The Pulpit Commentary — Romans — Section 115

principle n.pplicnblo to 1111, but on Iy the th~t believe, though they be In unciroum- blessedness to sinners of having their sins ohion, that righteou1ne99 might be reokoned forgiven, it mn.y be replied, firstly, that the unto tbe111 alao. And the father of ciroum- way in which the verses are introduced oision to th8111 who are not of oircu.mcision does not require more to be implied. All only, but who alao walk in the 11tep1 of that that need be meant is that the ground of faith of our father Abrah11D1 which he had justifiootion exemplified in Abraham's case in nnoiroumoision. The intention of ver. 12 is the same e.e is spoken of by David e.s still is to express that, though the faithful who available for man, e.nd crowned with blessing. are not of Israel are Abraham's children yet But, secondly, it is to be observed the.t these his circumci!led descendants have not 'lost verses represent e.nd suggest the general their privilege. They are already his chil- tenor of the Book of Pee.Ima, in which dren according to the flesh, and h~ spiritual human righteousness is never asserted as children too, if they walk in the lltepe of constituting a claim to reward. "My trust his faith (cf. John viii. 37, "I know that is in thy mercy," is, on the contrary, the ye are Abraham's seed," compared wif1 ever-recurring theme. St. Paul's quote.tioDB ver. 39, "If ye were Abraham's children, from the Old Testament are frequently ye would do the works of Abraham "). given e.s suggestive of the genera.I scriptural teaching on the subject in he.nd, rather than What now follows is to show (aa above as exhaustive proofs in themselves. explained) that the Law could not be the Vera. 9, 10.-Cometh this blessedness fulfilment of the promise to Abraham, or then (properly, is then this blessing) upon appropriate its blessing to the Jews. the oircumoision only, or upon the uncir- oumcision also 1 l!'or we say that faith was Vera. 13-15.-l!'or not through law was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness, the promise to Abraham or to his seed that How (i.e., as the context shows, under whaC he should be the heir of the world, but eircu'TTl,Btances) we.a it then reckoned 1 when through the righteousness of faith. l!'or i! he was in oircumcision, or in unoir- they which are of law be heirs, faith is oumoision 1 Not in circumoision, but in U1ade void, and the promise made of none unciroumoision. F,iith, and not works, eft'eot. l!'or the Law worketh wrath : for having been shown to be the principle of where no law is, neither is there trans- Abraham's justification, e.nd those who gression. The point of the argument is were under the Mosaio Law, represented that the principle of law is essentially by David, having been seen to have shared difl'erent from that on which Abraha.m WO-.i the blessing of being so justified, the ques- justified. and which is hence to be untler- tion still remains, whether it may not be stood in the fulfilment of the promise to confined to them only, or to Abraham's him and his seed. How this is so is circumcised descendants only. That this shortly intima.ted in ver. 15, the idea. being cannot be is shown in two we.ye : firstly more fully expounded in eh. vii. The ides (vers. 10-18), from the fact that Abraham is (e.s he.a been already explained) tha.t bw was himself unciroumcised when he was simply declares what is right, a.ud require~ spoken of as being thus justified, so that conformity to it; it tloes not give either neither the capability nor the inheritance potDer to obey, or atunement for not obeying. of suoh justifiootion can be viewed as Hence, in itself, it worketh, not righteous- dependent on circumcision; and, secondly ness, but tDf'ath; for man becomes fully liable (vers. 13-16), it is argued that the Law to wrath when h,-, comes to know, through could not appropriRte the privilege to his law, the difference between right and wrong oe.rnal descendants, the very principle of (of.John ix. 41, "If ye were blind, ye shuuld •law being the opposite of tlmt on which have no sin"). Exactly the same view of Abraham is so.id to have been justified. the impossibility of the l\fosaie Law being Thus the seed, innumero.ble a.a the stars, to the fulfilment of the promise to Abraham be understood as inheritors of the promise is found in Gal. iii., where also the re,i.l me.de to him, and sharers in his blessing, purpose of the Law, intervening thus between are not his circumcised descendants, but I\ the promise and its fultilment, is further spiritual seed-they which o.ro of foith being explained. The expressi,,n in ver. 13, the trne children of Abraham (Gru. iii. 7). "thut he should ho the Ji,,ir of the world," Vera. 11, 12.-And he reoeived the sign of hns reference to the ultinmto scope uf the oircumoision, a seal of the righteousness Abmhmuic promises (see Gen. xii. :!, 3; of the faith which he had in unoiroumcision xiii. B-16; xv. 5, 6, IS; :s:Yii. :!-9; (this was all tlmt circumcision Wt\S-& xv iii. 18; :s:xii. 17, 18). Now, it ~ tru,, tlrnt vfoiblo sigfl iwd eoal to his own dosoondu.nts in some of theso promises tile langung.i of the righteousness thn.t is of fBith; but not used seems to denote no moro thl\u tho confining it to them, or in itsolf conforring temporal possession by Israel of the pro- it) that he might be tile father of all theqi misad land, with dominion (notuully rue.ii.zoo  110 THE EPIS1'LE OF PAUL TO 'l'IIE nl)MANS. f.oa. 1v. t ....... 281