1. Some say that by his own righteousness, which the apostle rejects, he intends only his righteousness ix v6/j.ov, or " by the works
JUSTIFICATION AS DECLARED BY PAUL. 867
of the law/' But this was only an outiuard, external righteousness, consisting in the obsei'vation of rites and ceremonies, without respect unto the inward frame or obedience of the heart. But this is an impious imagination. The righteousness which is by the law is the righteousness which the law requires, and those works of it which if a man do he shall live in them; for "the doers of the law shall be justified," Rom. ii. 13. Neither did God ever give any law of obedience unto man, but what obliged him to " love the Lord his God with all his heart, and all his soul.'' And it is so far from being true, that God by the law required an external righteousness only, that he frequently condemns it as an abomination to him, where it is alone.
2. Others say that it is the righteousness, whatever it be, which he had during his Pharisaism. And although he should be allowed, in that state, to have " lived in all good conscience, instantly to have served God day and night," and to have had respect as well unto the internal as the external works of the law ; yet all these works, being before faith, before conversion to God, may be, and are to be, rejected as unto any concurrence unto our justification. But works wrought in faith, by the aid of grace, — evangelical works, — are of another con- sideration, and, together with faith, are the condition of justification.
Ans. 1. That, in the matter of our justification, the apostle opposeth evangelical works, not only unto the grace of God, but also unto the faith of believers, was proved in the consideration of the foregoing testimony.
2. He makes no such distinction as that pretended, — namely, that works are of two sorts, whereof one is to be excluded from any interest in our justification, but not the other; neither doth he any- where else, treating of the same subject, intimate any such distinc- tion, but, on the contrary, declares that use of all works of obedi- ence in them that beUeve which is exclusive of the supposition of any such distinction: but he directly expresseth, in this rejection, his own righteousness, — that is, his personal, inherent righteousness, — whatever it be, and however it be wrought.
3. He makes a plain distinction of his own twofold estate, — namely, that of his Judaism which he was in before his conversion, and that which he had by faith in Christ Jesus. In the first state, he con- siders the privileges of it, and declares what judgment he made concerning them upon the revelation of Jesus Christ unto him : riyri/j^ai, saith he, refemng unto the time past, — namely, at his fii'st conver- sion. " I considered them, with all the advantages, gain, and reputa- tion which I had by them; but rejected them all for Christ: because the esteem of them and continuance in them as privileges, was inconsistent with faith in Christ Jesus." Secondly, he proceeds to
S68 ON JUSTIFICATION.
give an account of himself and his thoughts, as unto his present condition. For it might he supposed that although he had parted M-ith all his legal privileges for Christ, yet now, being united unto him by faith, he had something of his own wherein he might rejoice, and on the account whereof he might be accepted Avith God (the thing inquired after), or else he had parted with all for nothing. Wherefore, he, who had no design to make any reserves of what he might glory in, plainly declares what his judgment is concernmg all his present righteousness, and the ways of obedience which he was now engaged in, with respect unto the ends inquired after, Phil. iii. 8 : 'AXXa iMivoiivyi zai Tiyovfj^ai. The bringing over of what was affirmed before concerning his Judaical privileges into this verse, is an effect of a very superficiary consideration of the context. For, — (1.) There is a plain av^rjSig in these words, 'AXXa fisvoiivyi -/.at. He could not more plainly express the heightening of what he had affirmed by a proceed unto other things, or the consideration of himself in another state : " But, moreover, beyond what I have already asserted." (2.) The change of the time expressed by ^yri/xai, [which] respects what was past, into riyov/j.ai, wherein he hath respect only unto what was pre- sent, not what he had before rejected and forsaken, makes evident his progress unto the consideration of things of another nature. Where- fore, unto the rejection of all his former Judaical privileges, he adds his judgment concerning his own present personal righteousness. But whereas it might be objected, that, rejecting all both before and after conversion, he had nothing left to rejoice in, to glory in, to give him acceptance with God ; he assures us of the contrary, — namely, that he found all these things in Christ, and the righteousness of God which is by faith. He is therefore in these words, " Not having mine own righteousness, which is of the law," so far from intending only the righteousness which he had before his conversion, as that he intends it not at all.