into a lower rank. That the question opened by the apostle is not one of justification so much as one of righteousness, is demonstrated by what follows, in which he describes the abominable unrighteousness of the Gentiles, and also the wickedness of the Jews, under the law, and therefore the need of the gospel method of making both Jews and Gentiles soundly righteous, and so, of course, acceptable to God; namely, by faith, by the great spiritual principle of Christianity, in contradistinction to the meie light of reason and nature among the Gentiles, and the legal system of the Jews. Paul's doctrine is, then, (1) a doctrine of righteousness (2) By consequence, a doctrine of justification: not the reverse, as too often interpreted. Ch. iii. 22; x. 3-10."- Livermore. Whatever may be thought of some of the details, I apprehend the general idea running through the foregoing note is correct; namely, that the great need of mankind is deliverance from sinfulness, or salvation from sin; in other words, to become righteous. The method by which this need is to be supplied, and this deliverance wrought, by which men are to become righteous, is revealed in the gospel. As it is prompted by the love of God, devised by his wisdom, and executed by his power, it is properly called God's righteousness. It differs from all other methods chiefly in this all others, in some form, recognize works, or the efforts of men, as the procuring cause of righteousness and salvation; this recognizes divine grace alone as the cause- -righteousness as the effect, and good works as the natural fruit of righteousness. That the salvation of men from sin, and their attainment of righteousness, is represented in the gospel as the effect of God's grace, is admitted by all Christians. Even those who most firmly believe that such salvation is absolutely suspended on certain conditions, to be performed by man alone, admit this fact in general terms. None are hardy enough to pretend that the gospel reveals a salvation to be demanded and obtained as a matter of reward. None pretend, on authority of the gospel, that man, unassisted by divine grace, can attain perfect righteousness. As, therefore, by common consent, it is

It

agreed that the degree of righteousness attainable in the present life, as well as the more perfect righteousness which may be realized in the future life, is so dependent on divine grace as, in a proper and very important sense, to be regarded as a gift from God, it should surprise no one to hear it denominated by the apostle the righteousness of God It is a righteousness of his appointment; a righteousness in a certain sense and to a certain extent, at least, of his bestowment. It is just so far different from the righteousness which unassisted humanity might attain. It is, in truth, God's righteousness, and not man's. is this righteousness which is revealed in the gospel. T From faith to faith. Various interpretations have been given of this passage, which, as it stands in the common translation, is confessedly obscure. Some have supposed the meaning to be that the gospel presents its great truths, and especially that which is the immediate subject here mentioned by the apostle, to be received by men from one degree of faith to another. That is, that believers should strive, by increasing their knowledge of the divine character and purposes, to increase the power of their faith in the gospel. But I prefer the different and more general interpretation, which is well expressed in the translation by Macknight. "For the righteousness of God by faith is revealed in it, in order to faith." He adds this note: "This translation, which results from construing the words properly, affords a clear sense of a passage which, in the common translation, is absolutely unintelligible. it is shown to be the right translation by other passages of scripture in which the expression righteousness by faith is found. Rom. iii. 22; ix. 30; x. 6; Phil. iii. 9. Righteousness by faith is called the righteousness of God, (1) Because God hath enjoined faith as the righteousness which he will count to sinners, and hath declared that he will accept and reward it as righteousness. (2.) Because it stands in opposition to the righteousness of men, which consists in a sinless obedience to the law of God. For if men gave that obedience, it would be their own righteousness, and they might claim reward as a debt." In what precise manner faith is accounted as righteousness, or involves righteousness,

Besides,

we may not fully understand; nor is this the proper place for a discussion of that point. But the fact is abundantly asserted in the Scriptures. A knowledge of God, faith in his Son, faith in the gospel, is repeatedly represented as inseparably connected with justification from sin, with righteousness, with eternal life. Thus our Lord says, "He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life." -"And this is life eternal, that they might know thee, the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom thou hast sent." John v. 24; xvii. 3. And the apostle asserts that "being justified by faith, we have peace with God, through our Lord Jesus Christ," ch. v. 1; see also ch. iv. 3-5, where it is repeatedly declared that faith is counted for righteousness. Such is the plan of God, revealed in the gospel of his Son, and presented to men as an object of faith. As it is written. Namely, in the Old Testament. Such is the reference, whenever this phrase occurs in the New Testament. There are those who think lightly of the older scriptures, and disregard their authority. Not so our Lord and his apostles. They often referred to them as a divine record of truth, and quoted them as good authority, so far as their testimony extended. The particular reference here is to Hab. ii. 4. ¶ The just shall iive by faith. Rather, the just by faith shall live. "This did not refer primarily to the doctrine of justification by faith, nor did the apostle so quote it; but it expressed a general principle that those who had confidence in God should be happy, and be preserved and blessed. This would express the doctrine which Paul was defending. It was not by relying on his own merit that the Israelite would be delivered; but it was by confidence in God, by his strength and mercy. On the same principle would men be saved under the gospel. It was not by reliance on their own works or merit; it was by confidence in God, by faith, that they were to live.". Barnes. To live, as the word is here used, signi'fies to be happy. Thus eternal life often signifies the degree of happiness men enjoy in this world through faith in the

gospel, as well as that more perfect happiness, consequent upon perfect holiness, in the state of existence to which they shall be introduced by the resurrection from the dead. Of this use of the phrase many instances occur in this epistle, which will be noticed in their proper places.

18. An argument commences here, which extends to the end of chap. iii. Having announced his theme, namely, the necessity and nature of salvation, or that righteousness of God's appointment which is revealed in the gospel, the apostle proceeds to show that this is the only righteousness which men can hope to attain; and that, therefore, they should lay hold on this, by faith, if they would have peace with God, and enter into rest. His argument was thus: He shows, first, in the remainder of this chapter, that the Gentile world, guided by the light of nature, and aided by the instructions of their wisest philosophers, had utterly failed to become righteous; on the contrary, they were guilty of the most debasing and scandalous sins, and gloried in their own shame. In the next two chapters, he shows that the Jews, with the additional guidance of the Old Testament, had equally failed to become righteous. He appeals to facts, which none could contradict, in proof of his allegations, and fortifies them by the authority of the Jewish scriptures. The result is manifest. If men had endeavored, for the space of four thousand years, to attain perfect righteousness by their own works, or as the effect of perfect obedience to the divine law, and had not succeeded in a single instance, either some different plan must be made known, or no reasonable hope of success could be entertained. This different plan God had graciously revealed in the gospel. To this plan the apostle directed attention, as the only effectual means of salvation. It was utterly useless to strive for perfect righteousness by works. Men had been thus striving from the beginning, and yet all had sinned, and thus come short of the glory of God. Ch. iii. 23. Their only rational hope was in God, who had given assurance that his grace would secure the blessing which they had failed to attain.

And

if they would lay hold on the promise, by a firm and living faith, they should at once be delivered from the power of sin, and should thenceforth be filled with joy and peace in believing, ch. xv. 13, until they should enter upon the full enjoyment of perfect holiness and happiness in the future life. Such is the general train of argument in these three chapters.

The wrath of God. See note on John iii. 36. This expression is highly figurative, like those in which God is said to repent, and to be grieved, and the like. Under the divine government, iniquity is always attended by misery, or punishment. The infliction of such punishment may seem, to shortsighted mortals, to indicate anger or wrath in the supreme Governor. Yet we have assurance that all the dispensations of divine providence, whether their immediate effect be joyous or grievous, are designed for good, and are evidences of love, not of wrath. Heb. xii. 9—11. By making the way of transgression painful, and hedging it up with difficulties, God is constantly admonishing men to turn from it, and to pursue the path of wisdom, which is peace. Prov. iii. 17. By the sharpness of stripes, men are made subject to the Father of their spirits, and receive permanent benefit. Nevertheless, while the punishment continues, its aspect is so different from the pleasures resulting from obedience, that a different epithet is properly used to describe it. The epithet chosen by the apostle is wrath. But we should grossly if we understood him to attribute to God a passion which is denounced as utterly sinful in man. We can only understand him to refer to that principle of the divine government by which misery is inseparably connected with transgression. This interpretation is substantially given by commentators whose opinions widely differ from each other as to the ultimate consequences of sin. "The righteous displeasure of God at the sins of his rational creatures is not, of course, like the anger or wrath which we speak of in reference to human passions. The expression is, as all agree, anthropathic, or speaking of God after the manner of men." Livermore. "The werd rendered wrath properly denotes that earnest appetite,

err,

And

or desire, by which we seek anything, or an intense effort to obtain it. it is particularly applied to the desire which a man has to take vengeance who is injured, and who is enraged. It is thus synonymous with revenge. Eph. iv. 31. Let all bitterness and wrath,' &c. Col. iii. 8. Anger, wrath, malice,' &c. 1 Tim. ii. 8; James i. 19. But it is also often applied to God; and it is clear that when we think of the word as applicable to him, it must be divested of everything like human passion, and especially of the passion of revenge. As he cannot be injured by the sins of men (Job xxxv. 6-8), he has no motive for vengeance, properly so called; and it is one of the most obvious rules of interpretation, that we are not to apply to God passions and feelings which, among us, have their origin in evil. In making a revelation, it was indispensable to use words which men used; but it does not follow that when applied to God they mean precisely what they do when applied to man. When the Saviour is said, Mark iii. 5, to have looked on his disciples with anger (Greek, wrath, the same word is here), it is not to be supposed that he had the feelings of an implacable man, seeking vengeance. The nature of the feeling is to be judged of by the character of the person. So, in this place, the word denotes

or

the divine displeasure indignation against sin; the divine purpose to inflict punishment.". Barnes. This opposition of the divine character against sinfulness, or, in other words, the opposition of holiness against sin, furnishes one of the many reasons why the utter end of sinfulness may be anticipated. If perpetual sinfulness were as pleasing and acceptable to God as perpetual holiness, no good reason can be perceived why he should desire or attempt to turn men away from their iniquities. Acts iii. 26. The fact that he does desire to save men from their sins is manifest both from the goodness and the severity of his administration of justice, ch. xi. 22, as well as from his revealed word. As he is greater than all, and none can pluck us out of his hand, John x. 29, he will surely accomplish his purpose in his own time. As a means to greater good, he permits the existence of sin for a

season. But its perpetual existence is inconsistent with his holiness, and incompatible with the accomplishment of his purposes. He has, therefore, determined" to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness." Dan. ix. 24. While sin continues, however, it will produce its appropriate fruits. The sinner must endure misery. And, in this sense, the wrath of God, or his determination to inflict punishment, as the meet reward of every transgression and disobedience, is revealed in the gospel. T Revealed from heaven. Or, from above. It is revealed distinctly in the Jewish Scriptures. And, in that older revelation, written on the face of nature and in the hearts of men, the fact is sufficiently plain. A consequence invariably resulting from a given cause must be regarded as the operation of a fixed law. Misery always accompanies transgression; and, without a special revelation, men had good reason to believe that the sovereign Ruler had ordained such punishment. The same fact is unmistakably announced in the gospel. T Ungodliness and unrighteousness. That is, impiety towards God, and injustice towards Under these two general heads are comprehended all the sins of which men are guilty. The apostle mentions some of the particular sins, in the subsequent verses, which he here groups together in two classes. He illustrates the ungodliness or impiety of men, by their neglect to glorify God, and by their worship of idols; and their unrighteousness, by various scandalous sins of which they were guilty towards each other. THold the truth in unrighteousness. Some commentators understand the apostle to refer to those who have attained some knowledge of the truth, and who yet fail to obey its precepts men "who are not wholly without the truth, but yet do not follow what they have of it, but live contrary to that truth they do know, or neglect to know what they might. This is evident from the next words, and for the same reason of God's wrath, given ch. ii. 8, in these words, who do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteous

men.

ness.'" Locke. Others, perhaps more properly, understand the phrase to be equivalent to "hinder the truth by unrighteousness." The word held, as well as the Greek word which occurs here, is used in either sense, to retain, or to impede or hinder. The following remarks on this passage are replete with sound sense and valuable suggestions : "This is a strong figurative word, which it is not easy to translate into our language. But its meaning is, that the knowledge of the one true God, the Maker and Governor of the universe, which the persons here spoken of had attained, by contemplating the works of creation, they did not discover to the rest of mankind; but confined it in their own breast, as in a prison, by the most flagrant unrighteousness. For they presented, as objects of worship, beings which are not by their nature God; nay, beings of the most immoral characters; and, by so doing, as well as by the most infamous rites with which they appointed these false gods to be worshipped, they led mankind into the grossest errors concerning the nature and attributes of the objects of their worship. This corrupt form of religion, though extremely acceptable to the common people, was not contrived and established by them. In all countries they were grossly ignorant of God, and of the worship which he required. They therefore could not be charged with the crime of concealing the truth concerning God. The persons guilty of that crime were the legislators who first formed mankind into cities and states, and who, as the apostle observes, ver, 21, though they knew God, did not glorify him as God, by making him the object of the people's worship, but unrighteously established polytheism and idolatry as the public religion. Of the same crime the magistrates and philosophers were likewise guilty, who, in after times, upheld the established religion. Of this number were Pythagoras, Socrates, and Plato, whom, therefore, we may suppose, the apostle had here in his eye. For, although these men had attained the knowledge of the true God, none of them worshipped him publicly, neither did they declare him to the people, that they might worship