The Pulpit Commentary — Romans — Section 18

hmtbeniPm. rt is difficult t,o de(llcl.e. 11mong but their '"PfJN>8mtg it. 14 Verltl\s in menm the -rari<'ns e:i.planetiona that have been nititur e\ urget: &ed homo eam impedlt" offered, on any apecifio mode of revelation (Bengel), whi<'h the writer had in ~icw. Perhnpa no Ver, iS.-Beo11u19 th11t whloh ill known parti<'ttlRr one m.:elusively. Commentntore (not, as in the Authorized Version," may bi may be often unduly 11.nx:ioue to IU!i.:i. 11n J,.-nown ; " for, though the force of the wort @Xll(lt sense io pregnant words used by St. ')IVflllT'rl>v euggest.s this sense, it oertnin)y Pnnl, who BO often indioat.es oomprehenaive means kflotan, not 1mowable, in the mary idrv by short phrase& He may have had passages of the New Testament where it belC're hie mind various ooncurrent signs of elsewhere oooure) of God la manifest in human guilt, and the Divine wrath against them; for God manifested it to them ; ratler it. at th11.t especial time of the world's history; tha.n hath manifested, a.s in the Author~ed &JI which, to his mind at least, brought con- Version. He manifested it, as appeo.re from TI<'tion u hv a li~ht from heaven. And the the following verse, in oreRtion. In it to gospel itself (t.hou~h in its esaenoe a revela- them from the first he manifested it; blt in tion of mercy, ro that he purposely avoids ~hem ( I• alrro.s) also, through the ca.paoity •ying th•t wrath was ill it re"8aled) still of the human soul to see Divine pover in had beeu the most powerful means of all for orention. bringing home a conviction of the Divine Ver. 20.-l'or the invisible things of him wrath to the oonsciences of believers. For ill! from ( i.e. since, &,rb) the oreatiou. of th~ world first office is to oonviuce of sin and of jndg- are olearly seen, beiD.g understood by the ment. Cf. the words of tho forerunner, "0 things that are made, even his eternal power generation of vipers, who bath warned you and Divinity (6.,d...,s, not e.&...,s); so that to flee from the wrath ta oome?" On all they are without u:ome. The concluding 81lch grannds we may conoeive that the clause is rendered in the Revised Version, apostle spoke of the wrath of God a,,trainst " tha.t they may be without excuse; " e.nd it human sin being especially at that time is trne that .ls .-b ,1.,,., alrrous does not ex- plainly revealed from heaven; and he desires press the fact that they now are so, but the to bring his readere:to peroeive it as he did. subjective result of the ma.nifestation, if For now was the time of i.he Divine purpose disregarded. "Paulus directe excusationem to bring it home to all (cf. Acts xvii. 30, adimit, non solum de.even tu aliquo loquitur" " The times of this ignorance God winked (Bengel). It is, however, a qoestion of im- et, but now oommandeth all men everywhere porta.nce, which has been much discussed, io repent"). " All ungodl.me111 and ,unright- whether (as the rendering o! the Revised eousness" (lurifJ•= iazl li!udcu,) comprehends Version might be taken to imply) the idea ell evil-doing, in whatever e.spect viewed, of Divine 1)Ul'_f0Be, aud /not result only, ia whether as impiety or as wrong. The phrase, involved in eis .,-b .Iva,. The difference or.-,, .,.i,., aJt..-'19eua, tta-rexdrr"'"• is wrongly between the two conceptions is apparent tnmslated in the Authorized V eraion, " who from the Vnlgate, ita ut sint inezcmabiles, hold the truth." If the verb 1ea.-lxew compared with Calvin's in 1wc ut. The allowed thls rendering here, it wonld indeed bearing of the distinction on the doctrine of be intelligible in reference to the knowledge predestina.tion is obvioue, and it was conse- of God, even by nature, which all men have quently a subject of contention between the ar ought to have, though they do not act Lutherans e.nd Calvinists. Meyer among upon it, and the very potential possession of modems contends strongly that " the view which renders them guilty. This is the which takes it of the p1wpose is required by thought of what immediately follows. Thm the prevailing use of ,ls with the inJinitive,'' the 11eI1Be wonld be, " They hold, i.e. posseSB, referring in this Epistle to eh. i. 11 ; iii. 26 : tile truth; but they do unrighteousness." iv. 11, 16, 18: vi. 12; vii 4, 5; viii. 29; xi, Bot whenever 1t:a-rlx.,,11 means " to hold," it 11; xii. 2, 3; xv. 8, 18, 16. A comparison, denotes a firm hold, not a loose hold, 8Uch however, of these passages does not seem to ea wonld be thns implied. It occurs in this bear out his contention, it being ,e.pparently 8IIIlll8 in 1 Cor. xi. 2 (" I praise you that ye dependent on the co$xt in each case, rather 1eep the ordinances") ; and 1 Theas. v. 21 than the phre.se ds .,-b, whether the idea of (" Hold falt that which is good"). We most, purpose comes in. Ohrysost.om among the therefore, have reoonrae to a BeCOnd sense in e.ncicnte expressly opposed this view, saying, which the verb isalao 1188d-that of" .keeping ,IC.a.('T01'Y• ov 3,c\ To&ro Taii.-ci i1rol711r,11, 6 be.ck," or" .reetraini.ng." Thm Luke iv. 42 0•br, El ical .,-oii.-a i{l1J71. Ov -yl1p 2'1111 avrol,, ( .. The people uged, him, that he should not &..-011.0-yla, l,.1rounp11u71 ll1llau1eall.ia11 'Tot1avn,11 depart from them") and 2 Thea ii. 6 (" Ye •ls µ,iuov 1rpof,871,c1v, /JJi.11.' 111a avrb11 ff'l')'l'OID'II'. know what t.DilJuwuldh "). The referen.oe is & that they 1lwuld be may be suggeat.ed 88 ml.I to the innat.e knowledge of God which an adequate rendering, 80 os to avoid the all m~n are 811pposed to have had originally; idea of God'H rnanifu11tation of himself to l,ut tLe idea lfipreaed is n,,t their 1111,ffing it, men having beou fro1,11 the fir1t delusive, CR. 1.1-32.] THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. 11