Romans 3:28

Romans 3:27-28 27. Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? of works? Nay: but by the law of faith. 27. Ubi ergo gloriatio? [123] exclusa est. Per quam legem? operum? Nequaquam; Sed per legem fidei. 28. Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. 28. Constituimus ergo, fide justificari hominem sine operibus Legis. 27. Where then is glorying? The Apostle, after having, with reasons abundantly strong, cast down men from their confidence in works, now triumphs over their folly: and this exulting conclusion was necessary; for on this subject, to teach us would not have been enough; it was necessary that the Holy Spirit should loudly thunder, in order to lay prostrate our loftiness. But he says that glorying is beyond all doubt excluded, for we cannot adduce anything of our own, which is worthy of being approved or commended by God. If the material of glorying be merit, whether you name that of congruity or of condignity, by which man would conciliate God, you see that both are here annihilated; for he treats not of the lessening or the modifying of merit, but Paul leaves not a particle behind. Besides, since by faith glorying in works is so taken away, that faith cannot be truly preached, without wholly depriving man of all praise by ascribing all to God's mercy -- it follows, that we are assisted by no works in obtaining righteousness. Of works? In what sense does the Apostle deny here, that our merits are excluded by the law, since he has before proved that we are condemned by the law? For if the law delivers us over to death, what glorying can we obtain from it? Does it not on the contrary deprive us of all glorying and cover us with shame? He then indeed showed, that our sin is laid open by what the law declares, for the keeping of it is what we have all neglected: but he means here, that were righteousness to be had by the law of works, our glorying would not be excluded; but as it is by faith alone, there is nothing that we can claim for ourselves; for faith receives all from God, and brings nothing except an humble confession of want. This contrast between faith and works ought to be carefully noticed: works are here mentioned without any limitation, even works universally. Then he neither speaks of ceremonies only, nor specifically of any external work, but includes all the merits of works which can possibly be imagined. The name of law is here, with no strict correctness, given to faith: but this by no means obscures the meaning of the Apostle; for what he understands is, that when we come to the rule of faith, the whole glorying in works is laid prostrate; as though he said -- "The righteousness of works is indeed commended by the law, but that of faith has its own law, which leaves to works, whatever they may be, no righteousness." [124] 28. We then conclude, etc. He now draws the main proposition, as one that is incontrovertible, and adds an explanation. Justification by faith is indeed made very clear, while works are expressly excluded. Hence, in nothing do our adversaries labor more in the present day than in attempts to blend faith with the merits of works. They indeed allow that man is justified by faith; but not by faith alone; yea, they place the efficacy of justification in love, though in words they ascribe it to faith. But Paul affirms in this passage that justification is so gratuitous, that he makes it quite evident, that it can by no means be associated with the merit of works. Why he names the works of the law, I have already explained; and I have also proved that it is quite absurd to confine them to ceremonies. Frigid also is the gloss, that works are to be taken for those which are outward, and done without the Spirit of Christ. On the contrary, the word law that is added, means the same as though he called them meritorious; for what is referred to is the reward promised in the law. [125] What, James says, that man is not justified by faith alone, but also by works, does not at all militate against the preceding view. The reconciling of the two views depends chiefly on the drift of the argument pursued by James. For the question with him is not, how men attain righteousness before God, but how they prove to others that they are justified, for his object was to confute hypocrites, who vainly boasted that they had faith. Gross then is the sophistry, not to admit that the word, to justify, is taken in a different sense by James, from that in which it is used by Paul; for they handle different subjects. The word, faith, is also no doubt capable of various meanings. These two things must be taken to the account, before a correct judgment can be formed on the point. We may learn from the context, that James meant no more than that man is not made or proved to be just by a feigned or dead faith, and that he must prove his righteousness by his works. See on this subject my Institutes. Footnotes: [123] Gloriatio -- kauchesis -- glorying -- boasting or rejoicing. "The result of the gospel plan of salvation is to prevent all self-approbation, self-gratulation and exaltation on the part of the sinner." -- Hodge [124] Grotius explains "law" here by "vivendi regula" -- rule of living;" Beza, by "doctrina -- doctrine or teaching," according to the import of the word tvrh in Hebrew; and Pareus takes "the law of works," metonymically, for works themselves, and "the law of faith," for faith itself; and he quotes these words of Theophylact, "The Apostle calls faith a law because the word, law, was in high veneration among the Jews." He uses the term, law, in a similar manner in Romans 8:2 , "The law of the spirit of life," etc. "He calls here the gospel; the law of faith,' because faith is the condition of the gospel covenant, as perfect obedience was the condition of the covenant of nature and of that of Moses, (conditio foederis naturalis et foederis Mosaici.)" -- Turrettin [125] The phrase, choris ergon nomou, may be rendered, "without the works of law," that is, either natural or revealed; for Gentiles as well as Jews are here contemplated. -- Ed.

Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law.

Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. A man is justified by faith — Here St Paul shows himself a pure Lutheran, and is therefore sharply and blasphemously censured by some Jesuits for a hot-headed person, who was so transported with the pangs of zeal and eagerness beyond all compass in most of his disputes, that there was no great reckoning to be made of his assertions. (Speculum Europae.) Yea, he was dangerous to read, as savouring of heresy in some places, and better perhaps he had never written. Four years before the Council of Trent, Cardinal Contarenus asserted the doctrine of justification by faith alone, in a just treatise, and was therefore soon after poisoned. Cardinal Pole is thought to have been sound in this point. Bellarmine reproves Pighius for consenting to Luther herein, whom he undertook to confute, and yet Bellarmine himself with his tutissimum est, it is most safe. doth as much upon the matter. Magna est veritas, et valebit, Great is the truth, and shall prevail.

Here is the conclusion of the whole matter that he had been discoursing of, from Romans 1:17 to this very place. When he says, we conclude, he means, we have reasoned or argued well, as logicians do; or this is the full account that we have taken, and summed up, after the manner of arithmeticians. A man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law; a phrase equivalent to that which is so much spoken against, that we are justified by faith only; as if we should say, That God is to be worshipped, excluding angels, idols, images, &c., it would be as much as to say, God is to be worshipped only.

Therefore we conclude,.... This is the conclusion from the premises, the sum total of the whole account: that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law. The subject of justification is, "man", not in opposition to angels; nor does it design the Jew against the Gentile, though some have so thought; but the apostle names neither Jew nor Gentile, but "man", to show that Christ's righteousness is unto all, and every man, that believes, be he who he will; and is to be understood indefinitely, that every man that is justified is justified by faith. The means is "by faith", not habitually or actually considered; that is, either as an habit and principle infused into us, or as an act performed by us; but either organically, as it is a means of receiving Christ's righteousness; or objectively, as it denotes Christ the object of it: and all this is done "without works", of any sort; not by a faith which is without works, for such a faith is dead, and of no avail; but by faith without works joined to it, in the affair of justification; or by the righteousness of Christ imputed by God the Father, without any consideration of them, and received by faith, and relied upon by the believer, without any regard unto them.

God will have the great work of the justification and salvation of sinners carried on from first to last, so as to shut out boasting. Now, if we were saved by our own works, boasting would not be excluded. But the way of justification by faith for ever shuts out boasting. Yet believers are not left to be lawless; faith is a law, it is a working grace, wherever it is in truth. By faith, not in this matter an act of obedience, or a good work, but forming the relation between Christ and the sinner, which renders it proper that the believer should be pardoned and justified for the sake of the Saviour, and that the unbeliever who is not thus united or related to him, should remain under condemnation. The law is still of use to convince us of what is past, and to direct us for the future. Though we cannot be saved by it as a covenant, yet we own and submit to it, as a rule in the hand of the Mediator.

28. Therefore we conclude, &c.—It is the unavoidable tendency of dependence upon our own works, less or more, for acceptance with God, to beget a spirit of "boasting." But that God should encourage such a spirit in sinners, by any procedure of His, is incredible. This therefore stamps falsehood upon every form of "justification by works," whereas the doctrine that. Our faith receives a righteousness That makes the sinner just, manifestly and entirely excludes "boasting"; and this is the best evidence of its truth. Inference second: This and no other way of salvation is adapted alike to Jew and Gentile.

Therefore - As the result of the previous train of argument. That a man - That all who are justified; that is, that there is no other way. Is justified by faith - Is regarded and treated as righteous, by believing in the Lord Jesus Christ. Without the deeds of the law - Without works as a meritorious ground of justification. The apostle, of course, does not mean that Christianity does not produce good works, or that they who are justified will not obey the Law, and be holy; but that no righteousness of their own will be the ground of their justification. They are sinners; and as such can have no claim to he treated as righteous. God has devised a plan by which, they may be pardoned and saved; and that is by faith alone. This is the grand uniqueness of the Christian religion. This was the special point in the reformation from popery. Luther often called this doctrine of justification by faith the article upon which the church stood or fell - articulus stantis, vel cadentis ecclesiae - and it is so. If this doctrine is held entire, all others will be held with it. If this is abandoned, all others will fall also. It may be remarked here, however, that this doctrine by no means interferes with the doctrine that good works are to be performed by Christians. Paul urges this as much as any other writer in the New Testament. His doctrine is, that they are not to be relied on as a ground of justification; but that he did not mean to teach that they are not to be performed by Christians is apparent from the connection, and from the following places in his epistles: Romans 2:7 ; 2 Corinthians 9:8 ; Ephesians 2:10 ; 1 Timothy 2:10 ; 1 Timothy 5:10 , 1 Timothy 5:25 ; 1 Timothy 6:18 ; 2 Timothy 3:17 ; Titus 2:7 , Titus 2:14 ; Titus 3:8 ; Hebrews 10:24 . That we are not justified by our works is a doctrine which he has urged and repeated with great power and frequency. See Romans 4:2 , Romans 4:6 ; Romans 9:11 , Romans 9:32 ; Romans 11:6 ; Galatians 2:16 ; Galatians 3:2 , Galatians 3:5 , Galatians 3:10 ; Ephesians 2:9 ; 2 Timothy 1:9 .

Romans 3:28 Therefore we conclude, etc. The common text has οὖν , therefore , giving this verse the character of a conclusion from the preceding argument. The great majority, however, of the best manuscripts, the Vulgate and Coptic versions, and many of the Fathers, have γάρ , which almost all the modern editors adopt. This verse, then, is a confirmation of what is said before: “Boasting is excluded, λογιζόμθα γάρ , for we think, i.e., are sure,” etc. See Romans 2:3 ; Romans 8:18 ; 2 Corinthians 11:5 , for a similar use of the word λογίζομαι . That a man is justified by faith. If by faith, it is not of works; and if not of works, there can be no room for boasting, for boasting is the assertion of personal merit. From the nature of the case, if justification is by faith, it must be by faith alone. Luther’s version, therefore, allein durch den glauben , is fully justified by the context. The Romanists, indeed, made a great outcry against that version as a gross perversion of Scripture, although Catholic translators before the time of Luther had given the same translation. So in the Nuremberg Bible , 1483, “Nur durch den glauben.” And the Italian Bibles of Geneva, 1476, and of Venice, 1538, per sola fede . The Fathers also often use the expression, “man is justified by faith alone;” so that Erasmus, De Ratione Concionandi , Lib. 3., says, “Vox sola , tot clamoribus lapidata hoc saeculo in Luthero, reverenter in Patribus auditur.” See Koppe and Tholuck on this verse. Without works of the law. To be justified without works, is to be justified without anything in ourselves to merit justification. The works of the law must be the works of the moral law, because the proposition is general, embracing Gentiles as well as Jews. And as our Savior teaches that the sum of the moral law is that we should love God with all the heart, mind, and strength, and our neighbor as ourselves, and as no higher form of excellence than supreme love to God is possible or conceivable, in excluding works of the law, the apostle excludes everything subjective. He places the ground of justification out of ourselves. Olshausen, on this verse, reverts to his Romish idea of subjective justification, and explains works of the law to mean works produced by the moral law, which he says spring only from ourselves, and are perishable, whereas “the works of faith are imperishable as the principle whence they spring.” That is, we are not justified by works performed from a principle of natural conscience, but by those which are the fruits of a renewed nature. How utterly subversive this is of the gospel, has already been remarked. The works of the law are not works which the law produces, but works which the law demands, and the law demands all that the Spirit of God effects, even in the just made perfect. And therefore spiritual as well as legal works are excluded. The contrast is not between works produced by the law and works produced by faith, but between works and faith, between what is done by us (whether in a state of nature or a state of grace) and what Christ has done for us.