성경 주석서

사도는 의롭다 하심과 구원이 율법의 행위가 아니라 오직 믿음으로 말미암으며, 모세가 아니라 그리스도로 말미암는다는 것을 분명히 단언하고 폭넓게 입증한 후에, 이 장과 이어지는 장들에서 이에 대하여 제기될 수 있는 한 가지 반론을 미리 다루고자 한다. 만일 그러하다면, 하나의 복합적 단체로서의 유대인들, 특히 그들 가운데 그리스도를 영접하지도 않고 복음을 믿지도 않는 자들은 어떻게 되는가? 이 원칙대로라면 그들은 반드시 행복에 이르지 못하게 될 것이다. 그렇다면 조상들에게 주신 약속, 곧 유대인들에게 구원을 보장하던 그 약속은 어떻게 되는가? 그 약속이 무효가 되고 헛것이 되는 것이 아닌가? 그러나 이는 하나님의 그 어떤 말씀에 관하여도 결코 상상할 수 없는 일이다. 그러므로 그들은 말하기를, 이와 같은 결론이 흘러나오는 그런 교리는 받아들여서는 안 된다고 할 것이다. 믿지 아니하는 유대인들이 버림받는다는 결론이 바울의 교리로부터 따라 나온다는 것은 그가 인정하지만, 그는 이를 누그러뜨리고 완화하고자 애쓴다(롬 9:1-15). 그러나 이로부터 하나님의 말씀이 폐하여진다는 결론이 따라 나온다는 것은 그가 부인하며(롬 9:6), 이 장의 나머지 부분에서 그 부인을 입증하는데, 이는 또한 그가 (롬 8:28에서) 구원이라는 일에 있어서 다른 모든 톱니바퀴를 돌아가게 하는 첫째 톱니바퀴로 언급하였던 저 위대한 예정의 교리를 밝히 드러내는 데에도 기여한다.

이 장은 어느 정도 새로운 사고와 논증의 흐름을 연다. 그 주된 목적은 아마도 이 Epistle의 앞부분들에서 제시되고 변호된 입장들에 대해 제기될 반론들을 다루는 데 있었을 것이다. 앞 장들에서 Paul은 Jews와 Gentiles 사이의 장벽이 제거되었다는 입장, Jews가 자기들이 가진 어떤 외적 이점들로도 구원받을 수 없다는 입장, 모든 사람이 하나님 앞에서 똑같이 죄 있다는 입장, 그리고 Jews와 Gentiles에게 구원의 길은 오직 하나, 곧 Jesus Christ를 믿음으로 말미암는 길뿐이라는 입장을 변호했다. 로마서 1장; 2장; 3장. 그는 이 계획의 유익들을 진술했고(로마서 5장), 죄를 이기는 데 있어서 Moses의 율법이 이룰 수 없었던 것을 이루는 데 그것이 어떤 관련이 있는지를 보였다. 로마서 6장; 7장. 로마서 8장에서 그는 이것이 어떤 원리들에 따라 이루어졌는지도 진술했다. 그것은 하나님의 목적에 따른 것이며, 죄 있는 Jews와 Gentiles의 무리에게 차별 없이 적용된 선택하시는 자비의 원리라는 것이다. 이 진술에 대해 두 가지 반론이 일어날 수 있었다. 첫째, 그것이 부당하다는 것. 둘째, 전체 논증이 Jewish nation에게 주어진 약속들에서 벗어나는 것을 포함한다는 것이다. 더 나아가 사도가 자기 동족에 대한 관심을 그쳤고 Gentiles의 배타적 옹호자가 되었다고 여겨질 수도 있었다. 이 장의 목적은 이런 반론과 감정들을 다루는 데 있었던 듯하다. 그는 그들에게 다음을 보인다.

(1) 자기 동족에 대한 식지 않은 사랑과 그들의 복지에 대한 관심. 로마서 9:1-5.

(2) 그는 그들의 글들 자체에서 선택의 원리가 이전 시대에 존재했음을 보인다. Isaac의 경우(로마서 9:7-13), Moses의 글들(로마서 9:15), Pharaoh의 경우(로마서 9:17), 그리고 Hosea와 Isaiah의 예언들(로마서 9:25-29)에서 그러하다.

(3) 그는 이 장 전체에서 이 divine administration의 원리를 변호하고, 반론들에 답하며, Old Testament의 인정된 원리들에 따라 Jewish nation의 일부가 거절될 수 있고, 하나님께서 다른 사람들을 하나님의 백성의 특권들로 부르시는 것이 그의 목적이었음을 보이는 기회로 삼는다. 로마서 9:16, 로마서 9:19-23, 로마서 9:25-26, 로마서 9:29-33.

그러므로 이 장은 national election이나 외적 특권으로의 선택을 가리키는 것이 아니라, 로마서 8장에서 진술된 구원으로의 선택 교리를 직접 가리킨다. 그것이 단지 외적 특권과 national distinctions를 가리킨다고 생각하면, 전체 논의는 연결이 없고 의미가 없으며 불필요한 것이 된다.

바울은 유대인들의 불신앙과 완고함 때문에 크게 슬퍼한다고 말한다, 로마서 9:1-3. 그들에게 속한 높은 특권들을 열거한다, 로마서 9:4, 로마서 9:5. 하나님께서 유대인과 이방인 양쪽에 자기 이름의 지식을 전달하기로 선택하신 방식과, 개인들을 심판으로든 긍휼로든 다루시는 방식을 지적하며, 아브라함, 이삭, 야곱, 에서, 바로의 사례를 제시한다, 로마서 9:6-17. 하나님은 자기 뜻에 합당한 대로 긍휼과 심판을 보이시며, 누구도 그의 처사를 탓할 권리가 없다, 로마서 9:18-20. 하나님은 토기장이가 진흙 위에 가지는 권세와 같은 권세를 인류 위에 가지신다, 로마서 9:21-23. 선지자들은 이방인의 부르심과 유대인의 버림받음을 예언했다, 로마서 9:24-29. 이방인들은 죄인을 구원하시는 하나님의 방법을 아는 데 이르렀으나, 유대인들은 이 지식에 이르지 못했다, 로마서 9:30, 로마서 9:31. 유대인들이 복음 안에서 자신들을 위해 마련된 구원에 이르지 못한 이유, 로마서 9:32, 로마서 9:33.

테일러 박사는 이 장과 10장 앞에 다음과 같은 신중한 요약을 붙였다.

사도는 앞선 장들에서 하나님의 은혜가 유대인에게뿐 아니라 이방인에게도 미친다는 것, 그리고 하나님의 긍휼의 경륜은 어떤 행위의 공로나 어떤 율법에 맞춘 순응과 반대로, 유대인이든 이방인이든 믿는 모든 사람에게 절대적으로, 그 자체로 자유롭게 열려 있다는 것을 충분히 증명했다. 또한 이방인들은 믿음으로 하나님의 언약의 복에 대한 정당한 권리를 가지며, 유대인들도 그 복에 대해 다른 길로 권리를 가질 수 없음을 증명했다. 여기까지 사도는 유대인들을 간접적인 방식 외에는 버림받은 자로 보지 않았다. 오히려 그들이 교회 안에 계속 머물 가능성이 있으며, 그들은 이방인들이 그 안에 들어오는 것을 막으려 해서는 안 되고, 그들도 하나님의 긍휼에 참여하게 해야 한다는 관점에서 말했다. 그래서 그의 말은 요약하면 이렇다. 믿는 이방인들도 너희와 마찬가지로 받아들여지고, 용서받고, 구원받을 수 있지 않은가?

그러나 이 장과 다음 두 장에서 사도는 이방인들이 하나님의 나라와 언약 안으로 받아들여지는 일을 부르심 또는 초청, 선택 또는 택하심이라는 관념 아래 다룬다. 이는 그가 이 두 무리를 앞서 놓았던 빛과는 다른 빛에서 보고 있음을 보여 준다. 그는 이방인들을 하나님의 나라 안으로 초청받고 하나님의 백성으로 선택받은 자들로 보며, 유대인들은 밖에 남겨지고 버림받은 자들로 본다. 그들 대다수가 이제 그리스도의 복음을 거절했으므로, 그는 하나님께서 그들을 교회 밖으로 내치시고, 그들의 정체를 무너뜨리시며, 성전을 파괴하시고, 그들을 지면에 흩으실 것을 보았기 때문이다. 이처럼 그는 그들이 그리스도에게서 저주받거나 끊어지고, 세상의 이교 민족들과 같은 수준으로 낮아질 것을 알았다. 그리고 실제 사건은 그의 선언들이 진리의 영으로 말미암은 것이었음을 입증했다.

사도의 섬세한 글쓰기 방식과 자기 동족을 대하는 세심하고 부드러운 태도에 맞게, 그는 그들의 버림받음이라는, 그의 생각에 극히 고통스러운 주제를 로마서 11장에 이르기 전까지는 거의 언급하지 않는다는 점이 주목된다. 그는 거기서 그들이 현재 버림받은 상태로 간주되더라도 그들에게 유리하게 말할 것이 많다. 그 전에는 오직 자신이 그들을 위해 그리스도에게서 저주를 받았으면, 또는 그들이 그리스도에게서 저주받는 일을 막을 수만 있다면 좋겠다는 소원(로마서 9:3)의 형식으로만 말한다. 그러나 이 장의 논증이 유대 민족의 대다수가 하나님의 보이는 나라에서 내쫓길 것이라는 전제 위에 서 있다는 것은 매우 분명하다. 바로 이 이유 때문에 그는 이 장과 다음 두 장에서 어떤 백성이 하나님의 나라와 언약 안으로 받아들여지는 일을 초청과 선택, 곧 부르심과 택하심이라는 관계적 관념 아래 다룬다. 유대인들은 버림받고 배척되었으며, 이방인들은 선택되고 부름받았거나 택함받았다. 이것이 사도의 뜻임이 너무도 명백한데도, 어떤 사람들이 그의 교리를 개인들의 특수하고 무조건적인 유기와 선택에 적용한다는 것은 이상한 일이다.

이방인들의 부르심과 선택은 유대인들의 이 버림받음 위에 놓여 있다. 유대인들이 버림받지 않고 여전히 하나님의 보이는 교회와 나라라면, 사도의 교리에서 가장 적절하게 이끌어낼 수 있는 결론에 따르면 이방인들은 그 나라의 복들에 대한 권리를 갖지 못한다. 초청받거나 부름받은 것이 아니라, 그들은 하늘 잔치에 침입한 자들이 된다. 믿지 않는 유대인들은 바로 이것을 입증하려고 애썼고, 믿는 이방인들에게 그들이 하나님의 교회 안으로 정당하게 받아들여진 것이 아니라고 설득함으로써 그들을 흔들려 했다. 그들은 유대인들이 하나님의 유일한 교회와 나라였고 언제나 그래야 하며, 하나님께서 아브라함에게 하신 약속에 신실하신 한 그들이 버림받을 수 없다고 주장했다. 또 이방인들이 그리스도에 대한 믿음으로 그 나라 안으로 들어왔다고 생각하는 것은 몹시 비참한 착각이며, 그 안에 들어가거나 그 특권에 대한 자격을 얻는 길은 모세의 율법에 복종하는 것뿐이라고 주장했다. 이것이 유대인들의 고정된 견해였고, 그들이 이방인들을 반대하며 그리스도의 복음에서 오는 구원 소망의 기초를 허물려고 애쓴 근거였으므로, 유대인들이 그리스도와 그의 복음을 거절함으로써 그들 자신이 교회 밖으로 쫓겨났다는 것, 그리고 이것이 아브라함에게 하신 약속의 진리와 완전히 일치하는 방식으로 이루어졌다는 것을 증명할 수 있는 일은 지극히 중요했다. 그는 3장 처음에서 이 주제를 가볍게 건드렸지만, 거기서 논증을 계속하면 담화의 흐름을 지나치게 끊었을 것이다. 그래서 그는 이 문제를 이 자리까지 남겨 둔 듯하다. 여기서 그는 다음과 같이 한다.

(1) 자기 동족에 대한 가장 부드러운 애정과 그들의 불신앙 및 그에 따른 버림받음 때문에 마음에 실제로 가진 슬픔을 엄숙히 선언한다, 로마서 9:1-5.

(2) 이 버림받음에 대한 반론들에 답한다, 로마서 9:6-23.

(3) 그들 자신의 성경으로부터 이방인의 부르심을 증명한다, 로마서 9:24-30.

(4) 유대인의 버림받음과 이방인의 부르심의 참된 상태와 이유를 제시한다, 로마서 9:30부터 로마서 10:14까지.

(5) 이방인들의 구원을 위해 사도적 사명이 필요함을 증명한다, 로마서 10:14-21.

이 모든 것은 한편으로 하나님의 경륜을 변호하고, 믿지 않는 유대인을 깨우치며, 믿는 이방인에게 자신이 하나님의 교회 안으로 부름받거나 초청받은 일이 유효함을 확신시키고, 믿지 않는 유대인들의 트집과 반론에 맞서 그를 무장시키며, 그리스도인 유대인으로 하여금 믿는 이방인을 하나님의 가족과 나라의 구성원으로 받아들이고 인정하게 하려는 것이었다. 그 권리는 신적 권리이며, 그 유대인 자신이 내세울 수 있는 어떤 권리와도 동등하다. 테일러의 주석, 321쪽 이하를 보라.

INTRODUCTION TO Romans 9

The apostle having discoursed of justification and sanctification, and of the privileges of justified and sanctified ones, proceeds to treat of predestination, the source and spring of all the blessings of grace; and to observe how this distinguishing act of God's sovereign will has taken place, both among Jews and Gentiles; in treating of which, he knew he should go contrary to the sense of his countrymen the Jews, who have a notion that all Israel shall have a part in, or inherit the world to come (q): and that the Gentiles will be for ever miserable; and nothing was more disagreeable to them, than to talk of their rejection of God, and the calling of the Gentiles; wherefore that it might be manifest, that it was not out of pique and ill will to them, that the apostle said the things hereafter related; he expresses the most cordial affection to them imaginable, and which he introduces in Romans 9:1, by way of appeal to Christ, who knew the truth of what he was about to say, and who could, together with the Spirit of God and his own conscience, testify for him that it was no lie: the thing he appeals for the truth of, is in Romans 9:2, that the salvation of the Jews lay near his heart; that it was no pleasure to him to think or speak of their rejection, but was what gave him continual pain and uneasiness: and his great desire for their good is expressed in a very strong and uncommon manner, Romans 9:3, the reasons of it are partly the relation they stood in to him, being his brethren and kinsmen; and partly the many privileges they had been favoured with of God; an enumeration of which is given, Romans 9:4, and foreseeing an objection, he prevents it, which might be made, that if the Jews were cast off, the promise of God to that people that he would be their God, would become void, and the preaching the Gospel of Christ to them of no effect; to which he answers by distinguishing between Israel and Israel, or the elect of God among them, and those that were not; wherefore though the latter were rejected according to the purpose of God, the promise and preaching of the word had their effect in the former, Romans 9:6, and that there was such a distinction, he proves from the two sons of Abraham, Isaac and Ishmael, who were both Abraham's seed; yet one was a child of promise, and the other a child of the flesh, and were emblematical of the children of the promise, and the children of the flesh among that people; Romans 9:7, and further confirms this by the instance of Jacob and Esau, who were born of the same parents, and were twins; and yet one was in the favour of God, and the other not; and that this was owing not to works, but to the sovereign will of God in election, he proves by observing that this was before good or evil were done by either of them, Romans 9:11, and that this was notified to Rebekah before, Romans 9:12, as appears from a passage in Genesis 25:23, and by another passage in Malachi 1:2, which is cited, Romans 9:13, then an objection is started, Romans 9:14, that if God loves one, and hates another, both being in equal circumstances, as Jacob and Esau were, he must be guilty of unrighteousness; which he answers and removes, first by a detestation of such a charge against God, and then by producing testimonies out of the books of Moses, proving both election and reprobation, as being not of the works of men, but of the will of God; the former of these he proves, Romans 9:15, from Exodus 33:19, by which it appears, that the choice of men to salvation is not according to the will of man, but according to the grace and love of God, Romans 9:16, the latter he proves by the case of Pharaoh, Romans 9:17, and the Scripture relating to that, Exodus 9:16, and from both testimonies concludes, Romans 9:18, that God's having mercy on one, and hardening another, are according to his sovereign will and pleasure; then another objection rises, up, if so, God has no reason to find fault with men that are hardened in sin, since they are according to his will, and in sinning do but fulfil it, and which no man resists; and this objection is formed in a very pert and sneering manner, and insinuates that God is cruel and acts unreasonably, Romans 9:19, to which he answers, by putting the objector in mind that he was a man, a mere creature that started it, and that it was God against whom it was made; and by observing the folly and madness of replying against God, and the absurdity of such a procedure, taken from the consideration of the one being a creature, and the other the Creator, Romans 9:20, and by instancing in the case of the potter, who has power over his clay, to form it in what shape, and for what use he pleases, Romans 9:21, and accommodates this, both to the affair of election and reprobation, and to the business of the latter first, Romans 9:22, where he observes the end of God in it to show forth his power and wrath, and describes the subjects of it, which clears him from injustice, and points at the patience of God towards them, which frees him from the charge of cruelty, Romans 9:22, and then proceeds to apply the metaphor before used, to the objects of election styled vessels of mercy, and the end of the Lord to manifest the riches of his glory in them, and the method he takes to bring them to eternal happiness, by preparing them for it by grace, Romans 9:23, which is done in the effectual calling, the objects of which are both Jews and Gentiles, Romans 9:24, That it is the will of God that the Gentiles should be called, he proves, Romans 9:25, from some passages in Hosea, Hosea 2:23, and that God had chosen, and so would call some among the Jews, he clearly makes appear, Romans 9:27, from some prophecies of Isaiah, Isaiah 10:22, and then he concludes the chapter by observing the free and distinguishing grace of God, in the calling of the Gentiles, and the justification of them by the righteousness of Christ; that such who were far off from it, and sought not after it, should enjoy it, Romans 9:30, when the Israelites, who were diligent and zealous in seeking after a righteousness to justify them before God, yet did not arrive to one, Romans 9:31, the reasons of which are given, Romans 9:32, because it was not the righteousness of faith, or the righteousness of Christ received by faith they sought; but a legal one, and by works which can never be attained by sinful men: they sought after a wrong righteousness, and in a wrong way, because they stumbled at Christ, and rejected him and his righteousness; and this removes an objection which is suggested in the two preceding verses, that God is unrighteous in calling the Gentiles, who never sought after righteousness, and in rejecting the Jews that followed after one: and that they did stumble at Christ and his righteousness, is no other than what was foretold in Isaiah 8:14, and that whoever believes in Christ, whether Jew or Gentile, shall be saved, he suggests is a doctrine agreeably to Isaiah 28:16, which passages are referred to, Romans 9:33

(q) Misn. Sanhedrin, c. 11. sect. 1.

IX.

There is a distinct break in the Epistle at this point. The subject of the preceding chapters, the development of the gospel scheme, has been worked up to a climax. We might imagine that at the end of chapter 8 the Epistle was laid aside, and the Apostle now begins upon a new topic, in the discussion of which, however, he still retains the same vein of deep emotion that had characterised his latest utterances. This new topic is the relation of the Christian system just expounded to the chosen people. And here, after a few opening words of patriotic sympathy (Romans 9:1-5), the Apostle discusses: (1) the justice of their rejection (Romans 9:6-29); (2) its causes (Romans 9:30 to Romans 10:21); (3) its compensations and qualifications (Romans 11:1-32); with a closing doxology (Romans 11:33-36). The section including these three chapters is complete and rounded in itself.

F. ELECTION (Cch. 8, 9–11)

It is almost needless to say that the Election spoken of in ch. 8 &c. is variously explained. A large and important school of Theology (the Arminian) interprets it as a personal election, but contingent upon foreseen faith and perseverance. Another school[58] interprets it as an election not personal at all, but (so to speak) social; an election, like the election of the Jewish Nation, not to life eternal but to a vantage-ground for attaining it.

[58] Or, more properly, other schools, with important differences among themselves in other respects.

Without forgetting for a moment the awful mysteries of the subject, we yet feel that both these theories, with all (and it is very much) that can be said for them, do not fit the language of ch. 8. and of St Paul’s (not to quote St John’s) general teaching. “Not according to our works” is surely the tone of this chapter and of the whole previous epistle, and of the next three chapters. And it seems to us impossible, on any other theory than that of a Personal Election to Life, antecedent to “our works” and mercifully prevailing in its purpose, quite naturally to explain the tone of rapturous joy which marks the closing passages of the chapter.

In the Seventeenth English Article, a masterpiece of careful expression, this result of the humble belief in an Election personal and effectual (but, observe, taking effect through moral means,) is strongly stated:—“The godly consideration of Predestination, and our Election in Christ, is full of sweet, pleasant, and unspeakable comfort, to godly persons, &c.”

See the whole Article; and especially the closing paragraph, in which the word “generally” is technical, and means “with regard to the genus;”—i.e. probably, mankind. The Article warns us to begin with faith in the promises to man as man, not with the question of personal election.

G. PREDESTINATION (Ch. 9)

See note on chap. Romans 8:30, on the original word.

On this great mystery, brought up with such stern force in ch. 9, we quote a few sentences from one who certainly spoke from no cold or unsympathetic heart—Martin Luther. His Prœfatio in Ep, ad Romanos (translated into Latin from Luther’s German by his friend Justus Jonas) is indeed, as Tholuck describes it, “admirable, and breathing the very spirit of St Paul.” There is a very noble contemporary English paraphrase of it, by Tyndale, from which we take the following passage (Tyndale’s Doctrinal Treatises, Parker Soc. Edition, p. 505):—

“In the ninth, tenth, and eleventh chapters he (Paul) treateth of God’s predestination, whence it springeth altogether whether we shall believe or not believe … By which predestination our justifying and salvation are clean taken out of our hands, and put in the hands of God only. For we are so weak and so uncertain, that, if it stood in us, there would of a truth be no man saved; the devil, no doubt, would deceive us. But now is God sure, that His predestination cannot deceive Him, neither can any man withstand or let Him; and therefore have we hope and trust against sin.

“But here must a mark be set to those unquiet, busy, and high-climbing spirits which begin first from an high (sic) to search the bottomless secrets of God’s predestination, whether they be predestinate or not. These must needs either cast themselves down headlong into desperation, or else commit themselves to free chance, careless. But follow thou the order of this Epistle, and noosel thyself[59] with Christ, and learn to understand what the Law and the Gospel mean, and the office of both the two; that thou mayest in the one know thyself, and how thou hast of thyself no strength but to sin, and in the other the grace of Christ; and then see thou fight against sin and the flesh, as the seven first chapters teach thee. After that, when thou art come to the eighth chapter, and art under the cross and suffering of tribulation, the necessity[60] of predestination will wax sweet, and thou shalt well feel how precious a thing it is. For except thou have borne the cross of adversity and temptation, and hast felt thyself brought into the very brim of desperation, yea, and unto hell-gates, thou canst never meddle with the sentence of predestination without thine own harm, and without secret wrath and grudging inwardly against God; for otherwise it shall not be possible for thee to think that God is righteous and just … Take heed therefore unto thyself, that thou drink not wine, while thou art yet but a suckling. For … in Christ there is a certain childhood, in which a man must be content with milk for a season, until he wax strong and grow up unto a perfect man in Christ, and be able to eat of more strong meat.”

[59] I.e. find shelter, as a child with a nurse. This striking clause is not in the Latin of the Præfatio.

[60] Necessitas, fixed certainty.

And to the last, surely, the dark problems that gather round the central and insoluble mystery of Sin will be safely approached only with the remembrance that “the Judge of all the earth” will “do right;” that He is the Eternal, and that His “ways” must therefore be “past finding out;” and that He “so loved the world that He gave His Only-begotten Son.”

H. REPROBATION (Ch. 9)

In the last note but one on Romans 9:22 we have alluded to the tenet that the lost are personally and positively fore-doomed to ruin. To this tenet Calvin was led, not by a passionless rigidity, from which his deep and sensitive temperament, and truly ample mind, were far removed; but by the conviction that it was inexorably demanded by Scripture and reason. But St Augustine, the great patristic teacher of Predestination, carefully avoided such a tenet; teaching that, however little we can fathom the mystery, man’s sin, running its proper course, is the only cause of man’s ruin; while yet special grace is the only cause of his salvation.

CHAPTERS 9–11. With the eighth chapter Paul concludes the positive exposition of his gospel. Starting with the theme of Romans 1:16 f., he showed in Romans 1:18 to Romans 3:20 the universal sinfulness of men—Gentile and Jew; in Romans 3:21 to Romans 5:21 he explained, illustrated and glorified the gospel of justification by faith in Christ, set forth by God as a propitiation for sin; in Romans 6:1 to Romans 8:39 he has vindicated this gospel from the charge of moral inefficiency, by showing that justification by faith is inseparably connected with a new life in the Spirit, a life over which sin has no dominion and in which the just demands of God’s law are fulfilled. He has even carried this spiritual life on, in hope, to its consummation in glory: and no more remains to be said. With chap. 9 a new subject is introduced. There is no formal link of connection with what precedes. Structurally, the new division of the epistle stands quite apart from the earlier; it might have been written, and probably was written, after a break. But though no logical relation between the parts is expressed, a psychological connection between them is not hard to discover. The new section deals with a problem which presented great difficulty to the early Church, and especially to men of Jewish birth, a problem which haunted the Apostle’s own mind and was no doubt thrust on his attention by his unbelieving countrymen, a problem all the more painful to him as he realised more completely the greatness and glory of the Christian salvation. This was the problem constituted by the fact that the Jews as a whole did not receive the Gospel. They were God’s chosen people, but if the Christian Gospel brought salvation they had no share in it. The Messiah was to spring from them, but if Jesus was the Messiah this privilege meant not redemption but condemnation, for they rejected Him almost with one consent. In short, if the birth of the Christian Church and the gathering of Gentiles into it represented the carrying out of God’s purpose to bless and save men, God must have turned His back upon Himself; He must have broken His promise to Israel, and cast off His chosen people. But as this must seem impossible, the Jewish inference would be that the Gospel preached by Paul could not be of God, nor the Gentile Churches, as Paul asserted, God’s true Israel. This is the situation to which the Apostle addresses himself in the ninth and the two following chapters. It is a historical problem, in the first instance, he has to deal with, not a dogmatic one; and it is necessary to keep the historical situation in view, if we are to avoid illegitimate inferences from the arguments or illustrations of the Apostle. After the introductory statement (Romans 9:1-5), which shows how deeply his heart is pledged to his brethren after the flesh, he works out a solution of the problem—or an interpretation of the position—along three lines. In each of these there are many incidental points of view, but they can be broadly discriminated. (1) In the first, chap. Romans 9:6-29, Paul asserts the absolute freedom and sovereignty of God as against any claim, made as of right, on the part of man. The Jewish objection to the Gospel, to which reference is made above, really means that the Jewish nation had a claim of right upon God, giving them a title to salvation, which God must acknowledge; Paul argues that all God’s action, as exhibited in Scripture, and especially in the history of Israel itself—to say nothing of the essential relations of Creator and creature—refutes such a claim. (2) In the second, chap. Romans 9:30 to Romans 10:21, Paul turns from this more speculative aspect of the situation to its moral character, and points out that the explanation of the present rejection of the Jews is to be found in the fact that they have wilfully and stubbornly rejected the Gospel. Their minds have been set on a righteousness of their own, and they have refused to submit themselves to the righteousness of God. (3) In the third, chap. 11, he rises again to an absolute or speculative point of view. The present unbelief of the Jews and incoming of the Gentiles are no doubt, to a Jew, disconcerting events; yet in spite of them, or rather—which is more wonderful still—by means of them, God’s promises to the fathers will be fulfilled, and all Israel saved. Gentile Christianity will provoke the unbelieving Jews to jealousy, and they too will enter the Messianic Kingdom. In the very events which seem to throw the pious Jewish mind out of its reckoning, there is a gracious providence, a depth of riches and wisdom and knowledge which no words can express. The present situation, which at the first glance is heart-breaking (Romans 9:2), is only one incident in the working out of a purpose which when completed reveals the whole glory of God’s mercy, and evokes the loftiest and most heartfelt praise. “He shut up all unto disobedience that He might have mercy on all.… Of Him and through Him and to Him are all things. Unto Him be glory for ever.” Since Baur’s time several scholars have held that the mass of the Roman Church was Jewish-Christian, and that these three chapters, with their apologetic aim, are specially addressed to that community, as one which naturally felt the pressure of the difficulty with which they deal. But the Roman Church, as these very chapters show (cf. Romans 9:3, my kinsmen, not our; Romans 11:13, ὑμῖν δὲ λέγω τοῖς ἔθνεσιν), was certainly Gentile, whatever influence Jewish modes of thought and practice may have had in it; and it was quite natural for the Apostle, in writing what he evidently meant from the first should be both a systematic and a circular letter, to include in it a statement of his thoughts on one of the most difficult and importunate questions of the time. The extraordinary daring of chap. 11 ad fin. is not unrelated to the extraordinary passion of chap. 9 ad init. The whole discussion is a magnificent illustration of the aphorism, that great thoughts come from the heart.

CHAPTER 9

Romans 9:3. The verbal order ἀνάθεμα εἶναι αὐτὸς ἐγώ (recommended by Griesb., adopted by Lachm. and Tisch.) receives preponderant attestation from A B D E F G, min., VSS., and Fathers; as also from א, reading εἶναι before ἀνάθ. Erroneously attached to ηὐχόμην, αὐτὸς ἐγώ became placed before ἀνάθ. (Elz.).

Romans 9:4. αἱ διαθῆκαι] B D E F G, min., Vulg., with several Fathers, read ἡ διαθήκη, which Lachm. has adopted. An alteration, because the plural was understood of the Old and New Test. (Galatians 4:24), and yet the latter could not be considered as a privilege of the Jews.

Romans 9:11. κακόν] Lachm. and Tisch. read φαῦλον, according to A B א, min., Or. Cyr. Damasc. Rightly; the more usual opposite of ἀγαθόν easily intruded.

Romans 9:15. The order τῷ Μωϋσεῖ γάρ is decidedly to be received, with Lachm. and Tisch., following B D E F G א. The Recepta τ. γ. Μ. is a mechanical alteration.

Romans 9:16. ἐλεοῦντος] A B* D E F G P א, 39, read ἐλεῶντος; so Lachm. and Tisch. But since in no other passage of the N. T. is ἐλεάω, the form belonging to the κοινή (see Etym. M. 327. 30), to be found; and in Romans 9:18 only D* F G have ἐλεᾶ instead of ἐλεεῖ (and yet in both places Paul doubtless used one form); it is most probable that Ω instead of ΟΥ was merely an early copyist’s error, which, as the form -αω was actually in existence, became diffused, and also induced in some Codd. the alteration ἐλεᾶ in Romans 9:18 (so Tisch. 7).

Romans 9:27. κατάλειμμα] A B א* Eus. read ὑπόλειμμα; so Lachm. and Tisch. Rightly; see LXX. Isaiah 10:22.

Romans 9:28. ἐν δικαιοσύνῃ, ὁτι λόγον συντετμημένον] is wanting in A B א*, 23*, 47*, 67**, Syr. Aeth. Erp. Copt. Eus. Damasc. Aug. It certainly bears the suspicion of being an addition from the LXX.; but its deletion, which Lachm. and Tisch. 8 have carried out, is precluded by the ease with which it was possible for transcribers to turn from συντέμνων at once to συντετμημένον.

Romans 9:31. The second δικαιοσύνης is wanting in A B D E G א, 47, 67**, 140, Copt. It. Or. and several Fathers, and is marked with an obelus in F. Omitted by Lachm. and Tisch. 8. But the omission admits of no sense accordant with the context. See the exeg. notes. The weight of the omitting codd. is much diminished by the counter-testimony of ancient VSS. (including Syr. and Vulg.) and of most Greek Fathers. The omission itself might easily, from the frequent recurrence of the word in Romans 9:30-31, occur through a homoeoteleuton, which led, in the first instance, to the disappearance of the words εἰς νόμ. δικαιοσύνης (they are still absent from 2 min.), followed by their incomplete restoration.

Romans 9:32. νόμου] Wanting in A B F G א*, min., Copt. Vulg., and several Fathers. Rightly deleted by Lachm. and Tisch. A defining addition.

The γάρ after προσέκοψαν, which is wanting in A B D* F G א* 47*, Copt. It. Vulg. ms, Goth. Ambr. Ruf., Dam. (and is omitted by Lachm. and Tisch. 8), is simply a connective insertion.

Romans 9:33. πᾶς] has preponderant evidence against it, and must, with Lachm. and Tisch., be struck out. An addition from Romans 10:11, where it stands in all the witnesses.

Chap. 9–11. On the non-participation hitherto of the greater part of the Jews in the Christian plan of salvation; and specially (a) the lamentation over this (Romans 9:1-5); (b) the Theodicée on its account (Romans 9:6-29); (c) the fault thereof, which rests upon the Jews themselves (Romans 9:30-33 and Romans 10:1-21); (d) the consolation in reference to this (Romans 11:1-32), with final giving glory to God (Romans 11:33-36). Paul could not do otherwise, he must still settle this great problem; this is inevitably demanded by all that had gone before. For if the whole previous treatise had as its result, that only believers were the recipients of the promised salvation, and if nevertheless the Messianic promise and destination to salvation had their reference in the first place (comp. Romans 1:16) to the Israelites, concerning whom, however, experience showed that they were for the most part unbelieving (comp. John 1:11), this contradictory relation thus furnished an enigma, which Paul, with his warm love for his people, could least of all evade, but in the solution of which he had on the contrary to employ all the boldness and depth of his clear insight into the divine plan of redemption (Ephesians 3:4 ff.). The defence of the efficacy of his Gentile apostleship (Th. Schott, and in another way Mangold and Sabatier) is not the object of the section—that object Paul would have known how to meet directly—but such a defence results indirectly from it, since we see from the section how fully the apostle had recognised and comprehended his place in connection with the divine plan of salvation. The problem itself, the solution of which is now taken in hand by the apostle, was sufficiently serious and momentous to be treated with so much detail in this great and instructive letter to the important mixed community of the world’s capital, which, however, does not thereby appear to have been a Jewish-Christian one.