demonstration, the emblem, and the medium of God’s love. Christ demonstrates the reality and strength of this divine love by His death. “While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.” His death therefore becomes that mighty, moral force to make the wrong right, the lost safe.—D. Thomas.

Divine love for sinners.—We infer:—

I. That God has love.—He is not sheer intellect; He has heart, and His heart is not malign, but benevolent. He has love, not merely an attribute, but in essence. Love is not a mere element in His nature—it is His nature; He is love. The moral code by which He governs the universe is but love speaking in the imperative mood. His wrath is but love uprooting and consuming whatever obstructs the happiness of His creation.

“O Love! the one sun,

O Love! the one sea,

No life has begun

That breathes not in Thee;

Thy rays have no limit,

Thy waves have no shore,

Thou giv’st, without merit,

To worlds evermore.”

Yes, love is the one sea. All created existences are but waves rising out of that sea, and breaking on the shores of eternity.

II. That God has love for sinners.—“While we were yet sinners.”

1. This is not a love that is revealed in nature. Not on one page in the mighty book of nature is it written that God has love for sinners. Nature was written before sinners had existence. It is exclusively the doctrine of the Bible, and the central and cardinal doctrine. “God so loved the world,” etc.

2. This is not the love of moral esteem. The holy One cannot love the corrupt character; it is the love of compassion—compassion deep, tender, boundless.

III. That God’s love for sinners is demonstrated in the death of Christ.—“Christ died for us.”

1. This demonstration is the mightiest. The strength of love is proved by the sacrifice it makes. “God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son.” “He delivered Him up for us all.”

2. This demonstration is the most indispensable. The only way to consume in me any enmity that I may have for a man is to carry into my soul the conviction that he whom I have hated loves me, and has always loved me. This conviction will turn my enmity into love. God knows the human soul, knows how to break its corrupt heart; hence He has given the demonstration of His love in the death of Christ.—D. Thomas, D.D.

SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON Rom_5:7-8

The design of Christ’s death.—All those who have paid their lives to the injured laws of the country have died for us; and if we derive not improvement from it the fault is our own. But are we going to rank the death of Christ with such deaths as these? We would rather class it with the death of an apostle. “If I be offered,” says Paul to the Philippians, “upon the sacrifice and service of your faith, I joy and rejoice with you.” This was noble. But was Paul crucified for us? No. “It is Christ that died”—His death is peculiarly pre-eminent. This was indicated by the prodigies that attended it. The question is, What was the design of Christ’s death? Some tell us that it was to confirm the truth of His doctrine by the testimony of His blood, and to suffer, leaving us an example that we should follow His steps. And this is true, and we believe it as truly as those who will go no further. But is that the whole or the principal part of the design? We appeal to the Scriptures. There we learn that He died for us as an expiation of our guilt, and to make reconciliation for the sins of the people. He died to redeem us from the curse. Exclude this, and the language of the Bible becomes perfectly embarrassing and unintelligible. Exclude this, and what becomes of the legal sacrifices? They were shadows without a substance. For there is no relation between them and His death, as He was a martyr and an example; but there is a full conformity between them and His death, as He was an atonement. Exclude this, and with what can we meet the conscience burdened with guilt? with what can we answer the inquiry, How shall I come before the Lord? with what can we wipe away the tear of godly grief? But we have boldness to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus. “Surely He hath borne our griefs and carried our sorrows.” His death was an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet-smelling savour. The all-sufficiency and acceptableness were evinced by His discharge from the grave and His being received up into glory. There within the veil our soul finds anchorage. Yet even this is not all the design. Christ died for us, not only to reconcile us, but to renovate; not only to justify us, but to sanctify. The one is as necessary to our recovery as the other, and both equally flow from the cross. “For He gave Himself for us, that He might redeem us from all iniquity, and purify unto Himself a peculiar people zealous of good works.”—W. Jay.

Greatness of divine love.—“For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die.” The greatness and freeness of the love of God are illustrated in this and the following verse by making still more prominent the unworthiness of its objects. It is hardly to be expected that any one would die in the place of a merely righteous man, though for a good man this self-denial might possibly be exercised; but we, so far from being good, were not even righteous; we were sinners, ungodly, and enemies. The difference between the words “righteous” and “good,” as here used, is that which in common usage is made between “just” and “kind.” The former is applied to a man who does all that the law or justice can demand of him, the latter to him who is governed by love. The just man commands respect; the good man calls forth affection. Respect being a cold and feeble principle compared to love, the sacrifices to which it leads are comparatively slight.—Hodge.

Singular goodness in Christ.—The apostle goes on to show the singular goodness of our Saviour in submitting to death in place of the ungodly. Rom_5:7 : “For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die.” By a righteous or just man appears to be meant a man of virtue and integrity, who does no injury; and it is certainly true that a man would not lay down his life to save from death a person who merely adheres strictly to the path of righteousness. “Though peradventure for a good man,” as it is in the original, “some would even dare to die.” By the good man appears to be meant a man of eminent virtue, a public benefactor, who does much good in society; and to preserve the life of such a man some might even venture to die. This is so true that there have not been wanting instances of persons saving the life of such a man at the expense of their own.—Ritchie.

“God commendeth His love toward us.”—We should observe the commendation of God’s love towards us: He “commendeth His love.” The word συνίστησι signifies God’s interposing, to make us know and be assured of that which otherwise we knew not, and which is exceedingly strange and incredible to us. There is another such word used for the very same purpose (Heb_6:17): “God, willing more abundantly to show unto the heirs of promise the immutability of His counsel, confirmed it by an oath.” The original is, He “interposed Himself,” as it is in the margin, or came in between by an oath, in order to show the unchangeableness of His counsel of love to the heirs of promise. So it is here. God would make known, would make plain and incontestable, His love towards sinners, so that they should have no room left to question it. Well, and what way does He take for the purpose? Does He give them His word for it, and interpose Himself by an oath to confirm that word? No; both these He had done before. He comes in between, therefore, with the incarnation of His only begotten Son, and causes Him, while we were yet sinners, to die for us. As if He should have said, I will have you know the love which I bear towards you; and because I know how hard it is for you to believe any such thing, lo! I will cause you to be satisfied of it without dispute. I set forth My Son in the midst of you, and give Him to die for you before your eyes. Look on that, and acknowledge My love towards you. Now, brethren, is not this speaking love? Does not this declare the love of God in terms which cannot be mistaken? Who can think of this and charge his ruin on a want of goodwill in God?—S. Walker.

The great love of Christ.—Christ has obliged us with two of the highest instances of His love to us imaginable:—

I. That He died for us.—The love of life is naturally the greatest, and therefore that love that so far masters this as to induce a man to lay it down must needs be transcendent and supernatural. For life is the first thing that nature desires, and the last that it is willing to part with. But how poor and low and in what a pitiful shallow channel does the love of the world commonly run! Let us come and desire such a one to speak a favourable word or two for us to a potent friend, and how much of coyness and excuse and shyness shall we find. The man is unwilling to spend his breath in speaking, much less in dying, for his friend. Come to another, and ask him upon the stock of a long acquaintance and a professed kindness to borrow but a little money of him, and how quickly does he fly to his shifts, pleading poverty, debts, and great occasions, and anything rather than open his own bowels to refresh those of his poor neighbour! The man will not bleed in his purse, much less otherwise, to rescue his friend from prison, from disgrace, and perhaps a greater disaster. But now how incomparably full and strong must the love of Christ needs have been that could make Him sacrifice even life itself for the good of mankind, and not only die, but die with all the heightening circumstances of pain and ignominy—that is, in such a manner that death was the least part of the suffering! Let us but fix our thoughts upon Christ, hanging, bleeding, and at length dying upon the cross, and we shall read His love to man there in larger and more visible characters than the superscription that the Jews put over His head in so many languages—all which and many more were not sufficient to have fully expressed and set forth so incredibly great an affection. Every thorn was a pencil to represent and every groan a trumpet to proclaim how great a love He was then showing to mankind. And now surely our love must needs be very cold if all the blood that ran in our Saviour’s veins cannot warm it; for all that was shed for us, and shed for that very purpose that it might prevent the shedding of ours. Our obnoxiousness to the curse of the law for sin had exposed us to all the extremity of misery, and made death as due to us as wages to the workman. And the divine justice, we may be sure, would never have been behindhand to pay us our due. The dreadful retribution was certain and unavoidable; and therefore since Christ could not prevent, He was pleased at last to divert the blow and to turn it upon Himself, to take the cup of God’s fury out of our hands and to drink off the very dregs of it. The greatest love that men usually bear one another is but show and ceremony, compliment, and a mere appearance in comparison of this. This was such a love as Solomon says is “strong as death,” and to express it yet higher, such a one as was stronger than the very desires of life.

II. The other transcendent instance of Christ’s love to mankind was that He did not only die for us, but that He died for us while we were enemies, and, in the phrase of Scripture, enmity itself against Him. It is possible indeed that some natures of a nobler mould and make than the generality of the world may arise to such an heroic degree of love as to induce one friend to die for another. For the apostle says that “for a good man one would even dare to die.” And we may read in heathen story of the noble contention of two friends, which of them should have the pleasure and honour of dying in the other’s stead, and writing the inward love of his heart in the dearest blood that did enliven it. Yet still the love of Christ to mankind runs in another and a higher strain; for admit that one man had died for another, yet still it has been for his friend—that is, for something, if not of equal, yet at least of next esteem to life itself in the common judgment of all. Human love will indeed sometimes act highly and generously, but still it is upon a suitable object, upon something that is amiable; and if there be either no fuel or that which is unsuitable, the flame will certainly go out. But the love of Christ does not find but makes us lovely. It “saw us in our blood” (as the prophet speaks), wallowing in all the filth and impurities of our natural corruption, and then it said unto us, Live. Christ then laid down His life for us, when we had forfeited our own to Him. Which strange action was as if a prince should give himself a ransom for that traitor that would have murdered him, and sovereignty itself lie down upon the block to rescue the neck of a rebel from the stroke of justice. This was the method and way that Christ took in what He suffered for us—a method that reason might at first persuade us to be against nature, and that religion assures us to be above it.—South.

A peculiar contrast.—The δέ, “but,” indicates this contrast. What man hardly does for what is most worthy of admiration and love, God has done for that which merited only His indignation and abhorrence. On the verb συνιστάναι: here it is the act whereby God establishes beyond question the reality of His love. The apostle says τὴν ἑαυτοῦ ἀγάπην: His own love, or the love that is peculiar to Him. The expression contrasts God’s manner of loving with ours. God cannot look above Him to devote Himself, as we may, to a being of more worth than Himself. His love turns to that which is beneath Him, and takes even the character of sacrifice in behalf of that which is altogether unworthy of Him. Ὅτι, “in that,” is here the fact by which God has proved His peculiar way of loving. In the word ἁμαρτωλός, “sinner,” the termination ωλος signifies “abundance.” It was by this term the Jews habitually designated the Gentiles. The ἔτι, “yet,” implies this idea: that there was not yet in humanity the least progress toward the good which would have been fitted to merit for it such a love; it was yet plunged in evil. The words “Christ died for us” in such a context imply the close relation of essence which unites Christ and God in the judgment of the apostle. With man sacrificing himself Paul compares God sacrificing Christ. This parallel has no meaning except as the sacrifice of Christ is to God the sacrifice of Himself. Otherwise the sacrifice of God would be inferior to that of man, whereas it must be infinitely exalted above it. Finally, it should be observed how Paul places the subject Θεός, “God,” at the end of the principal proposition, to bring it beside the word ἁμαρτωλῶν, “sinners,” and so brings out the contrast between our defilement and the delicate sensibility of divine holiness.—Godet.

ILLUSTRATIONS TO CHAPTER 5

Rom_5:6-8. “None of them died for me.”—Interest in the lepers, those special objects of the Saviour’s help, has been greatly revived of late, and attention is justly drawn to the noble deeds wrought by Protestant missionaries in India. The Rev. Dr. Bowman, of the Church Missionary Society, was enabled to erect a place of worship in connection with the Calcutta Leper Asylum, and an aged woman, over eighty-two years old, was there led by the preacher to the divine Healer. A sceptic asked her if the many gods and goddesses of her own religion would not suffice; but she had an answer ready for him: “None of them died for me.”—Henry Proudfoot.

Christ’s sacrifice for sinners.—In the early ages of the Christian Church many slaves were carried prisoners out of Italy into Africa. Paulinus, Bishop of Nola, redeemed many of them, until at last his fortune was exhausted. One day a poor widow came and besought him to recover an only son who had been carried away captive. Being unable to ransom him with money, Paulinus sailed for Africa and induced the prince whose slave the young man was to set him free and take himself in exchange. The bishop performed the duties of slave so faithfully that the prince grew attached to him, and on learning his rank gave him not only his own liberty, but that of his fellow-countrymen who were in bondage.—W. H. Hatch.

The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom 5:7. Δικαίου. το͂υ ἀγαθο͂υ) Masculines; with which comp. Rom 5:6; Rom 5:8, as Th. Gataker rightly shows, Book 2, Misc. c. 9, but in such a way, that he thinks them to be merely synonymous. When there is any doubt respecting the peculiar force of an expression, and a difference between words, it will be of much advantage if you either suppose something in the meanwhile, or transpose the words. Accordingly, by transposing the words in this passage, we shall read: μόλις γὰρ ὑπὲρ ἀγαθοῦ τις ἀποθανε͂ιται, ὑπὲρ γὰρ δικαίου τάχα τὶς καὶ τολμᾷ ἀποθανε͂ιν, for scarcely for a good man will one die, for peradventure for a righteous man, some one would even dare to die) suppose, to wit, also, that ἀγαθο͂υ is put without the article. You will immediately perceive the disadvantage to the sense, with which this change would be attended, and it will appear evident, that there is both some difference between δίκαιον and ἀγαθὸν, and a great one between δίκαιον and τὸν ἀγαθὸν, wheresoever that difference in the consecutive words may be found hereafter. In fact, the article so placed, makes a climax. Every good man is righteous; but every righteous man is not good. Gregory Thaumaturgus; περὶ πολλο͂υ καὶ ΤΟΥ παντός. Chrysostom; μικρὰ ταῦτα καὶ ΤΟ μηδεν, those things of little importance, and that which is of no importance whatever. The Hebrews call a man צדיק, who performs his lawful duties; חסיד, who performs acts of kindness. The Greeks call the former δίκαιος; the latter, ὃσιος; comp. צדק and ענוה, Zep 2:3, but in this passage we have not ὁσίου, but το͂υ ἀγαθοῦ. Wherefore the distinction between the Hebrew words does not determine the point. But this much is certain, that just as ὅσιος, so also ἀγαθὸς expresses more than δίκαιος. (See Mat 5:45, and lest they should be thought there also to be merely synonymous, try that same transposition, and it will be seen, that to make mention of the genial sun in connection with the just, and the useful rain in connection with the good, is not so suitable [as the converse order of the original], likewise Luk 23:50.) And so Paul, in this passage, judges τὸν ἀγαθὸν, the good man to be more worthy, that one should die for him, than δίκαιον, a righteous man. Ἀσεβεῖς [Rom 5:6] and ὁ ἀγαθὸς, the ungodly and the good man, also δίκαιος and ἁμαρτωλοὶ [Rom 5:8], a righteous man and sinners, are respectively opposed to each other. What, then, is the result? δίκαιος, indefinitely, implies a harmless [guiltless] man; ὁ ἀγαθὸς, one perfect in all that piety [duty towards God and man] demands, excellent, bounteous, princely, blessed, for example, the father of his country.—ὑπὲρ γὰρ) here γάρ has a disjunctive force, of which we have many examples.—τάχα, τὶς, καὶ, τολμᾷ, peradventure, one, even, dares) These several words amplify that which is stated in Rom 5:8; τάχα (instead of τάχιστα) diminishes the force of the affirmation; τὶς, one, is evidently put indefinitely; nor is it regarded [nor does it enter into the consideration], whether the person, who may die for a just or for the good man, is in a state of wrath or of grace; καἰ, even, concessive, shows, why it is not said simply, dies, as if it were a daily occurrence; but that the writer should rather say, dares to die, inasmuch as it is something great and unusual. τὁλμᾷ, dares, as though it were an auxiliary verb, corresponds to the future, will one die; dares [endures to], ventures.—ἀποθανε͂ιν, to die) Dost thou wish to have the steadiest friends? be a good man.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom_5:7-8. Illustrative description (γάρ) of this dying ὑπὲρ ἀσεβῶν as the practical demonstration of the divine love (Rom_5:8). Observe the syllogistic relation of Rom_5:8 to Rom_5:7; which is apparent through the emphatic ἑαυτοῦ.

Scarce, namely, for a righteous man (not to mention for ἀσεβεῖς) will any one die. This very contrast to the ἀσεβεῖς completely shuts out the neuter interpretation of δικαίου (pro re justa, Melancthon, comp Olshausen, Jerome, Erasmus, Annot. Luther). On account of the same contrast, consequently because of the parallel between ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ and ὙΠῈΡ ΔΙΚΑΊΟΥ, and because the context generally has to do only with the dying for persons, τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ also is to be taken not as neuter,[1198] but as masculine; and the article denotes the definite ἀγαθός who is in question in the case concerned. Since, moreover, an essential distinction between δίκαιος and ἈΓΑΘΌς (comp on the contrary Mat_5:45; further, ἈΝῊΡ ἈΓΑΘῸς Κ. ΔΊΚΑΙΟς in Luk_23:50; Ἡ ἘΝΤΟΛῊ ἉΓΊΑ Κ. ΔΙΚΑΊΑ Κ. ἈΓΑΘΉ in Rom_7:12; Ὁ ΔΊΚΑΙΟς ἩΜῖΝ ἈΝΑΠΈΦΑΝΤΑΙ ὬΝ ἈΓΑΘΌς ΤΕ ΚΑῚ ΣΟΦΌς, Aesch. Sept. 576; Eur. Hipp. 427; Thes. fr. viii. 2) is neither implied in the context, where on the contrary the contrast to both is ἀσεβῶν and ἉΜΑΡΤΩΛῶΝ, nor is in the least hinted at by Paul, no explanation is admissible that is based on an essential difference of idea in the two words; such as that ΤΟῦ ἈΓΑΘΟῦ should be held to express something different from or higher than δικαίου. Therefore the following is the only explanation that presents itself as conformable to the words and context: After Paul has said that one will hardly die for a righteous man, he wishes to add, by way of confirmation (ΓΆΡ), that cases of the undertaking such a death might possibly occur, and expresses this in the form: for perhaps for the good man one even takes it upon him to die. Thus the previously asserted ὑπὲρ δικαίου τις ἀποθανεῖται, although one assents to it vix et aegre, is yet said with reason,it may perhaps occur. Paul has not however written τοῦ δικαίου in the second clause of the verse, as he might have done, but introduces ΤΟῦ ἈΓΑΘΟῦ, and prefixes it, in order now to make still more apparent, in the interest of the contrast, the category of the quality of the person for whom one may perhaps venture this self-sacrifice. This is substantially the view arrived at by Chrysostom, Theodoret, Theophylact, Erasmus, in the Paraphr., Beza, Calvin (rarissimum sane inter homines exemplum exstat, ut pro justo mori quis sustineat, quamquam illud nonnunquam accidere possit), Castalio, Calovius, and others; recently again by Fritzsche (also Oltramare and Reithmayr); formerly also by Hofmann (in his Schriftbew. II. 1, p. 348). It has been wrongly alleged that it makes the second half of the verse superfluous (de Wette) and weakening (Köllner and Rückert); on the contrary, in granting what may certainly now and again occur, it the more emphatically paves the way for the contrast which is to follow, that God has caused Christ to die for quite other persons than the δικαίους and ἈΓΑΘΟῦςfor us sinners. Groundless also is the objection (of van Hengel), that in Pauls writings the repeated τίς always denotes different subjects; the indefinite τίς, one, any one, may indeed even here represent in the concrete application different subjects or the same. Comp 2Co_11:20. And, even if ΔΙΚΑΊΟΥ and ΤΟῦ ἈΓΑΘΟῦ be regarded as two distinct conceptions, may not the second ΤΊς be the same with the first? But the perfect accordance with the words and context, which is only found in the exposition offered, shuts out every other. Among the explanations thus excluded are: (1) Those which take τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ as neuter, like the rendering of Jerome, Erasmus, Annot. (bonitatem), Luther, Melancthon (pro bona et suavi re, i. e. incitati cupiditate aut opinione magnae utilitatis), and more recently Rückert (for the good, i.e. for what he calls his highest good), Mehring (for for his own advantage some one perhaps risks even life); now also Hofmann (what is in itself and really good.… a moral value, for which, when it is endangered, one sacrifices life, in order not to let it perish).(2) Those explanations which indeed take τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ properly as masculine, but yet give self-invented distinctions of idea in reference to δικαίου; namely (a), the exposition, that ὁ ἀγαθός means the benefactor: hardly does any one die for a righteous man (who stands in no closer relation to him); for for his benefactor one dares perchance (out of gratitude) to die. So Flacius,[1201] Knatchbull, Estius, Hammond, Clericus, Heumann, Wolf, and others; including Koppe, Tholuck, Winer, Benecke, Reiche, Glöckler, Krehl, Maier, Umbreit, Bisping, Lechler and Jatho. They take the article with ἀγαθοῦ as: the benefactor whom he has, against which nothing can be objected (Bernhardy, p. 315). But we may object that we cannot at all see why Paul should not have expressed benefactor by the very current and definite term εὐεργέτης; and that ἈΓΑΘΌς must have obtained the specific sense of beneficence (as in Mat_20:15; Xen. Cyr. iii. 13, 4, al[1202] ap. Dorvill. a[1203] Charit. p. 722; and Tholuck in loc[1204]) from the contexta want, which the mere article cannot supply (in opposition to Reiche). Hence, in order to gain for ἀγαθός the sense beneficent in keeping with the context, δίκαιος would have to be taken in the narrower sense as just (with Wetstein and Olshausen), so as to yield a climax from the just man to the benevolent (who renders more than the mere obligation of right binds him to do). An apt illustration of this would be Cicero, de off. iii Romans 15 : Si vir bonus is est, qui prodest quibus potest, nocet nemini, recte justum virum, bonum non facile reperiemus. But in Rom_5:8 there is no reference to ἀγαθός in the sense assumed; and the narrower sense of δικαίος is at variance with the contrasting ἉΜΑΡΤΩΛῶΝ in Rom_5:8, which demands for ΔΊΚ, precisely the wider meaning (righteous). Besides the prominence which Paul intends to give to the love of God, which caused Christ to die for sinners, while a man hardly dies for a δίκαιος, is weakened just in proportion as the sense of ΔΊΚΑΙΟς is narrowed. The whole interpretation is a forced one, inconsistent with the undefined ΤΟῦ ἈΓΑΘΟῦ itself as well as with the entire context.(b) No better are the explanations which find in τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ a greater degree of morality than in δικαίου, consequently a man more worthy of having life sacrificed for him. So, but with what varied distinctions! especially Ambrosiaster (the ΔΊΚΑΙΟς is such exercitio, the ἀγαθός natura), Bengel (δίκ. homo innoxius, ὁ ἀγαθός, omnibus pietatis numeris absolutus.… v. g. pater patriae), Michaelis, Olshausen, Köllner (δίκ.: legally just, ἈΓΑΘ.: perfectly good and upright), de Wette (ΔΊΚ.: irreproachable, ἀγαθ.: the noble), Philippi and Th. Schott (both substantially agreeing with de Wette), also van Hengel (δίκ.: probus coram Deo, i. e. venerabilis, ἀγαθ.: bonus in hominum oculis, i. e. amabilis), and Ewald, according to whom. δίκ. is he who, in a definite case accused unto death, is nevertheless innocent in that particular case, while the ἀγαθός is he, who not only in one such individual suit, but predominantly in his whole life, is purely useful to others and guiltless in himself;[1205] comp Stölting, who finds in ΔΊΚ. the honest upright man, and in ἈΓΑΘΌς him whom we personally esteem and love. But all these distinctions of idea are artificially created and brought in without any hint from the context.[1207]

On τάχα, fortasse, perhaps indeed, expressing possibility not without doubt, comp Xen. Anab. v. 2, 17; Phm_1:15; Wis_13:6; Wis_14:19. In classic authors most frequently τάχʼ ἄν.

καὶ τολμᾷ] etiam sustinet, he has even the courage,[1209] can prevail upon himself, audet. The καί is the also of the corresponding relation. In presence of the good man, he ventures also to die for him.

We may add, that the words from ὑπὲρ γὰρ τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ down to ἈΠΟΘΑΝΕῖΝ are not to be put (with Lachmann) in a parenthesis, since, though they form only a subordinate confirmatory clause, they cause no interruption in the construction.

Rom_5:8. δέ] Not antithetical (such are men, but such is God, Mehring), as if the sentence began with ὁ δὲ Θεός, but rather carrying it onward, namely, to the middle term of the syllogism (the minor proposition), from which then the conclusion, Rom_5:9, is designed to result.

συνίστησι] proves, as in Rom_3:25. The accomplished fact of the atoning death is conceived according to its abiding effect of setting forth clearly the divine love; hence the present. The emphasis indeed lies in the first instance on συνίστησι (for from this proof as such a further inference is then to be drawn), but passes on strengthened to ΤῊΝ ἙΑΥΤΟῦ, because it must be Gods own love, authenticating itself in the death of Christ, that gives us the assurance to be expressed in Rom_5:9. God Himself, out of His love for men, has given Christ to a death of atonement; Rom_3:24, Rom_8:32; Eph_2:4; 2Th_2:16; Joh_3:16; 1Jn_4:10 et al[1210] To find in Τ. ἙΑΥΤΟῦ ἈΓΑΠ. the contrast to our love towards God (Hofmann; comp on Rom_5:5) is quite opposed to the context, which exhibits the divine demonstration of love in Christs deed of love. That is the clear relation of Rom_5:8 to Rom_5:6 f., from which then the blessed inference is drawn in Rom_5:9. Hence we are not to begin a new connection with συνίστησι δέ Κ.Τ.Λ[1212] (Hofmann, God lets us know, and gives us to experience that He loves us; and this He does, because Christ, etc.). The ὅτι cannot be the motive of God for His συνίστησι κ.τ.λ[1213], since He has already given Christ out of love; it is meant on the contrary to specify the actual ground of the knowledge of the divine proof of love (= εἰς ἐκεῖνο, ὅτι, comp on 2Co_1:18; Joh_2:18).

ΕἸς ἩΜᾶς] belongs to ΣΥΝΊΣΤ.

ἜΤΙ ἉΜΑΡΤ. ὌΝΤ. ἩΜ.] For only through the atoning death of Christ have we become ΔΙΚΑΙΩΘΈΝΤΕς. See Rom_5:9.

[1198] Köster also in the Stud. u. Krit. 1854, p. 312, has taken both words as neuter: hardly does one die for others for the sake of their (mere) right; sooner at all events for the sake of the manifestly good, which they have.

[1201] Clav. I. p. 693. Vix accidit, ut quis suam vitam profundat pro justissimis; pro eo tamen, qui alicui valde est utilis, forsitan mori non recuset.

[1202] l. and others; and other passages; and other editions.

[1203] d refers to the note of the commentator or editor named on the particular passage.

[1204] n loc. refers to the note of the commentator or editor named on the particular passage.

[1205] Ewald supposes an allusion to cases like these in 1Sa_14:45; 1Sa_20:17; but that it is also possible, that Paul might have in view Gentile examples that were known to himself and the readers.

[1207] Kunze, in the Stud u. Krit. 1850, p. 407 ff., also rightly recognises this; but explains the second half, contrary to the words, as if the proposition were expressed conditionally (εἰ καί), for if even some one lightly ventures to die for the good man, still however God proves his love, etc. Comp. Erasm. Paraphr.Märcker explains it in the sense of one friend dying for another; and suggests that Paul was thinking of the example of Damon and Pythias.

[1209] Respecting τολμᾶν see Wetstein, who properly defines it: quidpiam grave in animum inducere et sibi imperare. Comp. Stallbaum, ad Plat. Rep. p. 360 B; Monk, ad Eur. Alc. 284; Jacobs in Addit. ad Athen. p. 309 f.

[1210] t al. and others; and other passages; and other editions.

[1212] .τ.λ. καὶ τὰ λοιπά.

[1213] .τ.λ. καὶ τὰ λοιπά.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom 5:7 . Christ’s death for the ungodly assures us of God’s love; for the utmost that human love will do is far less. ὑπὲρ δικαίου : for a righteous man. Some make both δικαίου and τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ neuter: some who take δικαίου as masculine take τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ as neuter (so Weiss and Godet “pour un juste, pour le bien”): but as Jowett says, the notion of dying for an abstract idea is entirely unlike the N.T., or the age in which the N.T. was written, while the opposition to Christ’s dying for sinful persons requires that persons should be in question here also. The absence of the article with δικαίου corresponds to the virtually negative character of the clause: it is inserted before ἀγαθοῦ because the exceptional case is definitely conceived as happening. ἀποθανεῖται , gnomic; see Burton, § 69. Unless ἀγαθὸς is meant to suggest a certain advance upon δίκαιος , it is impossible to see in what respect the second clause adds anything to the first. Of course the words are broadly synonymous, so that often they are both applied to the same person or thing (Luk 23:50 , Rom 7:12 ); still there is a difference, and it answers to their application here; it is difficult to die for a just man, it has been found possible (one may venture to affirm) to die for a good man. The difference is like that between “just” and “good” in English: the latter is the more generous and inspiring type of character. Cf. the Gnostic contrast between the “just” God of the O.T. and the “good” God of the N.T., and the passages quoted in Cremer, s.v ἀγαθός . καὶ τολμᾷ : even prevails upon himself, wins it from himself.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom_5:7

For scarcely for a righteous man will one die, yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die. The greatness and freeness of the love of God is illustrated in this and the following verse, by making still more prominent the unworthiness of its objects: It is hardly to be expected that any one would die, in the place of a merely righteous man, though for the good man, this self-denial might possibly be exercised. But we, so far from being good, were not even righteous; we were sinners, ungodly, and enemies. The difference between the words righteous and good, as here used, is that which, in common usage, is made between just and kind. The former is applied to a man who does all that the law or justice can demand of him, the latter to him who is governed by love. The just man commands respect; the good man calls forth affection. Respect being a cold and feeble principle, compared to love, the sacrifices to which it leads are comparatively slight. This distinction between δίκαιος and ἀγαθός is illustrated by that which Cicero, De Officiis, Lib. 3:15, makes between justus and bonus: Si vir bonus is est qui prodest quibus potest, nocet nemini, recte justum virum, bonum non facile reperiemus. The interpretation given above is the one generally adopted; it suits the contest, the signification of the words, and the structure of the passage. The design of the apostle is to represent the death of Christ as an unexampled manifestation of love. Among men, it was never heard of that one died for a man simply just; the most that human nature could be expected to accomplish is, that one should die for his benefactor, or for the good man one so good as to be characterized and known as the good. There is evidently a climax in the passage, as indicated by the opposition between (μόλις and τάχα) scarcely and possibly. The passage, however, has been differently interpreted. Luther takes both δικαίου and τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ as neuters: Scarcely for the right will any one die, possibly for something good some one might dare to die. Calvin makes no distinction between the words: Rarissimum sane inter homines exemplum exstat, ut pro justo quis mori sustineat quanquam illud nonnunquam accidere possit. Meyer takes δικαίου as it is without the article, as masculine, but τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ as neuter, and renders the latter clause of the verse interrogatively: Hardly for a righteous man will one die, for who can easily bring himself to die for what is good (τὸ ἀγαθόν, the good)? The common interpretation is perfectly satisfactory, and to these, other objections more or less decisive may be adduced. Instead of dikai&ou, the Syriac reads ἀδίκου, Scarcely for an unrighteous man will one die. But this is not only unauthorized, but the sense is not so appropriate.

Charles Hodge — Commentary on Romans (1835), First Corinthians (1857), and Ephesians (1856) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

An amplifying of the love of God towards us, so that we cannot doubt of it, who delivereth Christ to death for the unjust, and for them of whom he could receive no commodity, and (that more is) for his very enemies. How can it be then that Christ being now alive, should not save them from destruction, whom by his death he justifieth and reconcileth?

In the stead of some just man.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

For scarcely for a righteous man--a man of simply unexceptionable character.

will one--"any one"

die: yet peradventure for a good man--a man who, besides being unexceptionable, is distinguished for goodness, a benefactor to society.

some--"some one."

would--rather, "doth."

even dare to die--"Scarce an instance occurs of self-sacrifice for one merely upright; though for one who makes himself a blessing to society there may be found an example of such noble surrender of life" (So BENGEL, OLSHAUSEN, THOLUCK, ALFORD, PHILIPPI). (To make the "righteous" and the "good" man here to mean the same person, and the whole sense to be that "though rare, the case may occur, of one making a sacrifice of life for a worthy character" [as CALVIN, BEZA, FRITZSCHE, JOWETT], is extremely flat.)

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 7. For scarcely for a righteous man will one die] The Jews divide men, as to their moral character, into four classes:

1. First class, Those who say, "what is mine, is my own; and what is thine, is thy own." These may be considered the just, who render to every man his due; or rather, they who neither give nor take.

2. The second class is made up of those who say, "what is mine, is thine; and what is thine, is mine." These are they who accommodate each other, who borrow and lend.

3. The third class is composed of those who say, "What is mine, is thine; and what is thine, let it be thine." These are the pious, or good, who give up all for the benefit of their neighbour.

4. The fourth class are those who say, "What is mine, is mine; and what is thine, shall be mine." These are the impious, who take all, and give nothing. Now, for one of the first class, who would die? There is nothing amiable in his life or conduct that would so endear him to any man, as to induce him to risk his life to save such a person.

Peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die.] This is for one of the third class, who gives all he has for the good of others. This is the truly benevolent man, whose life is devoted to the public good: for such a person, peradventure, some who have had their lives perhaps preserved by his bounty, would even dare to die: but such cases may be considered merely as possible: they exist, it is true, in romance; and we find a few rare instances of friends exposing themselves to death for their friends. See the case of Jonathan and David; Damon and Pythias, Val. Max. lib. iv. c, 7; Nisus and Euryalus, Virgil. And our Lord says, Joh 15:13: Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. This is the utmost we can expect among men.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

7. For a just man, etc. The meaning of the passage has constrained me to render the particle γὰρ as an affirmative or declarative rather than as a causative. The import of the sentence is this, “Most rare, indeed, is such an example to be found among men, that one dies for a just man, though this may sometimes happen: but let this be granted, yet for an ungodly man none will be found willing to die: this is what Christ has done.” Thus it is an illustration, derived from a comparison; for such an example of kindness, as Christ has exhibited towards us, does not exist among men.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(7) Yet peradventure.—The true reading is, undoubtedly, for peradventure.

For a good man.—Literally, for the good (man), i.e., for the good man in question, the righteous man mentioned above. It would be possible to take the phrase “for the good” as neuter rather than masculine, and to understand by it “in a good cause.” It would be possible also to give to the word translated “good” the special meaning of “benefactor”—“a man might be found to die for his benefactor.” But if this had been intended, it might have been more clearly expressed, and upon the whole it seems best to take the passage as it is taken in the English version. There is a slight distinction in the Greek, as in English, between the words translated “righteous” and “good.” To be “righteous” is to direct the will in obedience to an external standard; to be “good” is to have a natural goodness, especially kindness or benevolence of disposition. But this distinction is not insisted upon here. The two words are used almost convertibly.

(7-8) What makes the sacrifice of Christ so paradoxical is that it was undergone for sinners. Even for a righteous man it is rare enough to find another who will be ready to lay down his life. Yet some such persons there are. The one thing which is most extraordinary in the death of Christ, and which most tends to throw into relief the love of God as displayed in it, is that He died for men as sinners, and at the very moment when they were sinning all around Him.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

7. For, &c.] The connexion is somewhat thus: “He died for the godless: a proof of unequalled love; for hardly will you find any one die for a just, a good, man; you may find such a case, but it will be rare.”—No marked distinction is meant between “just” and “good.” Justice and goodness are equally contrasted with godlessness and sinfulness here. As regards the wording of the verse, it is lit. For hardly for a just man will one die; for for the good man, perhaps, one actually dares to die. The first “for” in the second clause may be explained by a paraphrase: “Death for even a just person is hardly known. I say, hardly known; not quite unknown; for cases of death for one who is good do occur.” The whole point of the verse is that such acts of even such love among men are very rare and very limited indeed. (The translation “for a just cause,” “for that which is good,” is precluded, as Meyer points out, by the personal words in contrast; “the godless,” “sinners.”)

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

For scarcely for a righteous man will one die,.... The design of this, and the following verse, is to show that Christ's dying for ungodly persons is an instance of kindness that is matchless and unparalleled. By "a righteous man", is not meant a truly gracious, holy man; nor one that is made righteous by the obedience of Christ; but one that is so in his own eyes, and in the esteem of others, being outwardly moral and righteous before men; who keeps to the letter of the law, and does, as he imagines, what that externally requires: such were the Pharisees among the Jews, who, though they were had in much outward esteem and veneration among the people, yet were rather feared than loved; and it would have been a difficult thing to have found a person that would cheerfully venture, and lay down his life for any of that complexion and cast:

yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die. By "a good man", is not meant a man made so by the grace of God, and who is indeed truly and properly the only good man; but a liberal and beneficent man, who was very bountiful in his charitable distributions to the poor, and very liberal in contributing towards the charge of sacrifices, repairs of the temple, &c. and did more this way than what the law obliged to. Now for such a man perhaps there might be some found so daring and hardy, as to venture and lay down their lives, when there was any danger of his, or any necessity for so doing; so great an interest such men had in the affections of the people. And so the Jews (z) distinguish between "a righteous man", and "a good man". They say (a),

"there is a righteous man that is good, and there is a righteous man that is not good; but he that is good for heaven, and the creatures, i.e. for God and men, this is , "a righteous good man"; but he that is good to God, and evil to men, this is , "a righteous man that is not good".''

The whole body of the people of the Jews were divided into three sorts: take a short sentence out of their Talmud (b), not to support the justness of the characters, but for the sake of this threefold division of the people:

"three things are said concerning the paring of the nails, "a righteous man" buries them, "a good man" burns them, "a wicked man" casts them away.''

Now to this division of the people the apostle alludes; and there is in the words a beautiful gradation, scarcely for one of the "righteous men", who does just what he is obliged to do by the law, and no more, will any die; perhaps it may be, that for one of "the good men", who are very liberal to the poor, and towards defraying all the expenses of the temple service, in which they exceed the strict demands of the law, some may be found willing to die; but who will die for the "the wicked and ungodly", the profligate and abandoned part of the people? not one, but Christ died for the ungodly: wherefore if instances could be produced of men's dying either for righteous men, or good men, these would not come up to the instance of Christ's dying for men, who were neither righteous nor good.

(z) Maimon in Misn Pirke Abot, c. 5. sect. 10, 13. Bartenora in Misn. Bava Metzia, c. 4. sect. 6. Juchasin, fol. 12. 2. Kimchi in Psal. iv. 3. (a) T. Bab. Kiddushin, fol. 40. 1. (b) T. Bab. Moed Katon, fol. 18. 1. & Niddah, fol. 17. 1.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

7 For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: yet peradventure for a good man some would even dare to die.

Ver. 7. Yet peradventure for a good man] For a public person. Lilloe stepped between the murderer and King Edwin his master to intercept the deadly thrust. (Speed’s Chron.) A common soldier lost his life at Musselborough field to save the Earl of Huntly’s life; so did Nicolas Ribische to rescue Prince Maurice at the siege of Pista.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

For scarcely ... - The design of this verse and the following is, to illustrate the great love of God by comparing it with what man was willing to do. “It is an unusual occurrence, an event which is all that we can hope for from the highest human benevolence and the purest friendship, that one would be willing to die for a good man. There are none who would be willing to die for a man who was seeking to do us injury, to calumniate our character, to destroy our happiness or our property. But Christ was willing to die for bitter foes.”

Scarcely - With difficulty. It is an event which cannot be expected to occur often. There would scarcely be found an instance in which it would happen.

A righteous man - A just man; a man distinguished simply for integrity of conduct; one who has no remarkable claims for amiableness of character, for benevolence, or for personal friendship. Much as we may admire such a man, and applaud him, yet he has not the characteristics which would appeal to our hearts to induce us to lay down our lives for him. Accordingly, it is not known that any instance has occurred where for such a man one would be willing to die.

For a righteous man - That is, in his place, or in his stead. A man would scarcely lay down his own life to save that of a righteous man.

Will one die - Would one be will. ing to die.

Yet peradventure - Perhaps; implying that this was an event which might be expected to occur.

For a good man - That is, not merely a man who is coldly just; but a man whose characteristic is that of kindness, amiableness, tenderness. It is evident that the case of such a man would be much more likely to appeal to our feelings, than that of one who is merely a man of integrity. Such a man is susceptible of tender friendship; and probably the apostle intended to refer to such a case - a case where we would be willing to expose life for a kind, tender, faithful friend.

Some would even dare to die - Some would have courage to give his life. Instances of this kind, though not many, have occurred. The affecting case of Damon and Pythias is one. Damon had been condemned to death by the tyrant Dionysius of Sicily, and obtained leave to go and settle his domestic affairs on promise of returning at a stated hour to the place of execution. Pythias pledged himself to undergo the punishment if Damon should not return in time, and deliver himself into the hands of the tyrant. Damon returned at the appointed moment, just as the sentence was about to be executed on Pythias; and Dionysius was so struck with the fidelity of the two friends, that he remitted their punishment, and entreated them to permit him to share their friendship; (Val. Max. 4. 7.) This case stands almost alone. Our Saviour says that it is the highest expression of love among people. “Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends;” Joh 15:13. The friendship of David and Jonathan seems also to have been of this character, that one would have been willing to lay down his life for the other.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

He amplifies the love of Christ in dying for the ungodly, and shows that it is unparalleled and without example. By a good man you must understand one that is very kind and bountiful, or one that is very useful and profitable; that is, a public and common good. Instances may be given of those that have sacrificed their lives for such. Lilloe stepped between the murderer and king Edward his master. Nicholas Ribische lost his life to preserve Prince Maurice at the siege of Pista.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

7. A righteous man… a good man—A righteous man is one rigidly just; a good man is one never unjust, but often more than just, namely, kind, generous, bountiful. The former all may respect, few will love, but scarce one will die for; the latter is loved, and for him many would sacrifice much, perhaps even life.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

A just man - One who gives to all what is strictly their due The good man - One who is eminently holy; full of love, of compassion, kindness, mildness, of every heavenly and amiable temper. Perhaps-one-would-even-dare to die - Every word increases the strangeness of the thing, and declares even this to be something great and unusual.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

righteous

See Rom 1:19 (See Scofield "Rom 10:10").

The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Here the apostle amplifies, extols, and magnifies the love of Christ in dying for us, when we were enemies to him; by comparing his love to us, with our love to one another: He intimates to us, that amongst men it is very rare and seldom known that one man will lay down his life to save another’s; but if so, it must be for a very extraordinary friend, for a person of uncommon goodness, and of eminent worth; For, says he, scarcely for a righteous man will one die.

As if he had said, Such a thing may be, but it is scarcely ever known, that a person will lay down his life for another though he be a very righteous, innocent, and truly honest man. Perhaps for a good man, that is, for a very king and bountiful benefactor; for some person of rare charity, and extraordinary goodness; for a man that is a public blessing and common good to the whole community; some person, from a sense of strong obligations, would even dare to die.

The scope of the apostle is this: To set forth the transcendency of Christ’s love in dying for the ungodly, to shew that it is beyond all human example, and that there can be no resemblance, much less any parallel of it; He loved us, and gave himself for us. Had he only as an advocate spoken and pleaded for us, his condescension had been admirable, and his love unspeakable. But to die, yea, to die for us, to be not only our Mediator, but Redeemer; not only our Redeemer, but our Ransom; Here is love beyond comparison: Blessed Jesus! was ever love like thine?

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

7. “For scarcely will one die for a righteous man: for in behalf of a good man one even dares to die:

William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

For scarcely for a righteous man will one die: for peradventure for the good man some one would even dare to die .

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

7. Scarcely for a righteous man will one die . The great love of Jesus is now set forth. If “scarcely for a righteous man will one die,” who would die for the ungodly? Yet peradventure. One might die for a good man. The world had instances of those who would die for their friends. The “righteous” man is one who is regarded just; the good man is benevolent.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

7, 8 emphasise the uniqueness of this act of love. This parenthesis makes an anacoluthon, a constant mark in S. Paul of deep feeling.

7. δικαίου—ἀγαθοῦ. Both masc. The idea is that the appeal of a righteous character hardly stirs the emotion; the good man with more that touches the heart may inspire such an act. Those for whom Christ died were neither.

τολμᾷ = ‘has the spirit to die’; cf. Field, ad loc[132], qu. Eur. Alc. 644.

[132] ad loc. ad locum

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

7.] The greatness of this Love, of Christ’s death on behalf of the impious, is brought out by shewing that there is none such among men, nay that such a self-sacrifice,—not unexampled where a good man, one loving his fellow-men and loved by them, is to be rescued,—is hardly found to occur on behalf of the pious and just. For hardly will any one die on behalf of a just man (masc.,—not neuter, ‘for justice’ or ‘righteousness sake,’ as , Erasm., Luth., al.: for the matter in hand is Christ’s death on behalf of persons)—for (this second ‘for’ is exceptive, and answers to ‘but I do not press this without exception,’ understood) on behalf of the good man (the art. as pointing him out generally, as in the expression, ‘the fool,’ ‘the wise man,’ ‘the righteous,’ ‘the wicked’) perhaps (τάχα opens a possibility which μόλις closes) one doth even dare (i.e. is even found to venture; the pres. implies habituality—it may occur here and there) to die.

The distinction here made between δίκαιος and ἀγαθός, is also found in Cicero, de Of. 3:15, ‘Si vir bonus is est qui prodest quibus potest, nocet nemini, recte justum virum, bonum non facile reperiemus.’ (But some edd. read ‘istum virum bonum.’)

The interpretation which makes δίκαιος and ἀγαθός refer to the same man, and the second clause = ‘I do not say that such a thing may not sometimes occur,’ is very vapid, and loses sight of the antithesis between δἰκαιος, and ἄδικος (= ἀσεβής = ἁμαρτωλός).

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

7. μόλις γάρ. The γάρ explains how this dying for sinners is a conspicuous proof of love. A few may face death for a good man, still fewer for a righteous man, but in the case of Christ there is more even than this; He died for declared enemies of God.

For μόλις the first hand of א and Orig. read μόγις, which has more attestation in Luk 9:39. The two words were easily confused both in sense and in writing.

ὑπὲρ δικαίου. There is clearly in this passage a contrast between ὑπὲρ δικαίου and ὑπὲρ τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ. They are not expressions which may be taken as roughly synonymous (Mey.-W. Lips. &c.), but it is implied that it is an easier thing to die for the ἀγαθός than for the δίκαιος. Similarly the Gnostics drew a distinction between the God of the O. T. and the God of the N. T., calling the one δίκαιος and the other ἀγαθός (Iren. Adv. Haer. I. xxvii. 1; comp. other passages and authorities quoted by Gif. p. 123). The δίκαιος keeps to the ‘letter of his bond’; about the ἀγαθός there is something warmer and more genial such as may well move to self-sacrifice and devotion.

In face of the clear and obvious parallel supplied by Irenaeus, not to speak of others, it should not be argued as it is by Weiss and Lips. (who make τοῦ ἀγαθοῦ neut.) and even by Mey. and Dr. T. K. Abbott (Essays, p. 75) that there is no substantial difference between δίκαιος and ἀγαθός. We ourselves often use ‘righteous’ and ‘good’ as equivalent without effacing the distinction between them when there is any reason to emphasize it. The stumbling-block of the art. before ἀγαθοῦ and not before δικαίου need not stand in the way. This is sufficiently explained by Gif., who points out that the clause beginning with μόλις is virtually negative, so that δικαίου is indefinite and does not need the art., while the affirmative clause implies a definite instance which the art. indicates.

We go therefore with most English and American scholars (Stuart, Hodge, Gif. Va. Lid.) against some leading Continental names in maintaining what appears to be the simple and natural sense of the passage.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Righteous - good [δικαιου - αγαθου] . The distinction is : dikaiov is simply right or just; doing all that law or justice requires; ajgaqov is benevolent, kind, generous. The righteous man does what he ought, and gives to every one his due. The good man "does as much as ever he can, and proves his moral quality by promoting the wellbeing of him with whom he has to do." 'Agaqov always includes a corresponding beneficent relation of the subject of it to another subject; an establishment of a communion and exchange of life; while dikaiov only expresses a relation to the purely objective dikh right. Bengel says : "dikaiov, indefinitely, implies an innocent man; oJ ajgaqov one perfect in all that piety demands; excellent, honorable, princely, blessed; for example, the father of his country."

Therefore, according to Paul, though one would hardly die for the merely upright or strictly just man who commands respect, he might possibly die for the noble, beneficent man, who calls out affection. The article is omitted with righteous, and supplied with good - the good man, pointing to such a case as a rare and special exception.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.