23 thou that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonorest thou God? For the name of God is blas24 phemed among the Gentiles through you; as it is written. 25 FOR circumcision verily profiteth, if thou keep the law; but if thou be a breaker of the law, thy circumcision is made 26 uncircumcision. Therefore, if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be 27 counted for circumcision? And shall not uncircumcision which is by nature, if it fulfil the law, judge thee, who by 28 the letter and circumcision dost transgress the law? For he be said that the expression, robbers of churches, more correctly, robbers of temples, is given as the translation of the kindred noun in the only passage of the New Testament where it occurs, Acts 19: 37. It is also worthy of notice that one of the laws of Moses, Deut. 7: 25, prohibits taking off from idols the silver and gold which might be found on them. This implies that in the days of Moses the Jews were exposed to the temptation of appropriating to themselves such treasures; and though this prohibition may have had respect to idols which had in some way fallen into their possession, yet in subsequent times purloining from idol-temples may have been practised. Josephus in his Antiquities of the Jews, iv. 8. 10. gives, as one of the regulations of Moses, the following: :- "Nor may any one steal what belongs to strange temples; nor take away the gifts that are dedicated to any god; a prohibition, which whether rightly traced to Moses or not, implies the existence of the practice which it forbids. 23, 24. Thou that makest thy boast of the law, etc. Though they made a boast of possessing the revealed law of God, yet they dishonored him by their notorious transgressions of it, and virtually exemplified a declaration in their own scriptures, Is. 52: 5, that by their vices the name of God was reviled among the heathen. This quotation is taken from the Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures, so much in use among the Jews in the apostle's days, and is specially applicable to his purpose by the verbal addition made in that translation. It was not necessary for the apostle to enter with greater detail on the evidence of his position, that the Jews did the same things as the Gentiles. By a few comprehensive questions, he could awaken attention and give a right direction to the reflections of the considerate. Enough was said to produce conviction that the Jews were sinners, as well as the Gentiles. 25-27. For circumcision verily profiteth, etc. The Jews placed great reliance on circumcision, as the sign of their being in covenant with God. The apostle now wished to forestall an objection which would arise in the mind of a Jew; namely, that he made no account of this ordinance and that, according to his view, it was of no advantage to be a Jew. He affirms, that circumcision in itself is of no avail; it must, in order to be of efficacy in securing the favor of God, be connected with a spiritual obedience to the religious institute which enjoined it. The requisitions of God have respect to the spirit of man: his heart must be right, in order that he may be accepted of God. A Jew who should live in violation of the religious temper enjoined in his scriptures might just as well be a Gentile, so far as possession of the divine favor is concerned. If is not a Jew, which is one outwardly: neither is that circum29 cision, which is outward in the flesh: but he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter: whose praise is not of men, but of God. CHAPTER III. Objections, or queries, in regard to the alleged sinfulness of the Jews, 1-8. Testimony of the Jewish scriptures to the sinfulness of Jews and Gentiles, 9-18. The righteous principle which God observes in his treatment of men, and the impossibility of any man's being justified through a legal obedience, 19, 20. The righteousness which is available to men's justification, 21-26. The boasting of the Jews inadmissible, 27-30; yet the law not invalidated by faith, 31. a Gentile have an obedient spirit, ter of a law, or a written precept. he will receive from God as favorable | Whose praise: the word whose retreatment as if he were a Jew; and lates here, according to the original, though uncircumcised and having to the word Jew. The thought of no outward sign of a covenant-relation to God, his obedience would condemn the Jew who, favored with the written law and being circumcised, should live in transgression of the law. In other words, circumcision merely and the mere possession of the law of God, or of the system of religion revealed by him, are of no account in his sight. He requires an obedient spirit, inward piety. 28, 29. For he is not a Jew, etc. The ground of the view that God accepts a pious Gentile and rejects a disobedient Jew is, that a genuine Jew, one whom God will acknowledge as such, is a Jew in heart; and circumcision, to be acceptable, must be inward, that of the spirit. Compare Deut. 10: 16. Jer. 4: 4. The external obedience presupposes a corresponding temper of heart, conformed to the divine will. God looks not on the outward appearance, but on the heart not what man praises has true worth, but what God approves. || Circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, not in the letter; spiritual circumcision, the obedience of the heart, not merely an outward compliance with a written precept; but inward, as is the spirit of a man, not a mere outward thing, as is the let the apostle, however, is equally applicable to circumcision, and, of course, to any act of outward obedience. These spiritual views of religion, though harmonious with those presented in various parts of the Old Testament, had been greatly overlooked, and had nearly, or quite, faded away from the Jewish mind. Religion had become a matter of form and ceremony: and yet the Jews relied on this external religion with an assurance that it would avail to their salvation. The apostle directly and earnestly assailed the pride of the Jews in their external formal religion, and made prominent the nature of true religion, as spiritual, and quite independent of circumcision, or any mere ritual observances. CHAPTER III. The apostle had distinctly denied to the Jew, as such, any moral preeminence above the Gentile: the one was a sinner as well as the other. This view, placing both Gentiles and Jews on a common level, as to the fact of being sinners, and asserting the uselessness, for acceptance with God, of the external observance of circumcision, would naturally raise objections in the minds of Jews, since it was so different from the view then prevalent among them. Before he closes up, therefore, his argument in proof of the sinfulness of the Jews and presents the inference resulting from it in regard to justification, he pauses in order to remove such objections. We need not conceive of the apostle as introducing an objector and conducting a dialogue with him: he rather, as he knew the Jewish mind, states substantially what a Jew might be expected to say. The queries proposed are founded on external views of religion, and on an abuse of the covenant relation in which God had stood to the Jewish people. The chief question is, Of what advantage, then, is it to be a Jew rather than a Gentile? The reply to this suggested another query concerning the faithfulness of God to his engagements and the reply to this latter suggested, in its turn, another concerning the justice of God, should he inflict wrath on the Jews. The reply to this is followed by another query which calls in question the rightfulness of condemning an unfaithful Jew, as if he were to be classed with ordinary sinners, or with Gentile sinners. Vs. 1-8. Declarations of the Jewish scriptures are next adduced to confirm the charge that both Jews and Gentiles are sinners, 9-18, and the righteous principle which regulates the judicial retributions of God is stated, as also the conclusion, that no man can be justified through the law, 19, 20. — The righteousness which is available with God for justification is then announced, and the ground of it exhibited, 21-25.-The boasting in which the Jews indulged is shown to be baseless, 27-30; yet the law is not invalidated by faith, 31. In order to apprehend the import of the objections, rather cavils, presented and disposed of in verses 1-8, we must consider, that the Jews had come to regard the promises of divine favor and eternal life to the posterity of Abraham as dependent on their observance of circumcision, particularly, and of the other prescriptions of the Mosaic ritual; but these promises they held to be otherwise unconditional, so that they would be, of course, fulfilled to all Jews whether faithful, or not, to the spiritual requisitions of the Mosaic religion. It was the privilege of a Jew, they thought, to be one of the chosen people of God and hence to be interested in divine promises which would not fail: Jews, therefore, were not to be treated, in the divine administration, like Gentiles, whom they branded with the name of sinners. Compare Matt. 3: 9. John 8: 33-40. Rom. 2: 17. 9: 4. They could not rid themselves of the thought that, if they were circumcised, it would be unjust in God to withhold from them eternal life and to treat them as he would uncircumcised sinners of the Gentiles: though Jews should be unfaithful, still God would in all faithfulness fulfil his part of the covenant engagements and bestow eternal life; the righteousness and veracity of God would even become more glorious by his being constant to his covenant and blessing his chosen peoples though they should be unrighteous and false. The profane thought, even, was cherished that, even though they should be unrighteous and false, God would not have fair ground for proceeding against them as sinners, since by adhering to his engagements he would have the benefit of more signally illustrating his righteousness and veracity: he would by this glorifying of himself not only have an ample equivalent, on his side, for their unfaithfulness, but even be seen in a more advantageous light. They flattered themselves that they had a regard for the honor of God and seemed to cherish a fear that, by refusing to them eternal life, he would impair his own glory. Thus even their acknowledged wickedness furnished them an additional ground for presumption. 1 2 3 WHAT advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision? Much, every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God. For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief 4 make the faith of God without effect? God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged. 1. What advantage, then, hath the Jew, etc. This is the language of objection. Wherein, then, is the Jew more favorably situated than the Gentile? And what is the profit of circumcision? The former of the two questions is the main one, and that which receives an answer: the second is subordinate, and did not require immediate attention. The apostle had, indeed, explicitly avowed, 2: 25-29, the utter inefficacy, for acceptance with God, of outward circumcision. 2. Much, every way; much, in every respect pertaining to religion. In what pertained to religion, a Jew was far more favorably situated than a Gentile. Chiefly, etc. The chief point of advantage was, that the Jews were entrusted with the oracles of God; that is, his promises to Abraham and the other patriarchs, and all the revelations of the divine will through Moses and the prophets. 3. For what if some did not believe? Another objection to the apostle's views is here introduced. Some editions of the Greek Testament punctuate this verse differently from the mode adopted in our version: the words believe, unbelief, faith, also, do not convey the original idea. The verse may be thus rendered: -For what? If some have been unfaithful, will their unfaithfulness make void the faithfulness of God?-Jews, generally, indulged the thought that God was pledged, by his engagement with Abraham, to bless them. Hence the query, Though some of the Jews have proved faithless, will their faithlessness to their obligations destroy the faithfulness of God to his prom ises? Though we are sinners, will God be faithless to his engagements? 4. God forbid. These words are not a literal rendering of the original; but seem to have been adopted by the translators as expressive of the pious decision with which the apostle would repel the cavilling query. A literal rendering would be, Let it not be: an expression strongly indicative of aversion and showing how abhorrent the apostle regarded the query to every right feeling. In replying, then, to the thought advanced in objection to his view, Paul repels with abhorrence the insinuation, that God would be faithless should he not save the Jews; and at the same time, by a quotation from their own scriptures, maintains that in condemning the unfaithful, God would be acknowledged to be just. | Yea, let God be true, etc. So far from calling in question the faithfulness of God, let us hold it as a fixed principle, never to be surrendered, that God is true, of unimpeachable veracity, though every man should prove false, faithless to his engagements. || As it is written, etc. The sentiment just expressed is confirmed by a quotation from Ps. 51: 4, to the effect that God will be proved righteous in all his declarations, that, were his dealings brought under a judicial examination, he would gain the cause and be pronounced just. -The quotation from the Greek translation of the Hebrew scriptures is verbally different from the original in the Old Testament, but is apposite to the purpose of showing that God will invariably be found just and true: it 5 But if our unrighteousness commend the righteousness of God, what shall we say? Is God unrighteous who taketh 6 vengeance? (I speak as a man.) God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world? 7 For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory; why yet am I also judged as a sinner? conveys, also, the thought that, in such a trial, God would not only be cleared, but that his righteous character would be triumphantly displayed. 5. Another objection is brought against the sentiment that Jews, as well as Gentiles, might be objects of divine wrath. It is grounded on a professed regard for the glory of God and on the assumption, that his righteousness would be impaired should he inflict wrath on the Jews. The purport of it is, If the unrighteousness of the Jews occasion to God the advantage of signally glorifying himself as righteous in adhering, notwithstanding their unrighteousness, to his covenant engagements and in blessing them, will God be unrighteous and, instead of bestowing on them eternal life, inflict wrath on them?-If our unrighteousness commend, etc.; if our unrighteousness set forth in a favorable light the righteousness, or justice, of God.-The words righteousness of God, being here contrasted with our unrighteousness, mean the personal righteousness of God, and correspond to the expression in the preceding verse that thou mightest be justified, or shown to be just. || Is God unrighteous, etc. Is God, or will God be, unrighteous and inflict wrath, instead of bestowing on us eternal life and thus glorifying his righteousness in keeping his covenant? || Taketh_vengeance; literally, inflicteth wrath. I speak as a man. The query was not at all expressive of the apostle's own mind: he spoke as personating another, or, as some man might think and speak. 6. For then how shall God judge the world? The thought, that God is unrighteous, would be inconsistent with the belief held among the Jews, that God is to judge the world. The Judge of the world must discriminate in regard to the characters and deserts of men; and thus the acknowledged truth, that God is to judge the world, involves the idea of his personal justice. 7. The cavilling objector proposes another query, similar to the one just disposed of, an illustration, indeed, of it, but carried to a greater length: If the veracity of God in adhering to his engagements be, through my falseness, more abundantly glorified, why am I also, a Jew whom God has engaged to bless and by blessing whom, though I be false to my engagements, he may so much the more glorify his veracity, why am I also, like the sinful Gentile world, brought to trial as a sinner? God would glorify his veracity by bestowing eternal life on me, though false to my engagements, and even by occasion of my falseness: why then, notwithstanding this advantage to himself, am I brought to trial as a sinner? - The truth of God; the truthfulness, or veracity, of God. || My lie; my falsehood to God, my falseness, faithlessness. || Why yet am I also judged, etc. The word also seems to refer to other persons who are expected to be brought to judgment; and it may have a reference to the thought, in the preceding verse, that God is to judge the world, since by this term the Jews meant, more particularly, the Gentile world, and some of them seem to have believed that the judgment was designed solely for the Gentiles. The query of the objector may be thus presented: Why am even I, as if a sinner of the Gentiles, or as a |