tatned, &c. The inference is, that what to all human probability was the most unlikely to occur, has actually taken place. The Gentiles, sunk in carelessness and sin, have attained the favour of God, while the Jews, to whom religion was a business, have utterly failed. Why is this 1 The reason is given in v. 32 ; it was because they would not sub- mit to be saved on the terms which God proposed, but insisted on reach- ing heaven in their own way. To follow after righteousness is to press forward towards it, as towards the prize in a race, Phil. 3 : 14. The word rendered righteousness, might more properly be rendered justifica- tion, the consequence of having fulfilled the law ; a state of favour with God. It, therefore, includes all the blessings consequent on union to Christ; see Gal. 2: 21. 3: 21. 5: 5. This the Gentiles did not seek after, they cared nothing about the favour of God and the blessings there- with connected. But still they attained to righteousness, i. e. as before, justification, all the consequences of being righteous in the estimation of God.
Evefi the righteousness which is of faith, i. e. even that justification which is attained by faith. In all these clauses, however, the word righteous- ness, as expressing the sum of the divine requisitions, that which fulfils the law, may be retained. ' 7'he Gentiles did not seek this righteousness, yet they attained it; not that righteousness which is of the law, but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness of God (accept- able to God) by faith,' Phil. 3 : 9. They obtained that which satisfied the demands of the law, and was acceptable in the sight of God. It is very probable that Paul included both ideas in the word which he used, that is, both the excellence which satisfied the law, i. e. righteousness, and its consequence, i. e. justification.
(31) What the Gentiles thus attained, the Jews failed to secure. The former he had described as "not following after righteousness;" the latter he characterizes as those who follow after the law of righteousness. The expression law of righteousness may be variously explained. Law may be taken in its general sense o^ rule, as in ch. 3 : 27, and elsewhere. The meaning would then be, ' They followed after, i. e. they attended diligently to, the rule which they thought would lead to their attaining righteousness or being justified, but they did not attain unto that rule which actually leads to such results.' Or, 2. The word law may be redundant, and Paul may mean to say nothing more than that ' The Jews sought righteousness or justification, but did not attain it.' This, no doubt, is the substance, though it may not be the precise form of the thought. In favour of this view is a comparison with the preceding and succeeding verses, and the fact that the word is elsewhere nearly redun- dant, as " law of sin," ch. 7 : 23, for sin itself. The first interpretation, however, is probably the most correct.
(32) The reason why the Jews failed of securing the divine favour is thus stated. Because they sought it not ly faith, but, as it were, by the works of the law. In other words, they would not submit to the method