<hi type="bold">9. But ye are not in the flesh, but in the spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you--</hi>This does not mean, "if the disposition or mind of God dwell in you"; but "if the Holy Ghost dwell in you" (see <reference osisRef="1Cor.6.11">1Co 6:11</reference>, <reference osisRef="1Cor.6.19">19</reference>; <reference osisRef="1Cor.3.16">3:16</reference>, &c.). (It thus appears that to be "in the spirit" means here to be under the dominion of our own renewed mind; because the indwelling of God's Spirit is given as the evidence that we are "in the spirit").

<hi type="bold">Now--</hi>"But."

<hi type="bold">if any man have not the Spirit of Christ--</hi>Again, this does not mean "the disposition or mind of Christ," but the Holy Ghost; here called "the Spirit of Christ," just as He is called "the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus" (see on <reference osisRef="Rom.8.2">Ro 8:2</reference>). It is as "the Spirit of Christ" that the Holy Ghost takes possession of believers, introducing into them all the gracious, dove-like disposition which dwelt in Him (<reference osisRef="Matt.3.16">Mt 3:16</reference>; <reference osisRef="John.3.34">Joh 3:34</reference>). Now if any man's heart be void, not of such dispositions, but of the blessed Author of them, "the Spirit of Christ."

<hi type="bold">he is none of his--</hi>even though intellectually convinced of the truth of Christianity, and in a general sense influence by its spirit. Sharp, solemn statement this!

9. But ye are not in the flesh, but in the spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you-- This does not mean, "if the disposition or mind of God dwell in you"; but "if the Holy Ghost dwell in you" (see 1Co 6:11, 19; 3:16, &c.). (It thus appears that to be "in the spirit" means here to be under the dominion of our own renewed mind; because the indwelling of God's Spirit is given as the evidence that we are "in the spirit"). Now-- "But." if any man have not the Spirit of Christ-- Again, this does not mean "the disposition or mind of Christ," but the Holy Ghost; here called "the Spirit of Christ," just as He is called "the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus" (see on Ro 8:2). It is as "the Spirit of Christ" that the Holy Ghost takes possession of believers, introducing into them all the gracious, dove-like disposition which dwelt in Him (Mt 3:16; Joh 3:34). Now if any man's heart be void, not of such dispositions, but of the blessed Author of them, "the Spirit of Christ." he is none of his-- even though intellectually convinced of the truth of Christianity, and in a general sense influence by its spirit. Sharp, solemn statement this!


<hi type="bold">10-11. And if Christ be in you--</hi>by His indwelling Spirit in virtue of which we have one life with him.

<hi type="bold">the body--</hi>"the body indeed."

<hi type="bold">is dead because of--</hi>"by reason of"

<hi type="bold">sin; but the spirit is life because--</hi>or, "by reason"

<hi type="bold">of righteousness--</hi>The word "indeed," which the original requires, is of the nature of a concession--"I grant you that the body is dead ... and so far redemption is incomplete, but," &c.; that is, "If Christ be in you by His indwelling Spirit, though your 'bodies' have to pass through the stage of 'death' in consequence of the first Adam's 'sin,' your spirit is instinct with new and undying 'life,' brought in by the 'righteousness' of the second Adam" [Tholuck, Meyer, and Alford in part, but only Hodge entirely].

10-11. And if Christ be in you-- by His indwelling Spirit in virtue of which we have one life with him. the body-- "the body indeed." is dead because of-- "by reason of" sin; but the spirit is life because-- or, "by reason" of righteousness-- The word "indeed," which the original requires, is of the nature of a concession--"I grant you that the body is dead... and so far redemption is incomplete, but," &c.; that is, "If Christ be in you by His indwelling Spirit, though your 'bodies' have to pass through the stage of 'death' in consequence of the first Adam's 'sin,' your spirit is instinct with new and undying 'life,' brought in by the 'righteousness' of the second Adam" [Tholuck, Meyer, and Alford in part, but only Hodge entirely].


<hi type="bold">12-13. Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh--</hi>"Once we were sold under sin (<reference osisRef="Rom.7.14">Ro 7:14</reference>); but now that we have been set free from that hard master and become servants to Righteousness (<reference osisRef="Rom.6.22">Ro 6:22</reference>), we owe nothing to the flesh, we disown its unrighteous claims and are deaf to its imperious demands." Glorious sentiment!

12-13. Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh-- "Once we were sold under sin (Ro 7:14); but now that we have been set free from that hard master and become servants to Righteousness (Ro 6:22), we owe nothing to the flesh, we disown its unrighteous claims and are deaf to its imperious demands." Glorious sentiment!


<hi type="bold">14. For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God, they, &c.--</hi>"these are sons of God." Hitherto the apostle has spoken of the Spirit simply as a power through which believers mortify sin: now he speaks of Him as a gracious, loving Guide, whose "leading"--enjoyed by all in whom is the Spirit of God's dear Son--shows that they also are "sons of God."

14. For as many as are led by the Spirit of God, they are the sons of God, they, &c.-- "these are sons of God." Hitherto the apostle has spoken of the Spirit simply as a power through which believers mortify sin: now he speaks of Him as a gracious, loving Guide, whose "leading"--enjoyed by all in whom is the Spirit of God's dear Son--shows that they also are "sons of God."


<hi type="bold">15. For, &c.--</hi>"For ye received not (at the time of your conversion) the spirit of bondage," that is, "The spirit ye received was not a spirit of bondage."

<hi type="bold">again--</hi>gendering.

<hi type="bold">to fear--</hi>as under the law which "worketh wrath," that is, "Such was your condition before ye believed, living in legal bondage, haunted with incessant forebodings under a sense of unpardoned sin. But it was not to perpetuate that wretched state that ye received the Spirit."

<hi type="bold">but ye have received--</hi>"ye received."

<hi type="bold">the spirit of adoption, whereby--</hi>rather, "wherein."

<hi type="bold">we cry, Abba, Father--</hi>The word "cry" is emphatic, expressing the spontaneousness, the strength, and the exuberance of the final emotions. In <reference osisRef="Gal.4.6">Ga 4:6</reference> this cry is said to proceed from the Spirit in us, drawing forth the filial exclamation in our hearts. Here, it is said to proceed from our own hearts under the vitalizing energy of the Spirit, as the very element of the new life in believers (compare <reference osisRef="Matt.10.19">Mt 10:19</reference>, <reference osisRef="Matt.10.20">20</reference>; and see on <reference osisRef="Rom.8.4">Ro 8:4</reference>). "Abba" is the Syro-Chaldaic word for "Father"; and the Greek word for that is added, not surely to tell the reader that both mean the same thing, but for the same reason which drew both words from the lips of Christ Himself during his agony in the garden (<reference osisRef="Mark.14.36">Mr 14:36</reference>). He, doubtless, loved to utter His Father's name in both the accustomed forms; beginning with His cherished mother tongue, and adding that of the learned. In this view the use of both words here has a charming simplicity and warmth.

15. For, &c.-- "For ye received not (at the time of your conversion) the spirit of bondage," that is, "The spirit ye received was not a spirit of bondage." again-- gendering. to fear-- as under the law which "worketh wrath," that is, "Such was your condition before ye believed, living in legal bondage, haunted with incessant forebodings under a sense of unpardoned sin. But it was not to perpetuate that wretched state that ye received the Spirit." but ye have received-- "ye received." the spirit of adoption, whereby-- rather, "wherein." we cry, Abba, Father-- The word "cry" is emphatic, expressing the spontaneousness, the strength, and the exuberance of the final emotions. In Ga 4:6 this cry is said to proceed from the Spirit in us, drawing forth the filial exclamation in our hearts. Here, it is said to proceed from our own hearts under the vitalizing energy of the Spirit, as the very element of the new life in believers (compare Mt 10:19, 20; and see on Ro 8:4). "Abba" is the Syro-Chaldaic word for "Father"; and the Greek word for that is added, not surely to tell the reader that both mean the same thing, but for the same reason which drew both words from the lips of Christ Himself during his agony in the garden (Mr 14:36). He, doubtless, loved to utter His Father's name in both the accustomed forms; beginning with His cherished mother tongue, and adding that of the learned. In this view the use of both words here has a charming simplicity and warmth.


<hi type="bold">16. The Spirit itself--</hi>It should be "Himself" (see on <reference osisRef="Rom.8.26">Ro 8:26</reference>).

<hi type="bold">beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children--</hi>"are children"

<hi type="bold">of God--</hi>The testimony of our own spirit is borne in that cry of conscious sonship, "Abba, Father"; but we are not therein alone; for the Holy Ghost within us, yea, even in that very cry which it is His to draw forth, sets His own distinct seal to ours; and thus, "in the mouth of two witnesses" the thing is established. The apostle had before called us "sons of God," referring to our adoption; here the word changes to "children," referring to our new birth. The one expresses the dignity to which we are admitted; the other the new life which we receive. The latter is more suitable here; because a son by adoption might not be heir of the property, whereas a son by birth certainly is, and this is what the apostle is now coming to.

16. The Spirit itself-- It should be "Himself" (see on Ro 8:26). beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children-- "are children" of God-- The testimony of our own spirit is borne in that cry of conscious sonship, "Abba, Father"; but we are not therein alone; for the Holy Ghost within us, yea, even in that very cry which it is His to draw forth, sets His own distinct seal to ours; and thus, "in the mouth of two witnesses" the thing is established. The apostle had before called us "sons of God," referring to our adoption; here the word changes to "children," referring to our new birth. The one expresses the dignity to which we are admitted; the other the new life which we receive. The latter is more suitable here; because a son by adoption might not be heir of the property, whereas a son by birth certainly is, and this is what the apostle is now coming to.


<hi type="bold">17. And if children, then heirs--</hi>"heirs also."

<hi type="bold">heirs of God--</hi>of our Father's kingdom.

<hi type="bold">and joint-heirs with Christ--</hi>as the "First-born among many brethren" (<reference osisRef="Rom.8.29">Ro 8:29</reference>), and as "Heir of all things" (<reference osisRef="Heb.1.2">He 1:2</reference>).

<hi type="bold">if so be that we suffer--</hi>"provided we be suffering with Him."

<hi type="bold">that we may be also glorified together--</hi>with Him. This necessity of conformity to Christ in suffering in order to participate in His glory, is taught alike by Christ Himself and by His apostles (<reference osisRef="John.12.24-John.12.26">Joh 12:24-26</reference>; <reference osisRef="Matt.16.24">Mt 16:24</reference>, <reference osisRef="Matt.16.25">25</reference>; <reference osisRef="2Tim.2.12">2Ti 2:12</reference>).

17. And if children, then heirs-- "heirs also." heirs of God-- of our Father's kingdom. and joint-heirs with Christ-- as the "First-born among many brethren" (Ro 8:29), and as "Heir of all things" (He 1:2). if so be that we suffer-- "provided we be suffering with Him." that we may be also glorified together-- with Him. This necessity of conformity to Christ in suffering in order to participate in His glory, is taught alike by Christ Himself and by His apostles (Joh 12:24-26; Mt 16:24, 25; 2Ti 2:12).


<hi type="bold">18. For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us--</hi>that is, "True, we must suffer with Christ, if we would partake of His glory; but what of that? For if such sufferings are set over against the coming glory, they sink into insignificance."

18. For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us-- that is, "True, we must suffer with Christ, if we would partake of His glory; but what of that? For if such sufferings are set over against the coming glory, they sink into insignificance."


<hi type="bold">19-22. For, &c.--</hi>"The apostle, fired with the thought of the future glory of the saints, pours forth this splendid passage, in which he represents the whole creation groaning under its present degradation, and looking and longing for the revelation of this glory as the end and consummation of its existence" [Hodge].

<hi type="bold">the earnest expectation--</hi>(compare <reference osisRef="Phil.1.20">Php 1:20</reference>).

<hi type="bold">of the creature--</hi>rather, "the creation."

<hi type="bold">waiteth for the manifestation--</hi>"is waiting for the revelation"

<hi type="bold">of the sons of God--</hi>that is, "for the redemption of their bodies" from the grave (<reference osisRef="Rom.8.23">Ro 8:23</reference>), which will reveal their sonship, now hidden (compare <reference osisRef="Luke.20.36">Lu 20:36</reference>; <reference osisRef="Rev.21.7">Re 21:7</reference>).

19-22. For, &c.-- "The apostle, fired with the thought of the future glory of the saints, pours forth this splendid passage, in which he represents the whole creation groaning under its present degradation, and looking and longing for the revelation of this glory as the end and consummation of its existence" [Hodge]. the earnest expectation-- (compare Php 1:20). of the creature-- rather, "the creation." waiteth for the manifestation-- "is waiting for the revelation" of the sons of God-- that is, "for the redemption of their bodies" from the grave (Ro 8:23), which will reveal their sonship, now hidden (compare Lu 20:36; Re 21:7).


<hi type="bold">23. And not only they, but ourselves also--</hi>or "not only [so], but even we ourselves"--that is, besides the inanimate creation.

<hi type="bold">which have the first-fruits of the Spirit--</hi>or, "the Spirit as the first-fruits" of our full redemption (compare <reference osisRef="2Cor.1.22">2Co 1:22</reference>), moulding the heart to a heavenly frame and attempering it to its future element.

<hi type="bold">even we ourselves--</hi>though we have so much of heaven already within us.

<hi type="bold">groan within ourselves--</hi>under this "body of sin and death," and under the manifold "vanity and vexation of spirit" that are written upon every object and every pursuit and every enjoyment under the sun.

<hi type="bold">waiting for the--</hi>manifestation of our

<hi type="bold">adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body--</hi>from the grave: "not (be it observed) the deliverance of ourselves from the body, but the redemption of the body itself from the grave" [Bengel].

23. And not only they, but ourselves also-- or "not only [so], but even we ourselves"--that is, besides the inanimate creation. which have the first-fruits of the Spirit-- or, "the Spirit as the first-fruits" of our full redemption (compare 2Co 1:22), moulding the heart to a heavenly frame and attempering it to its future element. even we ourselves-- though we have so much of heaven already within us. groan within ourselves-- under this "body of sin and death," and under the manifold "vanity and vexation of spirit" that are written upon every object and every pursuit and every enjoyment under the sun. waiting for the-- manifestation of our adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body-- from the grave: "not (be it observed) the deliverance of ourselves from the body, but the redemption of the body itself from the grave" [Bengel].


<hi type="bold">24. For we are saved by hope--</hi>rather, "For in hope we are saved"; that is, it is more a salvation in hope than as yet in actual possession.

<hi type="bold">but hope that is seen is not hope--</hi>for the very meaning of hope is, the expectation that something now future will become present.

<hi type="bold">for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for?--</hi>the latter ending when the other comes.

24. For we are saved by hope-- rather, "For in hope we are saved"; that is, it is more a salvation in hope than as yet in actual possession. but hope that is seen is not hope-- for the very meaning of hope is, the expectation that something now future will become present. for what a man seeth, why doth he yet hope for?-- the latter ending when the other comes.


<hi type="bold">25. But if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for it--</hi>that is, then, patient waiting for it is our fitting attitude.

25. But if we hope for that we see not, then do we with patience wait for it-- that is, then, patient waiting for it is our fitting attitude.


<hi type="bold">26-27. Likewise the Spirit also, &c.--</hi>or, "But after the like manner doth the Spirit also help.

<hi type="bold">our infirmities--</hi>rather (according to the true reading), "our infirmity"; not merely the one infirmity here specified, but the general weakness of the spiritual life in its present state, of which one example is here given.

<hi type="bold">for we know not what we should pray for as we ought--</hi>It is not the proper matter of prayer that believers are at so much loss about, for the fullest directions are given them on this head: but to ask for the right things "as they ought" is the difficulty. This arises partly from the dimness of our spiritual vision in the present veiled state, while we have to "walk by faith, not by sight" (see on <reference osisRef="1Cor.13.9">1Co 13:9</reference> and <reference osisRef="2Cor.5.7">2Co 5:7</reference>), and the large admixture of the ideas and feelings which spring from the fleeting objects of sense that there is in the very best views and affections of our renewed nature; partly also from the necessary imperfection of all human language as a vehicle for expressing the subtle spiritual feelings of the heart. In these circumstances, how can it be but that much uncertainty should surround all our spiritual exercises, and that in our nearest approaches and in the freest outpourings of our hearts to our Father in heaven, doubts should spring up within us whether our frame of mind in such exercises is altogether befitting and well pleasing to God? Nor do these anxieties subside, but rather deepen, with the depth and ripeness of our spiritual experience.

<hi type="bold">but the Spirit itself--</hi>rather, "Himself." (See end of <reference osisRef="Rom.8.27">Ro 8:27</reference>).

<hi type="bold">maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered--</hi>that is, which cannot be expressed in articulate language. Sublime and affecting ideas, for which we are indebted to this passage alone! "As we struggle to express in articulate language the desires of our hearts and find that our deepest emotions are the most inexpressible, we 'groan' under this felt inability. But not in vain are these groanings. For 'the Spirit Himself' is in them, giving to the emotions which He Himself has kindled the only language of which they are capable; so that though on our part they are the fruit of impotence to utter what we feel, they are at the same time the intercession of the Spirit Himself in our behalf."

26-27. Likewise the Spirit also, &c.-- or, "But after the like manner doth the Spirit also help. our infirmities-- rather (according to the true reading), "our infirmity"; not merely the one infirmity here specified, but the general weakness of the spiritual life in its present state, of which one example is here given. for we know not what we should pray for as we ought-- It is not the proper matter of prayer that believers are at so much loss about, for the fullest directions are given them on this head: but to ask for the right things "as they ought" is the difficulty. This arises partly from the dimness of our spiritual vision in the present veiled state, while we have to "walk by faith, not by sight" (see on 1Co 13:9 and 2Co 5:7), and the large admixture of the ideas and feelings which spring from the fleeting objects of sense that there is in the very best views and affections of our renewed nature; partly also from the necessary imperfection of all human language as a vehicle for expressing the subtle spiritual feelings of the heart. In these circumstances, how can it be but that much uncertainty should surround all our spiritual exercises, and that in our nearest approaches and in the freest outpourings of our hearts to our Father in heaven, doubts should spring up within us whether our frame of mind in such exercises is altogether befitting and well pleasing to God? Nor do these anxieties subside, but rather deepen, with the depth and ripeness of our spiritual experience. but the Spirit itself-- rather, "Himself." (See end of Ro 8:27). maketh intercession for us with groanings which cannot be uttered-- that is, which cannot be expressed in articulate language. Sublime and affecting ideas, for which we are indebted to this passage alone! "As we struggle to express in articulate language the desires of our hearts and find that our deepest emotions are the most inexpressible, we 'groan' under this felt inability. But not in vain are these groanings. For 'the Spirit Himself' is in them, giving to the emotions which He Himself has kindled the only language of which they are capable; so that though on our part they are the fruit of impotence to utter what we feel, they are at the same time the intercession of the Spirit Himself in our behalf."


<hi type="bold">28. And--</hi>or, "Moreover," or "Now"; noting a transition to a new particular.

<hi type="bold">we know, &c.--</hi>The order in the original is more striking: "We know that to them that love God" (compare <reference osisRef="1Cor.2.9">1Co 2:9</reference>; <reference osisRef="Eph.6.24">Ep 6:24</reference>; <reference osisRef="Jas.1.12">Jas 1:12</reference>; 2:5) "all things work together for good [even] to them who are the called (rather, 'who are called') according to His (eternal) purpose." Glorious assurance! And this, it seems, was a "household word," a "known" thing, among believers. This working of all things for good is done quite naturally to "them that love God," because such souls, persuaded that He who gave His own Son for them cannot but mean them well in all His procedure, learn thus to take in good part whatever He sends them, however trying to flesh and blood: and to them who are the called, according to "His purpose," all things do in the same intelligible way "work together for good"; for, even when "He hath His way in the whirlwind," they see "His chariot paved with love" (<reference osisRef="Song.3.10">So 3:10</reference>). And knowing that it is in pursuance of an eternal "purpose" of love that they have been "called into the fellowship of His Son Jesus Christ" (<reference osisRef="1Cor.1.9">1Co 1:9</reference>), they naturally say within themselves, "It cannot be that He 'of whom, and through whom, and to whom are all things,' should suffer that purpose to be thwarted by anything really adverse to us, or that He should not make all things, dark as well as light, crooked as well as straight, to co-operate to the furtherance and final completion of His high design."

28. And-- or, "Moreover," or "Now"; noting a transition to a new particular. we know, &c.-- The order in the original is more striking: "We know that to them that love God" (compare 1Co 2:9; Ep 6:24; Jas 1:12; 2:5) "all things work together for good [even] to them who are the called (rather, 'who are called') according to His (eternal) purpose." Glorious assurance! And this, it seems, was a "household word," a "known" thing, among believers. This working of all things for good is done quite naturally to "them that love God," because such souls, persuaded that He who gave His own Son for them cannot but mean them well in all His procedure, learn thus to take in good part whatever He sends them, however trying to flesh and blood: and to them who are the called, according to "His purpose," all things do in the same intelligible way "work together for good"; for, even when "He hath His way in the whirlwind," they see "His chariot paved with love" (So 3:10). And knowing that it is in pursuance of an eternal "purpose" of love that they have been "called into the fellowship of His Son Jesus Christ" (1Co 1:9), they naturally say within themselves, "It cannot be that He 'of whom, and through whom, and to whom are all things,' should suffer that purpose to be thwarted by anything really adverse to us, or that He should not make all things, dark as well as light, crooked as well as straight, to co-operate to the furtherance and final completion of His high design."


<hi type="bold">29. For--</hi>as touching this "calling according to his purpose" (<reference osisRef="Rom.8.28">Ro 8:28</reference>).

<hi type="bold">whom he did foreknow he also did predestinate--</hi>foreordain. In what sense are we to take the word "foreknow" here? "Those who He foreknew would repent and believe," say Pelagians of every age and every hue. But this is to thrust into the text what is contrary to the whole spirit, and even letter, of the apostle's teaching (see <reference osisRef="Rom.9.11">Ro 9:11</reference>; <reference osisRef="2Tim.1.9">2Ti 1:9</reference>). In <reference osisRef="Rom.11.2">Ro 11:2</reference>, and <reference osisRef="Ps.1.6">Psa 1:6</reference>, God's "knowledge" of His people cannot be restricted to a mere foresight of future events, or acquaintance with what is passing here below. Does "whom He did foreknow," then, mean "whom He foreordained?" Scarcely, because both "foreknowledge" and "foreordination" are here mentioned, and the one as the cause of the other. It is difficult indeed for our limited minds to distinguish them as states of the Divine Mind towards men; especially since in <reference osisRef="Acts.2.23">Ac 2:23</reference> "the counsel" is put before "the foreknowledge of God," while in <reference osisRef="1Pet.1.2">1Pe 1:2</reference> "election" is said to be "according to the foreknowledge of God." But probably God's foreknowledge of His own people means His "peculiar, gracious, complacency in them," while His "predestinating" or "foreordaining" them signifies His fixed purpose, flowing from this, to "save them and call them with an holy calling" (<reference osisRef="2Tim.1.9">2Ti 1:9</reference>).

<hi type="bold">to be conformed to the image of his Son--</hi>that is, to be His sons after the pattern, model, or image of His Sonship in our nature.

<hi type="bold">that he might be the first-born among many brethren--</hi>"The First-born," the Son by nature; His "many brethren," sons by adoption: He, in the Humanity of the Only-begotten of the Father, bearing our sins on the accursed tree; they in that of mere men ready to perish by reason of sin, but redeemed by His blood from condemnation and wrath, and transformed into His likeness: He "the First-born from the dead"; they "that sleep in Jesus," to be in due time "brought with Him"; "The First-born," now "crowned with glory and honor"; His "many brethren," "when He shall appear, to be like Him, for they shall see Him as He is."

29. For-- as touching this "calling according to his purpose" (Ro 8:28). whom he did foreknow he also did predestinate-- foreordain. In what sense are we to take the word "foreknow" here? "Those who He foreknew would repent and believe," say Pelagians of every age and every hue. But this is to thrust into the text what is contrary to the whole spirit, and even letter, of the apostle's teaching (see Ro 9:11; 2Ti 1:9). In Ro 11:2, and Psa 1:6, God's "knowledge" of His people cannot be restricted to a mere foresight of future events, or acquaintance with what is passing here below. Does "whom He did foreknow," then, mean "whom He foreordained?" Scarcely, because both "foreknowledge" and "foreordination" are here mentioned, and the one as the cause of the other. It is difficult indeed for our limited minds to distinguish them as states of the Divine Mind towards men; especially since in Ac 2:23 "the counsel" is put before "the foreknowledge of God," while in 1Pe 1:2 "election" is said to be "according to the foreknowledge of God." But probably God's foreknowledge of His own people means His "peculiar, gracious, complacency in them," while His "predestinating" or "foreordaining" them signifies His fixed purpose, flowing from this, to "save them and call them with an holy calling" (2Ti 1:9). to be conformed to the image of his Son-- that is, to be His sons after the pattern, model, or image of His Sonship in our nature. that he might be the first-born among many brethren-- "The First-born," the Son by nature; His "many brethren," sons by adoption: He, in the Humanity of the Only-begotten of the Father, bearing our sins on the accursed tree; they in that of mere men ready to perish by reason of sin, but redeemed by His blood from condemnation and wrath, and transformed into His likeness: He "the First-born from the dead"; they "that sleep in Jesus," to be in due time "brought with Him"; "The First-born," now "crowned with glory and honor"; His "many brethren," "when He shall appear, to be like Him, for they shall see Him as He is."


<hi type="bold">30. Moreover--</hi>"And," or "Now"; explanatory of <reference osisRef="Rom.8.29">Ro 8:29</reference>--In "predestinating us to be conformed to the image of His Son" in final glory, He settled all the successive steps of it. Thus

<hi type="bold">whom he did predestinate, them he also called--</hi>The word "called" (as Hodge and others truly observe) is never in the Epistles of the New Testament applied to those who have only the outward invitation of the Gospel (as in <reference osisRef="Matt.20.16">Mt 20:16</reference>; <reference osisRef="Matt.22.14">22:14</reference>). It always means "internally, effectually, savingly called." It denotes the first great step in personal salvation and answers to "conversion." Only the word conversion expresses the change of character which then takes place, whereas this "calling" expresses the divine authorship of the change, and the sovereign power by which we are summoned, Matthew-like, Zaccheus-like, out of our old, wretched, perishing condition, into a new, safe, blessed life.

<hi type="bold">and whom he called--</hi>thus.

<hi type="bold">them he also justified--</hi>brought into the definite state of reconciliation already so fully described.

<hi type="bold">and whom he justified, them he also glorified--</hi>brought to final glory (<reference osisRef="Rom.8.17">Ro 8:17</reference>, <reference osisRef="Rom.8.18">18</reference>). Noble climax, and so rhythmically expressed! And all this is viewed as past; because, starting from the past decree of "predestination to be conformed to the image of God's Son" of which the other steps are but the successive unfoldings--all is beheld as one entire, eternally completed salvation.

30. Moreover-- "And," or "Now"; explanatory of Ro 8:29--In "predestinating us to be conformed to the image of His Son" in final glory, He settled all the successive steps of it. Thus whom he did predestinate, them he also called-- The word "called" (as Hodge and others truly observe) is never in the Epistles of the New Testament applied to those who have only the outward invitation of the Gospel (as in Mt 20:16; 22:14). It always means "internally, effectually, savingly called." It denotes the first great step in personal salvation and answers to "conversion." Only the word conversion expresses the change of character which then takes place, whereas this "calling" expresses the divine authorship of the change, and the sovereign power by which we are summoned, Matthew-like, Zaccheus-like, out of our old, wretched, perishing condition, into a new, safe, blessed life. and whom he called-- thus. them he also justified-- brought into the definite state of reconciliation already so fully described. and whom he justified, them he also glorified-- brought to final glory (Ro 8:17, 18). Noble climax, and so rhythmically expressed! And all this is viewed as past; because, starting from the past decree of "predestination to be conformed to the image of God's Son" of which the other steps are but the successive unfoldings--all is beheld as one entire, eternally completed salvation.


<hi type="bold">31. What shall we then say to these things?--</hi>"We can no farther go, think, wish" [Bengel]. This whole passage, to <reference osisRef="Rom.8.34">Ro 8:34</reference>, and even to the end of the chapter, strikes all thoughtful interpreters and readers, as transcending almost every thing in language, while Olshausen notices the "profound and colossal" character of the thought.

<hi type="bold">If God be for us, who can be against us?--</hi>If God be resolved and engaged to bring us through, all our enemies must be His; and "Who would set the briers and thorns against Him in battle? He would go through them. He would burn them together" (<reference osisRef="Isa.27.4">Is 27:4</reference>). What strong consolation is here! Nay, but the great Pledge of all has already been given; for,

31. What shall we then say to these things?-- "We can no farther go, think, wish" [Bengel]. This whole passage, to Ro 8:34, and even to the end of the chapter, strikes all thoughtful interpreters and readers, as transcending almost every thing in language, while Olshausen notices the "profound and colossal" character of the thought. If God be for us, who can be against us?-- If God be resolved and engaged to bring us through, all our enemies must be His; and "Who would set the briers and thorns against Him in battle? He would go through them. He would burn them together" (Is 27:4). What strong consolation is here! Nay, but the great Pledge of all has already been given; for,


<hi type="bold">32. He--</hi>rather, "He surely." (It is a pity to lose the emphatic particle of the original).

<hi type="bold">that spared not--</hi>"withheld not," "kept not back." This expressive phrase, as well as the whole thought, is suggested by <reference osisRef="Gen.22.12">Ge 22:12</reference>, where Jehovah's touching commendation of Abraham's conduct regarding his son Isaac seems designed to furnish something like a glimpse into the spirit of His own act in surrendering His own Son. "Take now (said the Lord to Abraham) thy son, thine only, whom thou lovest, and ... offer him for a burnt offering" (<reference osisRef="Gen.22.2">Ge 22:2</reference>); and only when Abraham had all but performed that loftiest act of self-sacrifice, the Lord interposed, saying, "Now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou HAST NOT WITHHELD THY SON, THINE ONLY SON, from Me." In the light of this incident, then, and of this language, our apostle can mean to convey nothing less than this, that in "not sparing His own Son, but delivering Him up," or surrendering Him, God exercised, in His Paternal character, a mysterious act of Self-sacrifice, which, though involving none of the pain and none of the loss which are inseparable from the very idea of self-sacrifice on our part, was not less real, but, on the contrary, as far transcended any such acts of ours as His nature is above the creature's. But this is inconceivable if Christ be not God's "own (or proper) Son," partaker of His very nature, as really as Isaac was of his father Abraham's. In that sense, certainly, the Jews charged our Lord with making Himself "equal with God" (see on <reference osisRef="John.5.18">Joh 5:18</reference>), which He in reply forthwith proceeded, not to disown, but to illustrate and confirm. Understand Christ's Sonship thus, and the language of Scripture regarding it is intelligible and harmonious; but take it to be an artificial relationship, ascribed to Him in virtue either of His miraculous birth, or His resurrection from the dead, or the grandeur of His works, or all of these together--and the passages which speak of it neither explain of themselves nor harmonize with each other.

<hi type="bold">delivered him up--</hi>not to death merely (as many take it), for that is too narrow an idea here, but "surrendered Him" in the most comprehensive sense; compare <reference osisRef="John.3.16">Joh 3:16</reference>, "God so loved the world that He GAVE His only-begotten Son."

<hi type="bold">for us all--</hi>that is, for all believers alike; as nearly every good interpreter admits must be the meaning here.

<hi type="bold">how shall he not--</hi>how can we conceive that He should not.

<hi type="bold">with him also--</hi>rather, "also with Him." (The word "also" is often so placed in our version as to obscure the sense; see on <reference osisRef="Heb.12.1">He 12:1</reference>).

<hi type="bold">freely give us all things?--</hi>all other gifts being not only immeasurably less than this Gift of gifts, but virtually included in it.

32. He-- rather, "He surely." (It is a pity to lose the emphatic particle of the original). that spared not-- "withheld not," "kept not back." This expressive phrase, as well as the whole thought, is suggested by Ge 22:12, where Jehovah's touching commendation of Abraham's conduct regarding his son Isaac seems designed to furnish something like a glimpse into the spirit of His own act in surrendering His own Son. "Take now (said the Lord to Abraham) thy son, thine only, whom thou lovest, and... offer him for a burnt offering" (Ge 22:2); and only when Abraham had all but performed that loftiest act of self-sacrifice, the Lord interposed, saying, "Now I know that thou fearest God, seeing thou HAST NOT WITHHELD THY SON, THINE ONLY SON, from Me." In the light of this incident, then, and of this language, our apostle can mean to convey nothing less than this, that in "not sparing His own Son, but delivering Him up," or surrendering Him, God exercised, in His Paternal character, a mysterious act of Self-sacrifice, which, though involving none of the pain and none of the loss which are inseparable from the very idea of self-sacrifice on our part, was not less real, but, on the contrary, as far transcended any such acts of ours as His nature is above the creature's. But this is inconceivable if Christ be not God's "own (or proper) Son," partaker of His very nature, as really as Isaac was of his father Abraham's. In that sense, certainly, the Jews charged our Lord with making Himself "equal with God" (see on Joh 5:18), which He in reply forthwith proceeded, not to disown, but to illustrate and confirm. Understand Christ's Sonship thus, and the language of Scripture regarding it is intelligible and harmonious; but take it to be an artificial relationship, ascribed to Him in virtue either of His miraculous birth, or His resurrection from the dead, or the grandeur of His works, or all of these together--and the passages which speak of it neither explain of themselves nor harmonize with each other. delivered him up-- not to death merely (as many take it), for that is too narrow an idea here, but "surrendered Him" in the most comprehensive sense; compare Joh 3:16, "God so loved the world that He GAVE His only-begotten Son." for us all-- that is, for all believers alike; as nearly every good interpreter admits must be the meaning here. how shall he not-- how can we conceive that He should not. with him also-- rather, "also with Him." (The word "also" is often so placed in our version as to obscure the sense; see on He 12:1). freely give us all things?-- all other gifts being not only immeasurably less than this Gift of gifts, but virtually included in it.


<hi type="bold">33-34. Who shall lay anything to the charge of--</hi>or, "bring any charge against."

<hi type="bold">God's elect?--</hi>the first place in this Epistle where believers are styled "the elect." In what sense this is meant will appear in next chapter.

33-34. Who shall lay anything to the charge of-- or, "bring any charge against." God's elect?-- the first place in this Epistle where believers are styled "the elect." In what sense this is meant will appear in next chapter.


<hi type="bold">35-36. Who shall separate us from the love of Christ?--</hi>This does not mean "our love to Christ," as if, Who shall hinder us from loving Christ? but "Christ's love to us," as is clear from the closing words of the chapter, which refer to the same subject. Nor would the other sense harmonize with the scope of the chapter, which is to exhibit the ample ground of the believer's confidence in Christ. "It is no ground of confidence to assert, or even to feel, that we will never forsake Christ; but it is the strongest ground of assurance to be convinced that His love will never change" [Hodge].

<hi type="bold">shall tribulation, &c.--</hi>"None of these, nor all together, how terrible soever to the flesh, are tokens of God's wrath, or the least ground for doubt of His love. From whom could such a question come better than from one who had himself for Christ's sake endured so much? (See <reference osisRef="2Cor.11.11-2Cor.11.33">2Co 11:11-33</reference>; <reference osisRef="1Cor.4.10-1Cor.4.13">1Co 4:10-13</reference>). The apostle says not (remarks Calvin nobly) "What," but "Who," just as if all creatures and all afflictions were so many gladiators taking arms against the Christians [Tholuck].

35-36. Who shall separate us from the love of Christ?-- This does not mean "our love to Christ," as if, Who shall hinder us from loving Christ? but "Christ's love to us," as is clear from the closing words of the chapter, which refer to the same subject. Nor would the other sense harmonize with the scope of the chapter, which is to exhibit the ample ground of the believer's confidence in Christ. "It is no ground of confidence to assert, or even to feel, that we will never forsake Christ; but it is the strongest ground of assurance to be convinced that His love will never change" [Hodge]. shall tribulation, &c.-- "None of these, nor all together, how terrible soever to the flesh, are tokens of God's wrath, or the least ground for doubt of His love. From whom could such a question come better than from one who had himself for Christ's sake endured so much? (See 2Co 11:11-33; 1Co 4:10-13). The apostle says not (remarks Calvin nobly) "What," but "Who," just as if all creatures and all afflictions were so many gladiators taking arms against the Christians [Tholuck].


<hi type="bold">37. Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors, through him that loved us--</hi>not, "We are so far from being conquered by them, that they do us much good" [Hodge]; for though this be true, the word means simply, "We are pre-eminently conquerors." See on <reference osisRef="Rom.5.20">Ro 5:20</reference>. And so far are they from "separating us from Christ's love," that it is just "through Him that loved us" that we are victorious over them.

37. Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors, through him that loved us-- not, "We are so far from being conquered by them, that they do us much good" [Hodge]; for though this be true, the word means simply, "We are pre-eminently conquerors." See on Ro 5:20. And so far are they from "separating us from Christ's love," that it is just "through Him that loved us" that we are victorious over them.


<hi type="bold">38-39. For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers--</hi>whether good or bad. But as the bad are not called "angels," or "principalities," or "powers," save with some addition to show that such are meant (<reference osisRef="Matt.25.41">Mt 25:41</reference>; <reference osisRef="Col.2.15">Col 2:15</reference>; <reference osisRef="Eph.6.12">Ep 6:12</reference>; <reference osisRef="2Pet.2.4">2Pe 2:4</reference>--except perhaps <reference osisRef="1Cor.6.3">1Co 6:3</reference>), probably the good are meant here, but merely as the same apostle supposes an angel from heaven to preach a false gospel. (So the best interpreters).

<hi type="bold">nor things present, nor things to come--</hi>no condition of the present life and none of the unknown possibilities of the life to come.

38-39. For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers-- whether good or bad. But as the bad are not called "angels," or "principalities," or "powers," save with some addition to show that such are meant (Mt 25:41; Col 2:15; Ep 6:12; 2Pe 2:4--except perhaps 1Co 6:3), probably the good are meant here, but merely as the same apostle supposes an angel from heaven to preach a false gospel. (So the best interpreters). nor things present, nor things to come-- no condition of the present life and none of the unknown possibilities of the life to come.


<title type="x-s2">CHAPTER 9</title> <title type="x-s3"><reference osisRef="Rom.9.1-Rom.9.33">Ro 9:1-33</reference>. The Bearing of the Foregoing Truths upon the Condition and Destiny of the Chosen People--Election--The Calling of the Gentiles.</title>
 Too well aware that he was regarded as a traitor to the dearest interests of his people (<reference osisRef="Acts.21.33">Ac 21:33</reference>; <reference osisRef="Acts.22.22">22:22</reference>; <reference osisRef="Acts.25.24">25:24</reference>), the apostle opens this division of his subject by giving vent to his real feelings with extraordinary vehemence of protestation.

<hi type="bold">1-2. I say the truth in Christ--</hi>as if steeped in the spirit of Him who wept over impenitent and doomed Jerusalem (compare <reference osisRef="Rom.1.9">Ro 1:9</reference>; <reference osisRef="2Cor.12.19">2Co 12:19</reference>; <reference osisRef="Phil.1.8">Php 1:8</reference>).

<hi type="bold">my conscience bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost--</hi>"my conscience as quickened, illuminated, and even now under the direct operation of the Holy Ghost."

CHAPTER 9 Ro 9:1-33. The Bearing of the Foregoing Truths upon the Condition and Destiny of the Chosen People--Election--The Calling of the Gentiles. Too well aware that he was regarded as a traitor to the dearest interests of his people (Ac 21:33; 22:22; 25:24), the apostle opens this division of his subject by giving vent to his real feelings with extraordinary vehemence of protestation. 1-2. I say the truth in Christ-- as if steeped in the spirit of Him who wept over impenitent and doomed Jerusalem (compare Ro 1:9; 2Co 12:19; Php 1:8). my conscience bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost-- "my conscience as quickened, illuminated, and even now under the direct operation of the Holy Ghost."


<hi type="bold">3. For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for--</hi>"in behalf of"

<hi type="bold">my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh--</hi>In proportion as he felt himself severed from his nation, he seems to have realized all the more vividly their natural relationship. To explain away the wish here expressed, as too strong for any Christian to utter or conceive, some have rendered the opening words, "I did wish," referring it to his former unenlightened state; a sense of the words too tame to be endured: others unwarrantably soften the sense of the word "accursed." But our version gives the true import of the original; and if it be understood as the language rather of "strong and indistinct emotions than of definite ideas" [Hodge], expressing passionately how he felt his whole being swallowed up in the salvation of his people, the difficulty will vanish, and we shall be reminded of the similar idea so nobly expressed by Moses (<reference osisRef="Exod.32.32">Ex 32:32</reference>).

3. For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for-- "in behalf of" my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh-- In proportion as he felt himself severed from his nation, he seems to have realized all the more vividly their natural relationship. To explain away the wish here expressed, as too strong for any Christian to utter or conceive, some have rendered the opening words, "I did wish," referring it to his former unenlightened state; a sense of the words too tame to be endured: others unwarrantably soften the sense of the word "accursed." But our version gives the true import of the original; and if it be understood as the language rather of "strong and indistinct emotions than of definite ideas" [Hodge], expressing passionately how he felt his whole being swallowed up in the salvation of his people, the difficulty will vanish, and we shall be reminded of the similar idea so nobly expressed by Moses (Ex 32:32).


<hi type="bold">4. Who are Israelites--</hi>See <reference osisRef="Rom.11.1">Ro 11:1</reference>; <reference osisRef="2Cor.11.22">2Co 11:22</reference>; <reference osisRef="Phil.3.5">Php 3:5</reference>.

<hi type="bold">to whom pertaineth--</hi>"whose is"

<hi type="bold">the adoption--</hi>It is true that, compared with the new economy, the old was a state of minority and pupilage, and so far that of a bond-servant (<reference osisRef="Gal.4.1-Gal.4.3">Ga 4:1-3</reference>); yet, compared with the state of the surrounding heathen, the choice of Abraham and his seed was a real separation of them to be a Family of God (<reference osisRef="Exod.4.22">Ex 4:22</reference>; <reference osisRef="Deut.32.6">De 32:6</reference>; <reference osisRef="Isa.1.2">Is 1:2</reference>; <reference osisRef="Jer.31.9">Jr 31:9</reference>; <reference osisRef="Hos.11.1">Ho 11:1</reference>; Mal 1:6).

<hi type="bold">and the glory--</hi>that "glory of the Lord," or "visible token of the Divine Presence in the midst of them," which rested on the ark and filled the tabernacle during all their wanderings in the wilderness; which in Jerusalem continued to be seen in the tabernacle and temple, and only disappeared when, at the Captivity, the temple was demolished, and the sun of the ancient economy began to go down. This was what the Jews called the "Shekinah."

<hi type="bold">and the covenants--</hi>"the covenants of promise" to which the Gentiles before Christ were "strangers" (<reference osisRef="Eph.2.12">Ep 2:12</reference>); meaning the one covenant with Abraham in its successive renewals (see <reference osisRef="Gal.3.16">Ga 3:16</reference>, <reference osisRef="Gal.3.17">17</reference>).

<hi type="bold">and the giving of the law--</hi>from Mount Sinai, and the possession of it thereafter, which the Jews justly deemed their peculiar honor (<reference osisRef="Deut.26.18">De 26:18</reference>, <reference osisRef="Deut.26.19">19</reference>; <reference osisRef="Ps.147.19">Psa 147:19</reference>, <reference osisRef="Ps.147.20">20</reference>; <reference osisRef="Rom.2.17">Ro 2:17</reference>).

<hi type="bold">and the service of God--</hi>or, of the sanctuary, meaning the whole divinely instituted religious service, in the celebration of which they were brought so nigh unto God.

<hi type="bold">and the promises--</hi>the great Abrahamic promises, successively unfolded, and which had their fulfilment only in Christ; (see <reference osisRef="Heb.7.6">He 7:6</reference>; <reference osisRef="Gal.3.16">Ga 3:16</reference>, <reference osisRef="Gal.3.21">21</reference>; <reference osisRef="Acts.26.6">Ac 26:6</reference>, <reference osisRef="Acts.26.7">7</reference>).

4. Who are Israelites-- See Ro 11:1; 2Co 11:22; Php 3:5. to whom pertaineth-- "whose is" the adoption-- It is true that, compared with the new economy, the old was a state of minority and pupilage, and so far that of a bond-servant (Ga 4:1-3); yet, compared with the state of the surrounding heathen, the choice of Abraham and his seed was a real separation of them to be a Family of God (Ex 4:22; De 32:6; Is 1:2; Jr 31:9; Ho 11:1; Mal 1:6). and the glory-- that "glory of the Lord," or "visible token of the Divine Presence in the midst of them," which rested on the ark and filled the tabernacle during all their wanderings in the wilderness; which in Jerusalem continued to be seen in the tabernacle and temple, and only disappeared when, at the Captivity, the temple was demolished, and the sun of the ancient economy began to go down. This was what the Jews called the "Shekinah." and the covenants-- "the covenants of promise" to which the Gentiles before Christ were "strangers" (Ep 2:12); meaning the one covenant with Abraham in its successive renewals (see Ga 3:16, 17). and the giving of the law-- from Mount Sinai, and the possession of it thereafter, which the Jews justly deemed their peculiar honor (De 26:18, 19; Psa 147:19, 20; Ro 2:17). and the service of God-- or, of the sanctuary, meaning the whole divinely instituted religious service, in the celebration of which they were brought so nigh unto God. and the promises-- the great Abrahamic promises, successively unfolded, and which had their fulfilment only in Christ; (see He 7:6; Ga 3:16, 21; Ac 26:6, 7).


<hi type="bold">5. Whose are the fathers--</hi>here, probably, the three great fathers of the covenant--Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob--by whom God condescended to name Himself (<reference osisRef="Exod.8.6">Ex 8:6</reference>, <reference osisRef="Exod.8.13">13</reference>; <reference osisRef="Luke.20.37">Lu 20:37</reference>).

<hi type="bold">and--</hi>most exalted privilege of all, and as such, reserved to the last.

<hi type="bold">of whom as concerning the flesh--</hi>(See on <reference osisRef="Rom.1.3">Ro 1:3</reference>).

<hi type="bold">Christ came--</hi>or, "is Christ"

<hi type="bold">who is over all, God--</hi>rather, "God over all."

<hi type="bold">blessed for ever. Amen--</hi>To get rid of the bright testimony here borne to the supreme divinity of Christ, various expedients have been adopted: (1) To place a period, either after the words "concerning the flesh Christ came," rendering the next clause as a doxology to the Father--"God who is over all be blessed for ever"; or after the word "all"--thus, "Christ came, who is over all: God be blessed.", &c. [Erasmus, Locke, Fritzsche, Meyer, Jowett, &c.]. But it is fatal to this view, as even Socinus admits, that in other Scripture doxologies the word "Blessed" precedes the name of God on whom the blessing is invoked (thus: "Blessed be God," <reference osisRef="Ps.68.35">Psa 68:35</reference>; "Blessed be the Lord God, the God of Israel," <reference osisRef="Ps.72.18">Psa 72:18</reference>). Besides, any such doxology here would be "unmeaning and frigid in the extreme"; the sad subject on which he was entering suggesting anything but a doxology, even in connection with Christ's Incarnation [Alford]. (2) To transpose the words rendered "who is"; in which case the rendering would be, "whose (that is, the fathers') is Christ according to the flesh" [Crellius, Whiston, Taylor, Whitby]. But this is a desperate expedient, in the face of all manuscript authority; as is also the conjecture of Grotius and others, that the word "God" should be omitted from the text. It remains then, that we have here no doxology at all, but a naked statement of fact, that while Christ is "of" the Israelitish nation "as concerning the flesh," He is, in another respect, "God over all, blessed for ever." (In <reference osisRef="2Cor.11.31">2Co 11:31</reference> the very Greek phrase which is here rendered "who is," is used in the same sense; and compare <reference osisRef="Rom.1.25">Ro 1:25</reference>, Greek). In this view of the passage, as a testimony to the supreme divinity of Christ, besides all the orthodox fathers, some of the ablest modern critics concur [Bengel, Tholuck, Stuart, Olshausen, Philippi, Alford, &c.]

5. Whose are the fathers-- here, probably, the three great fathers of the covenant--Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob--by whom God condescended to name Himself (Ex 8:6, 13; Lu 20:37). and-- most exalted privilege of all, and as such, reserved to the last. of whom as concerning the flesh-- (See on Ro 1:3). Christ came-- or, "is Christ" who is over all, God-- rather, "God over all." blessed for ever. Amen-- To get rid of the bright testimony here borne to the supreme divinity of Christ, various expedients have been adopted: (1) To place a period, either after the words "concerning the flesh Christ came," rendering the next clause as a doxology to the Father--"God who is over all be blessed for ever"; or after the word "all"--thus, "Christ came, who is over all: God be blessed.", &c. [Erasmus, Locke, Fritzsche, Meyer, Jowett, &c.]. But it is fatal to this view, as even Socinus admits, that in other Scripture doxologies the word "Blessed" precedes the name of God on whom the blessing is invoked (thus: "Blessed be God," Psa 68:35; "Blessed be the Lord God, the God of Israel," Psa 72:18). Besides, any such doxology here would be "unmeaning and frigid in the extreme"; the sad subject on which he was entering suggesting anything but a doxology, even in connection with Christ's Incarnation [Alford]. (2) To transpose the words rendered "who is"; in which case the rendering would be, "whose (that is, the fathers') is Christ according to the flesh" [Crellius, Whiston, Taylor, Whitby]. But this is a desperate expedient, in the face of all manuscript authority; as is also the conjecture of Grotius and others, that the word "God" should be omitted from the text. It remains then, that we have here no doxology at all, but a naked statement of fact, that while Christ is "of" the Israelitish nation "as concerning the flesh," He is, in another respect, "God over all, blessed for ever." (In 2Co 11:31 the very Greek phrase which is here rendered "who is," is used in the same sense; and compare Ro 1:25, Greek). In this view of the passage, as a testimony to the supreme divinity of Christ, besides all the orthodox fathers, some of the ablest modern critics concur [Bengel, Tholuck, Stuart, Olshausen, Philippi, Alford, &c.]


<hi type="bold">6. Not as though the word of God had taken none effect--</hi>"hath fallen to the ground," that is, failed: compare <reference osisRef="Luke.16.17">Lu 16:17</reference>, Greek.

<hi type="bold">for they are not all Israel which are of Israel--</hi>better, "for not all they which are of Israel are Israel." Here the apostle enters upon the profound subject of Election, the treatment of which extends to the end of the eleventh chapter--"Think not that I mourn over the total loss of Israel; for that would involve the failure of God's word to Abraham; but not all that belong to the natural seed, and go under the name of 'Israel,' are the Israel of God's irrevocable choice." The difficulties which encompass this subject lie not in the apostle's teaching, which is plain enough, but in the truths themselves, the evidence for which, taken by themselves, is overwhelming, but whose perfect harmony is beyond human comprehension in the present state. The great source of error here lies in hastily inferring (as Tholuck and others), from the apostle's taking tip, at the close of this chapter, the calling of the Gentiles in connection with the rejection of Israel, and continuing this subject through the two next chapters, that the Election treated of in the body of this chapter is national, not personal Election, and consequently is Election merely to religious advantages, not to eternal salvation. In that case, the argument of <reference osisRef="Rom.9.6">Ro 9:6</reference>, with which the subject of Election opens, would be this: "The choice of Abraham and his seed has not failed; because though Israel has been rejected, the Gentiles have taken their place; and God has a right to choose what nation He will to the privileges of His visible kingdom." But so far from this, the Gentiles are not so much as mentioned at all till towards the close of the chapter; and the argument of this verse is, that "all Israel is not rejected, but only a portion of it, the remainder being the 'Israel' whom God has chosen in the exercise of His sovereign right." And that this is a choice not to mere external privileges, but to eternal salvation, will abundantly appear from what follows.

6. Not as though the word of God had taken none effect-- "hath fallen to the ground," that is, failed: compare Lu 16:17, Greek. for they are not all Israel which are of Israel-- better, "for not all they which are of Israel are Israel." Here the apostle enters upon the profound subject of Election, the treatment of which extends to the end of the eleventh chapter--"Think not that I mourn over the total loss of Israel; for that would involve the failure of God's word to Abraham; but not all that belong to the natural seed, and go under the name of 'Israel,' are the Israel of God's irrevocable choice." The difficulties which encompass this subject lie not in the apostle's teaching, which is plain enough, but in the truths themselves, the evidence for which, taken by themselves, is overwhelming, but whose perfect harmony is beyond human comprehension in the present state. The great source of error here lies in hastily inferring (as Tholuck and others), from the apostle's taking tip, at the close of this chapter, the calling of the Gentiles in connection with the rejection of Israel, and continuing this subject through the two next chapters, that the Election treated of in the body of this chapter is national, not personal Election, and consequently is Election merely to religious advantages, not to eternal salvation. In that case, the argument of Ro 9:6, with which the subject of Election opens, would be this: "The choice of Abraham and his seed has not failed; because though Israel has been rejected, the Gentiles have taken their place; and God has a right to choose what nation He will to the privileges of His visible kingdom." But so far from this, the Gentiles are not so much as mentioned at all till towards the close of the chapter; and the argument of this verse is, that "all Israel is not rejected, but only a portion of it, the remainder being the 'Israel' whom God has chosen in the exercise of His sovereign right." And that this is a choice not to mere external privileges, but to eternal salvation, will abundantly appear from what follows.


<hi type="bold">7-9. Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children--</hi>"Not in the line of mere fleshly descent from Abraham does the election run; else Ishmael, Hagar's child, and even Keturah's children, would be included, which they were not."

<hi type="bold">but--</hi>the true election are such of Abraham's seed as God unconditionally chooses, as exemplified in that promise.

<hi type="bold">in Isaac shall thy seed be called--</hi>(<reference osisRef="Gen.21.12">Ge 21:12</reference>).

7-9. Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children-- "Not in the line of mere fleshly descent from Abraham does the election run; else Ishmael, Hagar's child, and even Keturah's children, would be included, which they were not." but-- the true election are such of Abraham's seed as God unconditionally chooses, as exemplified in that promise. in Isaac shall thy seed be called-- (Ge 21:12).


<hi type="bold">10-13. And not only this; but when Rebecca, &c.--</hi>It might be thought that there was a natural reason for preferring the child of Sarah, as being Abraham's true and first wife, both to the child of Hagar, Sarah's maid, and to the children of Keturah, his second wife. But there could be no such reason in the case of Rebecca, Isaac's only wife; for the choice of her son Jacob was the choice of one of two sons by the same mother and of the younger in preference to the elder, and before either of them was born, and consequently before either had done good or evil to be a ground of preference: and all to show that the sole ground of distinction lay in the unconditional choice of God--"not of works, but of Him that calleth."

10-13. And not only this; but when Rebecca, &c.-- It might be thought that there was a natural reason for preferring the child of Sarah, as being Abraham's true and first wife, both to the child of Hagar, Sarah's maid, and to the children of Keturah, his second wife. But there could be no such reason in the case of Rebecca, Isaac's only wife; for the choice of her son Jacob was the choice of one of two sons by the same mother and of the younger in preference to the elder, and before either of them was born, and consequently before either had done good or evil to be a ground of preference: and all to show that the sole ground of distinction lay in the unconditional choice of God--"not of works, but of Him that calleth."


<hi type="bold">14. What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid--</hi>This is the first of two objections to the foregoing doctrine, that God chooses one and rejects another, not on account of their works, but purely in the exercise of His own good pleasure: "This doctrine is inconsistent with the justice of God." The answer to this objection extends to <reference osisRef="Rom.9.19">Ro 9:19</reference>, where we have the second objection.

14. What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid-- This is the first of two objections to the foregoing doctrine, that God chooses one and rejects another, not on account of their works, but purely in the exercise of His own good pleasure: "This doctrine is inconsistent with the justice of God." The answer to this objection extends to Ro 9:19, where we have the second objection.


<hi type="bold">15. For he saith to Moses--</hi>(<reference osisRef="Exod.33.19">Ex 33:19</reference>).

<hi type="bold">I will have mercy on whom I will have--</hi>"on whom I have"

<hi type="bold">mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have--</hi>"on whom I have"

<hi type="bold">compassion--</hi>"There can be no unrighteousness in God's choosing whom He will, for to Moses He expressly claims the right to do so." Yet it is worthy of notice that this is expressed in the positive rather than the negative form: not, "I will have mercy on none but whom I will"; but, "I will have mercy on whomsoever I will."

15. For he saith to Moses-- (Ex 33:19). I will have mercy on whom I will have-- "on whom I have" mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have-- "on whom I have" compassion-- "There can be no unrighteousness in God's choosing whom He will, for to Moses He expressly claims the right to do so." Yet it is worthy of notice that this is expressed in the positive rather than the negative form: not, "I will have mercy on none but whom I will"; but, "I will have mercy on whomsoever I will."


<hi type="bold">16. So then it is not of him that willeth--</hi>hath the inward desire

<hi type="bold">nor of him that runneth--</hi>maketh active effort (compare <reference osisRef="1Cor.9.24">1Co 9:24</reference>, <reference osisRef="1Cor.9.26">26</reference>; <reference osisRef="Phil.2.16">Php 2:16</reference>; <reference osisRef="2Cor.3.14">3:14</reference>). Both these are indispensable to salvation, yet salvation is owing to neither, but is purely "of God that showeth mercy." See on <reference osisRef="Phil.2.12">Php 2:12</reference>, <reference osisRef="2Cor.2.13">13</reference>, "Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling: for it is God which, out of His own good pleasure, worketh in you both to will and to do."

16. So then it is not of him that willeth-- hath the inward desire nor of him that runneth-- maketh active effort (compare 1Co 9:24, 26; Php 2:16; 3:14). Both these are indispensable to salvation, yet salvation is owing to neither, but is purely "of God that showeth mercy." See on Php 2:12, 13, "Work out your own salvation with fear and trembling: for it is God which, out of His own good pleasure, worketh in you both to will and to do."


<hi type="bold">17. For the scripture saith to Pharaoh--</hi>observe here the light in which the Scripture is viewed by the apostle.

<hi type="bold">Even for this same--</hi>"this very"

<hi type="bold">purpose have I raised--</hi>"raised I"

<hi type="bold">thee up, &c.--</hi>The apostle had shown that God claims the right to choose whom He will: here he shows by an example that God punishes whom He will. But "God did not make Pharaoh wicked; He only forbore to make him good, by the exercise of special and altogether unmerited grace" [Hodge].

<hi type="bold">that I might--</hi>"may"

<hi type="bold">show my power in thee--</hi>It was not that Pharaoh was worse than others that he was so dealt with, but "in order that he might become a monument of the penal justice of God, and it was with a view to this that God provided that the evil which was in him should be manifested in this definite form" [Olshausen].

<hi type="bold">and that my name might--</hi>"may"

<hi type="bold">be declared--</hi>"proclaimed"

<hi type="bold">in all the earth--</hi>"This is the principle on which all punishment is inflicted, that the true character of the Divine Lawgiver should be known. This is of all objects, where God is concerned, the highest and most important; in itself the most worthy, and in its results the most beneficent" [Hodge].

17. For the scripture saith to Pharaoh-- observe here the light in which the Scripture is viewed by the apostle. Even for this same-- "this very" purpose have I raised-- "raised I" thee up, &c.-- The apostle had shown that God claims the right to choose whom He will: here he shows by an example that God punishes whom He will. But "God did not make Pharaoh wicked; He only forbore to make him good, by the exercise of special and altogether unmerited grace" [Hodge]. that I might-- "may" show my power in thee-- It was not that Pharaoh was worse than others that he was so dealt with, but "in order that he might become a monument of the penal justice of God, and it was with a view to this that God provided that the evil which was in him should be manifested in this definite form" [Olshausen]. and that my name might-- "may" be declared-- "proclaimed" in all the earth-- "This is the principle on which all punishment is inflicted, that the true character of the Divine Lawgiver should be known. This is of all objects, where God is concerned, the highest and most important; in itself the most worthy, and in its results the most beneficent" [Hodge].


<hi type="bold">18. Therefore hath he--</hi>"So then he hath." The result then is that He hath

<hi type="bold">mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth--</hi>by judicially abandoning them to the hardening influence of sin itself (<reference osisRef="Ps.81.11">Psa 81:11</reference>, <reference osisRef="Ps.81.12">12</reference>; <reference osisRef="Rom.1.24">Ro 1:24</reference>, 26, 28; <reference osisRef="Heb.3.8">He 3:8</reference>, <reference osisRef="Heb.3.13">13</reference>), and of the surrounding incentives to it (<reference osisRef="Matt.24.12">Mt 24:12</reference>; <reference osisRef="1Cor.15.38">1Co 15:38</reference>; <reference osisRef="2Thess.2.17">2Th 2:17</reference>).

 Second objection to the doctrine of Divine Sovereignty:

18. Therefore hath he-- "So then he hath." The result then is that He hath mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth-- by judicially abandoning them to the hardening influence of sin itself (Psa 81:11, 12; Ro 1:24, 26, 28; He 3:8, 13), and of the surrounding incentives to it (Mt 24:12; 1Co 15:38; 2Th 2:17). Second objection to the doctrine of Divine Sovereignty:


<hi type="bold">19. Thou shalt say then unto me, Why--</hi>"Why then" is the true reading.

<hi type="bold">doth he yet find fault? for who hath resisted--</hi>"Who resisteth"

<hi type="bold">his will?--</hi>that is, "This doctrine is incompatible with human responsibility"; If God chooses and rejects, pardons and punishes, whom He pleases, why are those blamed who, if rejected by Him, cannot help sinning and perishing? This objection shows quite as conclusively as the former the real nature of the doctrine objected to--that it is Election and Non-election to eternal salvation prior to any difference of personal character; this is the only doctrine that could suggest the objection here stated, and to this doctrine the objection is plausible. What now is the apostle's answer? It is twofold. First: "It is irreverence and presumption in the creature to arraign the Creator."

19. Thou shalt say then unto me, Why-- "Why then" is the true reading. doth he yet find fault? for who hath resisted-- "Who resisteth" his will?-- that is, "This doctrine is incompatible with human responsibility"; If God chooses and rejects, pardons and punishes, whom He pleases, why are those blamed who, if rejected by Him, cannot help sinning and perishing? This objection shows quite as conclusively as the former the real nature of the doctrine objected to--that it is Election and Non-election to eternal salvation prior to any difference of personal character; this is the only doctrine that could suggest the objection here stated, and to this doctrine the objection is plausible. What now is the apostle's answer? It is twofold. First: "It is irreverence and presumption in the creature to arraign the Creator."


<hi type="bold">20-21. Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made--</hi>"didst thou make"

<hi type="bold">me thus?--</hi>(<reference osisRef="Isa.45.9">Is 45:9</reference>).

20-21. Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, Why hast thou made-- "didst thou make" me thus?-- (Is 45:9).


<hi type="bold">22-23. What if God, willing to show--</hi>"designing to manifest"

<hi type="bold">his wrath--</hi>His holy displeasure against sin.

<hi type="bold">and to make his power--</hi>to punish it

<hi type="bold">known endured with much long-suffering the vessels of wrath--</hi>that is, "destined to wrath"; just as "vessels of mercy," in <reference osisRef="Rom.9.23">Ro 9:23</reference>, mean "vessels destined to mercy"; compare <reference osisRef="Eph.2.3">Ep 2:3</reference>, "children of wrath."

<hi type="bold">fitted for destruction--</hi>It is well remarked by Stuart that the "difficulties which such statements involve are not to be got rid of by softening the language of one text, while so many others meet us which are of the same tenor; and even if we give up the Bible itself, so long as we acknowledge an omnipotent and omniscient God we cannot abate in the least degree from any of the difficulties which such texts make." Be it observed, however, that if God, as the apostle teaches, expressly "designed to manifest His wrath, and to make His power (in the way of wrath) known," it could only be by punishing some, while He pardons others; and if the choice between the two classes was not to be founded, as our apostle also teaches, on their own doings but on God's good pleasure, the decision behooved ultimately to rest with God. Yet, even in the necessary punishment of the wicked, as Hodge observes, so far from proceeding with undue severity, the apostle would have it remarked that God "endures with much long-suffering" those objects of His righteous displeasure.

22-23. What if God, willing to show-- "designing to manifest" his wrath-- His holy displeasure against sin. and to make his power-- to punish it known endured with much long-suffering the vessels of wrath-- that is, "destined to wrath"; just as "vessels of mercy," in Ro 9:23, mean "vessels destined to mercy"; compare Ep 2:3, "children of wrath." fitted for destruction-- It is well remarked by Stuart that the "difficulties which such statements involve are not to be got rid of by softening the language of one text, while so many others meet us which are of the same tenor; and even if we give up the Bible itself, so long as we acknowledge an omnipotent and omniscient God we cannot abate in the least degree from any of the difficulties which such texts make." Be it observed, however, that if God, as the apostle teaches, expressly "designed to manifest His wrath, and to make His power (in the way of wrath) known," it could only be by punishing some, while He pardons others; and if the choice between the two classes was not to be founded, as our apostle also teaches, on their own doings but on God's good pleasure, the decision behooved ultimately to rest with God. Yet, even in the necessary punishment of the wicked, as Hodge observes, so far from proceeding with undue severity, the apostle would have it remarked that God "endures with much long-suffering" those objects of His righteous displeasure.


<hi type="bold">24. even us, whom he hath called, &c.--</hi>rather, "Whom he hath also called, even us," &c., in not only "afore preparing," but in due time effectually "calling us."

<hi type="bold">not of the Jews, &c.--</hi>better, "not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles." Here for the first title in this chapter the calling of the Gentiles is introduced; all before having respect, not to the substitution of the called Gentiles for the rejected Jews, but to the choice of one portion and the rejection of another of the same Israel. Had Israel's rejection been total, God's promise to Abraham would not have been fulfilled by the substitution of the Gentiles in their room; but Israel's rejection being only partial, the preservation of a "remnant," in which the promise was made good, was but "according to the election of grace." And now, for the first time, the apostle tells us that along with this elect remnant of Israel, it is God's purpose to "take out of the Gentiles a people for His name" (<reference osisRef="Acts.28.14">Ac 28:14</reference>); and that subject, thus introduced, is now continued to the end of the eleventh chapter.

24. even us, whom he hath called, &c.-- rather, "Whom he hath also called, even us," &c., in not only "afore preparing," but in due time effectually "calling us." not of the Jews, &c.-- better, "not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles." Here for the first title in this chapter the calling of the Gentiles is introduced; all before having respect, not to the substitution of the called Gentiles for the rejected Jews, but to the choice of one portion and the rejection of another of the same Israel. Had Israel's rejection been total, God's promise to Abraham would not have been fulfilled by the substitution of the Gentiles in their room; but Israel's rejection being only partial, the preservation of a "remnant," in which the promise was made good, was but "according to the election of grace." And now, for the first time, the apostle tells us that along with this elect remnant of Israel, it is God's purpose to "take out of the Gentiles a people for His name" (Ac 28:14); and that subject, thus introduced, is now continued to the end of the eleventh chapter.


<hi type="bold">25. As he saith also in Osee--</hi>"Hosea."

<hi type="bold">I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved--</hi>quoted, though not quite to the letter, from <reference osisRef="Hos.2.23">Ho 2:23</reference>, a passage relating immediately, not to the heathen, but to the kingdom of the ten tribes; but since they had sunk to the level of the heathen, who were "not God's people," and in that sense "not beloved," the apostle legitimately applies it to the heathen, as "aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise" (so <reference osisRef="1Pet.2.10">1Pe 2:10</reference>).

25. As he saith also in Osee-- "Hosea." I will call them my people, which were not my people; and her beloved, which was not beloved-- quoted, though not quite to the letter, from Ho 2:23, a passage relating immediately, not to the heathen, but to the kingdom of the ten tribes; but since they had sunk to the level of the heathen, who were "not God's people," and in that sense "not beloved," the apostle legitimately applies it to the heathen, as "aliens from the commonwealth of Israel and strangers to the covenants of promise" (so 1Pe 2:10).


<hi type="bold">26. And--</hi>another quotation from <reference osisRef="Hos.1.10">Ho 1:10</reference>.

<hi type="bold">it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people; there shall they be called the children--</hi>"called sons"

<hi type="bold">of the living God--</hi>The expression, "in the place where ... there," seems designed only to give greater emphasis to the gracious change here announced, from divine exclusion to divine admission to the privileges of the people of God.

26. And-- another quotation from Ho 1:10. it shall come to pass, that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not my people; there shall they be called the children-- "called sons" of the living God-- The expression, "in the place where... there," seems designed only to give greater emphasis to the gracious change here announced, from divine exclusion to divine admission to the privileges of the people of God.


<hi type="bold">27-29. Esaias also crieth--</hi>"But Isaiah crieth"--an expression denoting a solemn testimony openly borne (<reference osisRef="John.1.15">Joh 1:15</reference>; <reference osisRef="1Cor.7.28">7:28</reference>, <reference osisRef="1Cor.7.37">37</reference>; 12:44; <reference osisRef="Acts.23.6">Ac 23:6</reference>; <reference osisRef="Acts.24.21">24:21</reference>).

<hi type="bold">concerning Israel, Though the number of the children--</hi>"sons"

<hi type="bold">of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a--</hi>"the"

<hi type="bold">remnant--</hi>that is, the elect remnant only shall be saved.

27-29. Esaias also crieth-- "But Isaiah crieth"--an expression denoting a solemn testimony openly borne (Joh 1:15; 7:28, 37; 12:44; Ac 23:6; 24:21). concerning Israel, Though the number of the children-- "sons" of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a-- "the" remnant-- that is, the elect remnant only shall be saved.


<hi type="bold">30-31. What shall we say then?--</hi>"What now is the result of the whole?" The result is this--very different from what one would have expected.

<hi type="bold">That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained--</hi>"attained"

<hi type="bold">to righteousness, even the righteousness of faith--</hi>As we have seen that "the righteousness of faith" is the righteousness which justifies (see on <reference osisRef="Rom.3.22">Ro 3:22</reference>, &c.), this verse must mean that "the Gentiles, who while strangers to Christ were quite indifferent about acceptance with God, having embraced the Gospel as soon as it was preached to them, experienced the blessedness of a justified state."

30-31. What shall we say then?-- "What now is the result of the whole?" The result is this--very different from what one would have expected. That the Gentiles, which followed not after righteousness, have attained-- "attained" to righteousness, even the righteousness of faith-- As we have seen that "the righteousness of faith" is the righteousness which justifies (see on Ro 3:22, &c.), this verse must mean that "the Gentiles, who while strangers to Christ were quite indifferent about acceptance with God, having embraced the Gospel as soon as it was preached to them, experienced the blessedness of a justified state."


<hi type="bold">32-33. Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were--</hi>rather simply, "as"

<hi type="bold">by the works of the law--</hi>as if it were thus attainable, which justification is not: Since, therefore, it is attainable only by faith, they missed it.

<hi type="bold">for--</hi>it is doubtful if this particle was originally in the text.

<hi type="bold">they stumbled at that stumbling-stone--</hi>better, "against the stone of stumbling," meaning Christ. But in this they only did.

32-33. Wherefore? Because they sought it not by faith, but as it were-- rather simply, "as" by the works of the law-- as if it were thus attainable, which justification is not: Since, therefore, it is attainable only by faith, they missed it. for-- it is doubtful if this particle was originally in the text. they stumbled at that stumbling-stone-- better, "against the stone of stumbling," meaning Christ. But in this they only did.


<title type="x-s2">CHAPTER 10</title> <title type="x-s3"><reference osisRef="Rom.10.1-Rom.10.21">Ro 10:1-21</reference>. Same Subject Continued--How Israel Came to Miss Salvation, and the Gentiles to Find It.</title>

<hi type="bold">1. Brethren, my heart's desire--</hi>The word here expresses "entire complacency," that in which the heart would experience full satisfaction.

<hi type="bold">and prayer--</hi>"supplication."

<hi type="bold">to God for Israel--</hi>"for them" is the true reading; the subject being continued from the close of the preceding chapter.

<hi type="bold">is, that they may be saved--</hi>"for their salvation." Having before poured forth the anguish of his soul at the general unbelief of his nation and its dreadful consequences (<reference osisRef="Rom.9.1-Rom.9.3">Ro 9:1-3</reference>), he here expresses in the most emphatic terms his desire and prayer for their salvation.

CHAPTER 10 Ro 10:1-21. Same Subject Continued--How Israel Came to Miss Salvation, and the Gentiles to Find It. 1. Brethren, my heart's desire-- The word here expresses "entire complacency," that in which the heart would experience full satisfaction. and prayer-- "supplication." to God for Israel-- "for them" is the true reading; the subject being continued from the close of the preceding chapter. is, that they may be saved-- "for their salvation." Having before poured forth the anguish of his soul at the general unbelief of his nation and its dreadful consequences (Ro 9:1-3), he here expresses in the most emphatic terms his desire and prayer for their salvation.


<hi type="bold">2. For I bear them record--</hi>or, "witness," as he well could from his own sad experience.

<hi type="bold">that they have a zeal of--</hi>"for"

<hi type="bold">God, but not according to knowledge--</hi>(Compare <reference osisRef="Acts.22.3">Ac 22:3</reference>; <reference osisRef="Acts.26.9-Acts.26.11">26:9-11</reference>; <reference osisRef="Gal.1.13">Ga 1:13</reference>, <reference osisRef="1Cor.1.14">14</reference>). He alludes to this well-meaning of his people, notwithstanding their spiritual blindness, not certainly to excuse their rejection of Christ and rage against His saints, but as some ground of hope regarding them. (See <reference osisRef="1Tim.1.13">1Ti 1:13</reference>).

2. For I bear them record-- or, "witness," as he well could from his own sad experience. that they have a zeal of-- "for" God, but not according to knowledge-- (Compare Ac 22:3; 26:9-11; Ga 1:13, 14). He alludes to this well-meaning of his people, notwithstanding their spiritual blindness, not certainly to excuse their rejection of Christ and rage against His saints, but as some ground of hope regarding them. (See 1Ti 1:13).


<hi type="bold">3. For they being ignorant of God's righteousness--</hi>that is, for the justification of the guilty (see on <reference osisRef="Rom.1.17">Ro 1:17</reference>).

<hi type="bold">and going about--</hi>"seeking"

<hi type="bold">to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves to the righteousness of God--</hi>The apostle views the general rejection of Christ by the nation as one act.

3. For they being ignorant of God's righteousness-- that is, for the justification of the guilty (see on Ro 1:17). and going about-- "seeking" to establish their own righteousness, have not submitted themselves to the righteousness of God-- The apostle views the general rejection of Christ by the nation as one act.


<hi type="bold">4. For Christ is the end--</hi>the object or aim.

<hi type="bold">of the law for--</hi>justifying

<hi type="bold">righteousness to every one that believeth--</hi>that is, contains within Himself all that the law demands for the justification of such as embrace Him, whether Jew or Gentile (<reference osisRef="Gal.3.24">Ga 3:24</reference>).

4. For Christ is the end-- the object or aim. of the law for-- justifying righteousness to every one that believeth-- that is, contains within Himself all that the law demands for the justification of such as embrace Him, whether Jew or Gentile (Ga 3:24).


<hi type="bold">5-10. For Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the law, That the man that doeth--</hi>"hath done"

<hi type="bold">those things--</hi>which it commands.

<hi type="bold">shall live in them--</hi>(<reference osisRef="Lev.18.5">Le 18:5</reference>). This is the one way of justification and life--by "the righteousness which is of (or, by our own obedience to) the law."

5-10. For Moses describeth the righteousness which is of the law, That the man that doeth-- "hath done" those things-- which it commands. shall live in them-- (Le 18:5). This is the one way of justification and life--by "the righteousness which is of (or, by our own obedience to) the law."


<hi type="bold">11-13. For the scripture saith--</hi>in <reference osisRef="Isa.28.16">Is 28:16</reference>, a glorious Messianic passage.

<hi type="bold">Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed--</hi>Here, as in <reference osisRef="Rom.9.33">Ro 9:33</reference>, the quotation is from the Septuagint, which renders those words of the original, "shall not make haste" (that is, fly for escape, as from conscious danger), "shall not be put to shame," which comes to the same thing.

11-13. For the scripture saith-- in Is 28:16, a glorious Messianic passage. Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed-- Here, as in Ro 9:33, the quotation is from the Septuagint, which renders those words of the original, "shall not make haste" (that is, fly for escape, as from conscious danger), "shall not be put to shame," which comes to the same thing.


14-15. How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? <hi type="bold">and ... believe in him of whom they have not heard? and ... hear without a preacher? and ... preach except ... sent?--</hi>that is, "True, the same Lord over all is rich unto all alike that call upon Him. But this calling implies believing, and believing hearing, and hearing preaching, and preaching a mission to preach: Why, then, take ye it so ill, O children of Abraham, that in obedience to our heavenly mission (<reference osisRef="Acts.26.16-Acts.26.18">Ac 26:16-18</reference>) we preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ?"

14-15. How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and... believe in him of whom they have not heard? and... hear without a preacher? and... preach except... sent?-- that is, "True, the same Lord over all is rich unto all alike that call upon Him. But this calling implies believing, and believing hearing, and hearing preaching, and preaching a mission to preach: Why, then, take ye it so ill, O children of Abraham, that in obedience to our heavenly mission (Ac 26:16-18) we preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ?"


<hi type="bold">16-17. But they have not all obeyed the gospel--</hi>that is, the Scripture hath prepared us to expect this sad result.

<hi type="bold">For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?--</hi>that is,"Where shall one find a believer?" The prophet speaks as if next to none would believe: The apostle softens this into "They have not all believed."

16-17. But they have not all obeyed the gospel-- that is, the Scripture hath prepared us to expect this sad result. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?-- that is,"Where shall one find a believer?" The prophet speaks as if next to none would believe: The apostle softens this into "They have not all believed."


<hi type="bold">18. But I say, Have they not heard?--</hi>"Did they not hear?" Can Israel, through any region of his dispersion, plead ignorance of these glad tidings?

<hi type="bold">Yes, verily, their sound went--</hi>"their voice went out"

<hi type="bold">into all the earth, and their words unto the end of the world--</hi>These beautiful words are from <reference osisRef="Ps.19.4">Psa 19:4</reference>. Whether the apostle quoted them as in their primary intention applicable to his subject (as Olshausen, Alford, &c.), or only "used scriptural language to express his own ideas, as is done involuntarily almost by every preacher in every sermon" [Hodge], expositors are not agreed. But though the latter may seem the more natural since "the rising of the Sun of righteousness upon the world" (Mal 4:2), "the Dayspring from on high visiting us, giving light to them that sat in darkness, and guiding our feet into the way of peace" (<reference osisRef="Luke.1.78">Lu 1:78</reference>, 79), must have been familiar and delightful to the apostle's ear, we cannot doubt that the irradiation of the world with the beams of a better Sun by the universal diffusion of the Gospel of Christ, must have a mode of speaking quite natural, and to him scarcely figurative.

18. But I say, Have they not heard?-- "Did they not hear?" Can Israel, through any region of his dispersion, plead ignorance of these glad tidings? Yes, verily, their sound went-- "their voice went out" into all the earth, and their words unto the end of the world-- These beautiful words are from Psa 19:4. Whether the apostle quoted them as in their primary intention applicable to his subject (as Olshausen, Alford, &c.), or only "used scriptural language to express his own ideas, as is done involuntarily almost by every preacher in every sermon" [Hodge], expositors are not agreed. But though the latter may seem the more natural since "the rising of the Sun of righteousness upon the world" (Mal 4:2), "the Dayspring from on high visiting us, giving light to them that sat in darkness, and guiding our feet into the way of peace" (Lu 1:78, 79), must have been familiar and delightful to the apostle's ear, we cannot doubt that the irradiation of the world with the beams of a better Sun by the universal diffusion of the Gospel of Christ, must have a mode of speaking quite natural, and to him scarcely figurative.


<hi type="bold">19. But I say, Did not Israel know?--</hi>know, from their own Scriptures, of God's intention to bring in the Gentiles?

<hi type="bold">First--</hi>that is First in the prophetic line [De Wette].

<hi type="bold">Moses saith, &c.--</hi>"I will provoke you to jealousy ('against') [them that are] not a nation, and against a nation without understanding will I anger you" (<reference osisRef="Deut.32.21">De 32:21</reference>). In this verse God warns His ancient people that because they had (that is, in aftertimes would) moved Him to jealousy with their "no-gods," and provoked Him to anger with their vanities, He in requital would move them to jealousy by receiving into His favor a "no-people," and provoke them to anger by adopting a nation void of understanding.

19. But I say, Did not Israel know?-- know, from their own Scriptures, of God's intention to bring in the Gentiles? First-- that is First in the prophetic line [De Wette]. Moses saith, &c.-- "I will provoke you to jealousy ('against') [them that are] not a nation, and against a nation without understanding will I anger you" (De 32:21). In this verse God warns His ancient people that because they had (that is, in aftertimes would) moved Him to jealousy with their "no-gods," and provoked Him to anger with their vanities, He in requital would move them to jealousy by receiving into His favor a "no-people," and provoke them to anger by adopting a nation void of understanding.


<hi type="bold">20. But Esaias is very bold, and saith--</hi>that is, is still plainer, and goes even the length of saying.

<hi type="bold">I was found of them that sought me not--</hi>until I sought them.

<hi type="bold">I was made--</hi>"became"

<hi type="bold">manifest unto them that asked not after me--</hi>until the invitation from Me came to them. That the calling of the Gentiles was meant by these words of the prophet (<reference osisRef="Isa.65.1">Is 65:1</reference>) is manifest from what immediately follows, "I said, Behold Me, behold Me, unto a nation that was not called by My name."

20. But Esaias is very bold, and saith-- that is, is still plainer, and goes even the length of saying. I was found of them that sought me not-- until I sought them. I was made-- "became" manifest unto them that asked not after me-- until the invitation from Me came to them. That the calling of the Gentiles was meant by these words of the prophet (Is 65:1) is manifest from what immediately follows, "I said, Behold Me, behold Me, unto a nation that was not called by My name."