law, dishonourest thou God? &c. Another striking instance ot their not acting agreeably to their advantages, while making a boast of the law, and of their peculiar relation to God, as their God, and theirs only ; in- stead of acting worthily of this relation, they so acted, that the name of God was every day blasphemed ; that is, the Gentiles were constantly led to speak and think evil of a God, whose worshippers were so wicked as the Jews. This assertion he confirms by the declarations of their own prophets ; see Ezek. 36 : 20, 23.
(25) For circumcision verily profiteth if ihou keep the law, &c. It had obviously been implied in the previous reasoning of the apostle, that the Jews, being chargeable with the sins just mentioned, could not escape the righteous judgment of God ; for circumcision is of no account, unless the law be obeyed ; if that is broken, circumcision is uncircumcision. The connexion between this and the preceding verses is thus obvious. The design of this passage, vs. 25 — 29, therefore, is to show that circum- cision afforded no security to the Jews. This rite was regarded by the Hebrews, and is considered by the apostle under two diJEFerent aspects. First, as a rite possessed of inherent efficacy or merit of its own ; and, secondly, as a sign or seal of God's covenant. In the former view, Paul here, as well as elsewhere (see Gal. 6 : 15), says, " circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is nothing." In the latter, it had its legiti mate and important value. As a seal it was attached, in the first place to the national covenant between God and the Jews. It was a sign of the existence of that covenant, and a pledge, on the part of God, that he would fulfil its promises. If any Jew fulfilled his part of that covenant, and in that sense kept the law, his circumcision would profit him ; it would secure to him all the blessings of Judaism. But it was also, in the second place, attached to the spiritual covenant made with Abraham. " It was a seal of the righteousness of faith," i. e. was designed as an, assurance that he was regarded as righteous by means of his faith, and that he should be treated accordingly. To all those Jews who had the faith of Abraham, and thus kept the covenant, or law of justification, established with him, circumcision was in like manner profitable. It was the visible sign and pledge of the divine favour. On the other hand, if either the national or spiritual covenant were broken, circumcision was of no more use than the seal of a contract after all its binding parts had been obliterated. In other words, the validity of a covenant or contract depends on the per'formance of its conditions, not on the mere possession of its seal. Paul, therefore, tells the Jews that there was no inherent efficacy in circumcision, that it could avail them nothing unless they obeyed the law; if they were transgressors of the law, as he had just declared them to be, their circumcision was made uncircumcision. That is, it would do them no good ; and though of the number of the people of God, they should be treated as though they were not.
(26) Therefore if the uncircumcision keep the righteousness of the law, shall not his uncircumcision be counted for circumcision ? In order to