Romans 9:1–9:33

Romans 9:1-5 1. I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost, 1. Veritatem dico in Christo, non mentior, testimonium simul mihi reddente mea conscientia eum Spiri-tu sancto, 2. That I have great heaviness and continual sorrow in my heart. 2. Quod dolor sit mihi magnus, et assiduus cruciatus cordi meo: 3. For I could wish that myself were accursed from Christ for my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh: 3. Optarim enim ego ipse anathema esse a Christo pro fratribus meis, cognatis inquam meis secundum car-nem; 4. Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises; 4. Qui sunt Israelitae, quorum est adoptio, et gloria, et testamenta, et legislatio, et cultus, et promissiones; 5. Whose are the fathers, and of whom as concerning the flesh Christ came, who is over all, God blessed for ever. Amen. 5. Quorum sunt Patres, et ex quibus est Christus secundum car-nem, qui est super omnia Deus bene-dictus in secula. Amen. In this chapter he begins to remove the offences which might have diverted the minds of men from Christ: for the Jews, for whom he was appointed according to the covenant of the law, not only rejected him, but regarded him with contempt, and for the most part bated him. Hence one of two things seemed to follow, -- either that there was no truth in the Divine promise, -- or that Jesus, whom Paul preached, was not the Lord's anointed, who had been especially promised to the Jews. This twofold knot Paul fully unties in what follows. He, however, so handles this subject, as to abstain from all bitterness against the Jews, that he might not exasperate their minds; and yet he concedes to them nothing to the injury of the gospel; for he allows to them their privileges in such a way, as not to detract anything from Christ. But he passes, as it were abruptly, to the mention of this subject, so that there appears to be no connection in the discourse. [283] He, however, so enters on this new subject, as though he had before referred to it. It so happened in this way, -- Having finished the doctrine he discussed, he turned his attention to the Jews, and being astonished at their unbelief as at something monstrous, he burst forth into this sudden protestation, in the same way as though it was a subject which he had previously handled; for there was no one to whom this thought would not of itself immediately occur, -- "If this be the doctrine of the law and the Prophets, how comes it that the Jews so pertinaciously reject it?" And further, it was everywhere known, that all that he had hitherto spoken of the law of Moses, and of the grace of Christ, was more disliked by the Jews, than that the faith of the Gentiles should be assisted by their consent. It was therefore necessary to remove this obstacle, lest it should impede the course of the gospel. 1. The truth I say in Christ, etc. As it was an opinion entertained by most that Paul was, as it were, a sworn enemy to his own nation, and as it was suspected somewhat even by the household of faith, as though he had taught them to forsake Moses, he adopts a preface to prepare the minds of his readers, before he proceeds to his subject, and in this preface he frees himself from the false suspicion of evil will towards the Jews. And as the matter was not unworthy of an oath, and as he perceived that his affirmation would hardly be otherwise believed against a prejudice already entertained, he declares by an oath that he speaks the truth. By this example and the like, (as I reminded you in the first chapter,) we ought to learn that oaths are lawful, that is, when they render that truth credible which is necessary to be known, and which would not be otherwise believed. The expression, In Christ, means "according to Christ." [284] By adding I lie not, he signifies that he speaks without fiction or disguise. My conscience testifying to me, etc. By these words he calls his own conscience before the tribunal of God, for he brings in the Spirit as a witness to his feeling. He adduced the Spirit for this end, that he might more fully testify that he was free and pure from an evil disposition, and that he pleaded the cause of Christ under the guidance and direction of the Spirit of God. It often happens that a person, blinded by the passions of the flesh, (though not purposing to deceive,) knowingly and wilfully obscures the light of truth. But to swear by the name of God, in a proper sense of the word, is to call him as a witness for the purpose of confirming what is doubtful, and at the same time to bind ourselves over to his judgment, in case we say what is false. 2. That I have great sorrow, etc. He dexterously manages so to cut short his sentence as not yet to express what he was going to say; for it was not as yet seasonable openly to mention the destruction of the Jewish nation. It may be added, that he thus intimates a greater measure of sorrow, as imperfect sentences are for the most part full of pathos. But he will presently express the cause of his sorrow, after having more fully testified his sincerity. But the perdition of the Jews caused very great anguish to Paul, though he knew that it happened through the will and providence of God. We hence learn that the obedience we render to God's providence does not prevent us from grieving at the destruction of lost men, though we know that they are thus doomed by the just judgment of God; for the same mind is capable of being influenced by these two feelings: that when it looks to God it can willingly bear the ruin of those whom he has decreed to destroy; and that when it turns its thoughts to men, it condoles with their evils. They are then much deceived, who say that godly men ought: to have apathy and insensibility, (apatheian kai analgesian) lest they should resist the decree of God. 3. For I could wish, etc. He could not have expressed a greater ardour of love than by what he testifies here; for that is surely perfect love which refuses not to die for the salvation of a friend. But there is another word added, anathema, which proves that he speaks not only of temporal but of eternal death; and he explains its meaning when he says, from Christ, for it signifies a separation. And what is to be separated from Christ, but to be excluded from the hope of salvation? It was then a proof of the most ardent love, that Paul hesitated not to wish for himself that condemnation which he saw impending over the Jews, in order that he might deliver them. It is no objection that he knew that his salvation was based on the election of God, which could by no means fail; for as those ardent feelings hurry us on impetuously, so they see and regard nothing but the object in view. So Paul did not connect God's election with his wish, but the remembrance of that being passed by, he was wholly intent on the salvation of the Jews. Many indeed doubt whether this was a lawful desire; but this doubt may be thus removed: the settled boundary of love is, that it proceeds as far as conscience permits; [285] if then we love in God and not without God's authority, our love can never be too much. And such was the love of Paul; for seeing his own nation endued with so many of God's benefits, he loved God's gifts in them, and them on account of God's gifts; and he deemed it a great evil that those gifts should perish, hence it was that his mind being overwhelmed, he burst forth into this extreme wish. [286] Thus I consent not to the opinion of those who think that Paul spoke these words from regard to God only, and not to men; nor do I agree with others, who say, that without any thought of God, he was influenced only by love to men: but I connect the love of men with a zeal for God's glory. I have not, however, as yet explained that which is the chief thing, -- that the Jews are here regarded as they were adorned with those singular tokens, by which they were distinguished from the rest of mankind. For God had by his covenant so highly exalted them, that by their fall, the faithfulness and truth of God himself seemed also to fail in the world: for that covenant would have thus become void, the stability of which was promised to be perpetual, as long as the sun and moon should shine in heaven. ( Psalm 72:7 .) So that the abolition of this would have been more strange, than the sad and ruinous confusion of the whole world. It was not therefore a simple and exclusive regard for men: for though it is better that one member should perish than the whole body; it was yet for this reason that Paul had such a high regard for the Jews, because he viewed them as bearing the character, and, as they commonly say, the quality of an elect people; and this will appear more evident, as we shall soon see, from what follows. The words, my kinsmen according to the flesh, though they contain nothing new, do yet serve much for amplification. For first, lest any one should think that he willingly, or of his own accord, sought cause of quarrel with the Jews, he intimates, that he had not put off the feeling of kindred, so as not to be affected with the destruction of his own flesh. And secondly, since it was necessary that the gospel, of which he was the preacher, should go forth from Sion, he does not in vain pronounce an eulogy in so many words on his own kindred. For the qualifying expression, according to the flesh, is not in my view added for the sake of extenuation, as in other places, but, on the contrary, for the sake of expressing his faith: for though the Jews had disowned Paul, he yet concealed not the fact, that he had sprung from that nation, the election of whom was still strong in the root, though the branches had withered. What Budoeus says of the word anathema, is inconsistent with the opinion of Chrysostom, who makes anathema and anathema, to be the same. 4. Who are Israelites, etc. Here the reason is now more plainly given, why the destruction of that people caused him so much anguish, that he was prepared to redeem them by his own death, namely because they were Israelites; for the relative pronoun is put here instead of a causative adverb. In like manner this anxiety took hold on Moses, when he desired that he should be blotted out of the book of life, rather than that the holy and chosen race of Abraham should be reduced to nothing. ( Exodus 32:32 .) Then in addition to his kind feeling, he mentions also other reasons, and those of a higher kind, which made him to favor the Jews, even because the Lord had, as it were, by a kind of privilege, so raised them, that they were separated from the common order of men: and these titles of dignity were testimonies of love; for we are not wont to speak thus favorably, but of those whom we love. And though by their ingratitude they rendered themselves unworthy to be esteemed on account of these gifts of God, yet Paul continued justly to respect them, that he might teach us that the ungodly cannot so contaminate the good endowments of God, but that they always deserve to be praised and admired: at the same time, those who abuse them acquire thereby nothing but a greater obloquy. But as we are not to act in such a manner as to contemn, through a detestation of the ungodly, the gifts of God in them; so, on the other hand, we must use prudence, lest by our kind esteem and regard for them we make them proud, and especially lest our praises bear the appearance of flattery. But let us imitate Paul, who conceded to the Jews their privileges in such a manner, that he afterwards declared that they were all of no worth without Christ. But it was not in vain that he mentioned this as one of their praises, -- that they were Israelites; for Jacob prayed for this as a great favor, that they should be called by his name. ( Genesis 48:16 .) Whose are the adoption, etc. The whole drift of Paul's discourse is to this purpose, -- that though the Jews by their defection had produced an ungodly divorce between God and themselves, yet the light of God's favor was not wholly extinguished, according to what he had also said in Romans 3:3 . They had indeed become unbelievers and had broken his covenant; but still their perfidy had not rendered void the faithfulness of God; for he had not only reserved for himself some remnant seed from the whole multitude, but had as yet continued, according to their hereditary right, the mime of a Church among them. But though they had already stripped themselves of these ornaments, so that it availed them nothing to be called the children of Abraham, yet as there was a danger, lest through their fault the majesty of the gospel should be depreciated among the Gentiles, Paul does not regard what they deserved, but covers their baseness and disgraceful conduct by throwing vails over them, until the Gentiles were fully persuaded, that the gospel had flowed to them from the celestial fountain, from the sanctuary of God, from an elect nation. For the Lord, passing by other nations, had selected them as a people peculiar to himself, and had adopted them as his children, as he often testifies by Moses and the prophets; and not content simply to give them the name of children, he calls them sometimes his first-begotten, and sometimes his beloved. So the Lord says in Exodus 4:22 , -- "My first-begotten son is Israel; let my son go, that he may serve me." In Jeremiah 31:9 , it is said, "I am become a Father to Israel, and Ephraim is my first-begotten:" and again, "Is not my son Ephraim precious to me? Is he not a delightful child? Hence troubled for him are my bowels, and I will yet pity him." By these words he means, not only to set forth his kindness towards the people of Israel, but rather to exhibit the efficacy of adoption, through which the promise of the celestial inheritance is conveyed. Glory means the excellency into which the Lord had raised up that people above all other nations, and that in many and various ways, and especially by dwelling in the midst of them; for besides many other tokens of his presence, he exhibited a singular proof of it in the ark, where he gave responses, and also heard his people, that he might show forth his power in helping them: and for this reason it was called "the glory of God." ( 1 Samuel 4:22 .) [287] As he has distinguished here between covenants [288] and promises, we may observe this difference, -- that a covenant is that which is expressed in distinct and accustomed words, and contains a mutual stipulation, as that which was made with Abraham; but promises are what we meet with everywhere in Scripture; for when God had once made a covenant with his ancient people, he continued to offer, often by new promises, his favor to them. It hence follows, that promises are to be traced up to the covenant as to their true source; in the same manner as the special helps of God, by which he testifies his love towards the faithful, may be said to flow from the true fountain of election. And as the law was nothing more than a renewal of the covenant, and more fully sanctioned the remembrance of it, legislation, or the giving of the law, seems to be here peculiarly applied to the things which the law decreed: for it was no common honor conferred on the Jewish people, that they had God as their lawgiver. For if some gloried in their Solons and Lycurguses, how much more reason was there to glory in the Lord? of this you have an account in Deuteronomy 4:32 . By worship he understands that part of the law in which the legitimate manner of worshipping God is prescribed, such as rites and ceremonies. These ought to have been deemed lawful on account of God's appointment; without which, whatever men devise is nothing but a profanation of religion. 5. Whose are the fathers, etc. It is indeed of some importance to be descended from saints and men beloved of God, since God promised to the godly fathers mercy with regard to their children, even to thousand generations, and especially in the words addressed to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as we find in Genesis 17:4 , and in other passages. It matters not, that this by itself, when separated from the fear of God and holiness of life, is vain and useless: for we find the same to have been the case as to worship and glory, as it is evident everywhere in the prophets, especially in Isaiah 1:11 ; Isaiah 60:1 ; and also in Jeremiah 7:4 . But, as God dignified these things, when joined with attention to godliness, with some degree of honor, he justly enumerated them among the privileges of the Jews. They are indeed said to be the heirs of the promises for this very reason, -- because they descended from the fathers. ( Acts 3:25 .) From whom, is Christ, etc. They who apply this to the fathers, as though Paul meant only to say that Christ had descended from the fathers, have no reason to allege: for his object was to close his account of the pre-eminence of the Jews by this encomium, -- that Christ proceeded from them; for it was not a thing to be lightly esteemed, to have been united by a natural relationship with the Redeemer of the world; for if he had honored the whole human race, in joining himself to us by a community of nature, much more did he honor them, with whom he had a closer bond of union. It must at the same time be always maintained, that when this favor of being allied by kindred is unconnected with godliness, it is so far from being an advantage, that on the contrary it leads to a greater condemnation. But we have here a remarkable passage, -- that in Christ two natures are in such a manner distinguished, that they are at the same time united in the very person of Christ: for by saying that Christ had descended from the Jews, he declared his real humanity. The words according to the flesh, which are added, imply that he had something superior to flesh; and here seems to be an evident distinction made between humanity and divinity. But he at last connects both together, where he says, that the Christ, who had descended from the Jew's according to the flesh, is God blessed for ever. We must further observe, that this ascription of praise belongs to none but only to the true and eternal God; for he declares in another place, ( 1 Timothy 1:17 ,) that it is the true God alone to whom honor and glory are due. They who break off this clause from the previous context, that they may take away from Christ so clear a testimony to his divinity, most presumptuously attempt, to introduce darkness in the midst of the clearest light; for the words most evidently mean this, -- Christ, who is from the Jews according to the flesh, is God blessed for ever [289] And I doubt not, but that Paul, who had to contend hard with a reproach urged against him, did designedly raise up his own mind to the contemplation of the eternal glory of Christ; nor did he do this so much for his own sake individually, as for the purpose of encouraging others by his example to raise up their thoughts. Footnotes: [283] The connection seems to be this: he had been speaking of the impossibility of separating God's people from the protecting influence and preserving power of his love; he had clearly shown, that no divorce or separation can take place through any possible circumstances. Then the Jews might say, "If this be true, then we are safe, we are still God's people." Hence he proceeds to remove this objection, and in order to prepare their mind to receive what he is going to say and to prove, he speaks first of his deep concern for their welfare: and then he resumes the doctrine he touched upon in Romans 8:28 , 29, and 30, and illustrates it by a reference to the past dealings of God with the Jews, and proves it by passages from the ancient Prophets. He shows that God's people are the called according to his purpose, and not all who wear the outward symbol of his covenant -- Ed. [284] "Idem valet ac secundum Christum, -- it is the same with According to Christ;" "lego en Christo -- I speak in Christ," that is, as a Christian; to be in Christ and to be a Christian is the same. This idea bears on the import of the passage more than any other. It is as though he said, "Though I am in Christ or a Christian, yet I tell you this as the truth or the fact, and I have the testimony of conscience enlightened by the Spirit, that I have great grief and unceasing sorrow on your account." The Jews had the impression that the Apostle, having become the follower of Christ, must have necessarily entertained hatred towards them, and must have therefore felt no concern for them; for this is really the case with all real apostates, that is, with those who leave the truth for error, but not with them who leave error for the truth. To obviate this impression seems to have been the object here. How the idea of an oath comports with what follows it is difficult to see. It is no argument to say that what is here means the same as in Matthew 5:34 , where it follows the verb "to swear." There is a passage similar to this in Ephesians 4:17 ; but en kurio there clearly signifies "by the Lord's authority." We may add, that to swear by Christ would have had no influence on the Jews. -- Ed. [285] "Ut ad aras usque procedat." Ainsworth gives a similar phrase and explains its reason, "Usque ad aras amicus -- As far as conscience permits," Gell., because in swearing they held the horns of the altar. -- Ed. [286] Most of those who take this view of the passage express the implied condition more distinctly than is done here. They have regarded the wish in this sense, "I could wish were it right or lawful." So thought Chrysostom, Photius, Theophlylact, Luther, Parcus, Beza, Estius, Lightfoot, Witsius, Mode, Whitby, and others. The words of Photius are given by Wolfius, "He says not, I wish to be separated, but I could wish, that is, were it possible -- euchomen an tout estin ei dunaton en," Stuart and Hodge adopt the same view. "It was a conditional wish," says Pareus, "like that of Christ in Matthew 26:39 . Christ knew and Paul knew that it could not be granted, and yet both expressed their strong desire." See Exodus 32:32 Almost all critics agree that the Vulgate is wrong in rendering the verb optabam -- "I did wish," as though the Apostle referred to the time, as Ambrose supposed, when he was a Pharisee; but this is wholly inconsistent with the tenor of the passage. Erasmus, Grotius, Beza, and most others regard the verb as having an optative meaning; an being understood after it, as the case is with eboulomen in Acts 25:22 , and ethelon in Galatians 4:20 There are two other opinions which deserve notice. The first is, that "anathema" here means excommunication, and that "from Christ" signifies from his Church, Christ the head being taken for his body the Church, as in 1 Corinthians 12:12 , and in Galatians 3:27 , according to the manner of the Hebrews, as Grotius says, who called the wife by the name of the husband, Isaiah 4:1 . This is the view taken by Hammond, Grotius, and some of the Lutheran divines. But the word "anathema" has not in Scripture this meaning, though in after-ages it had attained it both in the Church and among the Rabbins. In the New Testament it occurs only here and in Acts 23:14 ; 1 Corinthians 12:3 ; 1 Corinthians 16:22 ; and Galatians 1:8 , 9; and the verb anathematizo is found in Mark 14:71 ; Acts 23:12 , 14, 21; and with kata prefixed in Matthew 26:74 . The corresponding word in Hebrew, hrm, rendered "anathema" by the Septuagint, means two things: what is separated for a holy purpose and wholly devoted to God, incapable of being redeemed, Leviticus 27:28 ; and what is set apart and devoted to death or destruction, Joshua 6:17 ; Ezra 10:8 . It never means excommunication, but cutting off by death. Compare Exodus 22:20 , and Deuteronomy 13:1-11 . It has hence been applied to designate a man that is execrable and accursed, deserving death. So the Apostle uses it in 1 Corinthians 16:22 , and Galatians 1:8 , 9 The other view is more in accordance with the meaning of the term. It is thought that "anathema" means an ignominious death, and that of one apparently separated from Christ; or that he wished to be made "an anathema" by Christ, or for the sake of Christ, or after Christ, that is, his example. The words apo tou Christou create all the difficulty in this case. This is the explanation given by Jerome, Locke, Limborch, Doddridge, and Scott The first meaning, however, as materially given by Calvin, is the most obvious and natural. Both Haldane and Chalmers follow the Vulgate, and put the clause in a parenthesis, as expressing the Apostle's wish when unconverted; but there is altogether an incongruity in the terms he employs to express this wish; he surely would not have said that he wished to be separated from Christ as an accursed thing, for that is the meaning of anathema; for while he was a Pharisee he deemed it a privilege and an honour even to persecute Christ. And we cannot suppose that the Apostle would now describe his former wish in terms unsuitable to what it really was, but as he now regarded it. -- Ed. [287] Vitriaga thinks that "the glory" was the pillar of fire and the cloud in the wilderness: but Beza, Grotius, and Hammond agree with Calvin, that the ark is meant. See Psalm 78:61 . It seems to refer to those manifestations made in the tabernacle, and afterwards in the temple, by peculiar brightness or splendour. See Exodus 40:34 ; and I Kings 8:11. This splendour or glory signified God's presence, a privilege peculiar to the Israelites. -- Ed. [288] Why he mentions "covenants," hai diathokai, in the plural number, has been variously accounted for, -- "there were various things included -- the land of Canaan, prosperity, and the priesthood, -- there were three laws -- the moral, ceremonial, and judicial, -- there were several repetitions of the covenant made to the patriarchs;" but if we read Galatians 3:17 , we shall see the true reason, for the Apostle there makes a distinct difference between the Abrahamic and the Mosaic covenant; but both these belonged to the Jews. See also Ephesians 2:12 . -- Ed. [289] Stuart has in a most convincing manner vindicated the true and obvious meaning of this clause. There is no reading of any authority, nor any early version, that affects the genuineness of the received text: and it is amazing what ingenuity has been exercised by various critics to evade the plain construction of the passage, -- a remarkable instance of the debasing power of preconceived notions. It is somewhat singular too, that some who professed at least the doctrine of Christ's divinity, such as Erasmus, Whitby, and Locke, have attempted to make changes in the text, and those for the most part conjectural, by which the obvious meaning is wholly altered. It is very clearly shown by Stuart, that the very position of the words, and their connection with the context, will admit of no other construction than that which our version contains. It is well known, that in Hebrew the word "blessed" is always placed before "God," or Jehovah, when it is an ascription of praise; and it appears that the Septuagint has in more than thirty instances followed the same order, and, indeed, in every instance except one, ( Psalm 68:19 ,) and that evidently a typographical mistake. The same is the case with all the examples in the New Testament. So that if the phrase here was a doxology, it must have been written eulogetos ho Theos. In the Welsh language, which in many of its idioms is identically the same with the Hebrew, the order of the words is the same: when it is a doxology, the word "blessed" invariably precedes the word "God;" and when otherwise it follows it. The opinion of Chrysostom on this sentence, to which Erasmus attaches some importance, is of no value whatever, as he did not understand Hebrew; and Paul, for the most part, wrote as a Hebraist. The participle on, being put for esti, is what is common in Hebrew and in the New Testament. See a remarkable instance of two participles and a verb in the middle, in Revelation 1:4 . It has been said, that "amen" unsuitably follows a declarative sentence; but see an instance in Romans 1:25 It is justly observed by Stuart, that the context requires the application of this sentence to Christ, as otherwise there would be no antithesis to the words "according to the flesh." -- Ed.

I say {1} the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost, (1) The third part of this epistle, which goes to the twelfth chapter, in which Paul ascends to the higher causes of faith: and first of all, because he purposed to speak much of the casting off of the Jews, he uses a declaration, saying by a double or triple oath, and by witnessing of his great desire towards their salvation, his singular love towards them, and in addition granting to them all their privileges.

I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, my conscience also bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost, I say the truth, … — As any one is more assured of his own salvation, the more he desireth the salvation of others. Charity is no churl; as we see here in Paul.

I say the truth in Christ, I lie not,.... The apostle being about to discourse concerning predestination, which he had mentioned in the preceding chapter, and to open the springs and causes of it, and also concerning the induration and rejection of the Jewish nation; he thought it necessary to preface his account of these things with some strong assurances of his great attachment to that people, and his affection for them, lest it should be thought he spoke out of prejudice to them; and well knowing in what situation he stood in with them, on account of his preaching up the abrogation of the ceremonial law, and how difficult it might be for him to obtain their belief in what he should say, he introduces it with a solemn oath, "I say the truth in Christ, I lie not": which refers not to what he had said in the foregoing chapter, but to what he was going to say; and is all one as if he had said, as I am in Christ, a converted person, one born again, and renewed in the spirit of my mind, what I am about to speak is truth, and no lie; or I swear by Christ the God of truth, who is truth itself, and I appeal to him as the true God, the searcher of hearts, that what I now deliver is truth, and nothing but truth, and has no falsehood in it. This both shows that the taking of an oath is lawful, and that Christ is truly God, by whom only persons ought to swear: my conscience bearing me witness. The apostle, besides his appeal to Christ, calls his conscience to witness to the truth of his words; and this is as a thousand witnesses; there is in every man a conscience, which unless seared as with a red hot iron, will accuse or excuse, and bear a faithful testimony to words and actions; and especially a conscience enlightened, cleansed, and sanctified by the Spirit of God, as was the apostle's: hence he adds, in the Holy Ghost; meaning either that his conscience was influenced and directed by the Holy Ghost in what he was about to say; or it bore witness in and with the Holy Ghost, and the Holy Ghost with that; so that here are three witnesses called in, Christ, conscience, and the Holy Ghost; and by three such witnesses, his words must be thought to be well established.

Being about to discuss the rejection of the Jews and the calling of the Gentiles, and to show that the whole agrees with the sovereign electing love of God, the apostle expresses strongly his affection for his people. He solemnly appeals to Christ; and his conscience, enlightened and directed by the Holy Spirit, bore witness to his sincerity. He would submit to be treated as accursed, to be disgraced, crucified; and even for a time be in the deepest horror and distress; if he could rescue his nation from the destruction about to come upon them for their obstinate unbelief. To be insensible to the eternal condition of our fellow-creatures, is contrary both to the love required by the law, and the mercy of the gospel. They had long been professed worshippers of Jehovah. The law, and the national covenant which was grounded thereon, belonged to them. The temple worship was typical of salvation by the Messiah, and the means of communion with God. All the promises concerning Christ and his salvation were given to them. He is not only over all, as Mediator, but he is God blessed for ever.

CHAPTER 9 Ro 9:1-33. The Bearing of the Foregoing Truths upon the Condition and Destiny of the Chosen People—Election—The Calling of the Gentiles. Too well aware that he was regarded as a traitor to the dearest interests of his people (Ac 21:33; 22:22; 25:24), the apostle opens this division of his subject by giving vent to his real feelings with extraordinary vehemence of protestation. 1, 2. I say the truth in Christ—as if steeped in the spirit of Him who wept over impenitent and doomed Jerusalem (compare Ro 1:9; 2Co 12:19; Php 1:8). my conscience bearing me witness in the Holy Ghost—"my conscience as quickened, illuminated, and even now under the direct operation of the Holy Ghost." Romans 9:1-5 Paul professeth an unfeigned sorrow for the Jewish nation, Romans 9:6-13 but proveth by instance from Scripture that the promise to Abraham did not necessarily include all his descendants, Romans 9:14-18 asserting that there is no unrighteousness in God’s bestowing his unmerited bounty on whom he pleaseth, Romans 9:19-24 and that he was unquestionably free to suspend his judgments, where deserved, either for the more signal display of his power in taking vengeance on some, or of his mercy in calling others to glory. Romans 9:26-29 The calling of the Gentiles, and rejection of the Jews, foretold. Romans 9:30 ,31 Accordingly, the Gentiles have attained the righteousness of faith, which the Jews refused. Romans 9:32 ,33 The cause of such refusal. The apostle being about to treat of the rejection of the Jews and the calling of the Gentiles, before he enters upon it, he premiseth a preface, to prepare the minds of the Jews to a patient reading or hearing the same; and in this preface, he solemnly protesteth his love to his nation, and his hearty grief for their rejection, that so it might the better appear, that these things were not written out of any spleen or malice, but out of conscience towards God and the truth. I say truth in Christ; or, by Christ: so the word in is taken, Matthew 5:34-36 . This is the form of an oath, which the Scripture elsewhere useth in matters of importance: see Genesis 22:16 Daniel 12:7 Ephesians 4:17 . I lie not; this is added for confirmation, or to gain the greater credit to what he said or swore. It was the manner of the Hebrews, to an affirmative to add a negative: see 1 Samuel 3:18 John 1:20 . My conscience also bearing me witness; as being for this purpose placed in man by God, and is instead of a thousand witnesses. In the Holy Ghost; i.e. in the presence of the Holy Ghost, who is privy to what I say, and who is a witness also to the truth thereof: or, as some, by the guidance of the Holy Ghost, who cannot lie.

I say the truth - In what I am about to affirm respecting my attachment to the nation and people. In Christ - Most interpreters regard this as a form of an oath, as equivalent to calling Christ to witness. It is certainly to be regarded, in its obvious sense, as an appeal to Christ as the searcher of the heart, and as the judge of falsehood. Thus, the word translated "in" ἐν en is used in the form of an oath in Matthew 5:34-36 ; Revelation 10:6 , Greek. We are to remember that the apostle was addressing those who had been Jews; and the expression has all the force of an oath "by the Messiah." This shows that it is right on great and solemn occasions, and in a solemn manner, and thus only, to appeal to Christ for the sincerity of our motives, and for the truth of what we say. And it shows further, that it is right to regard the Lord Jesus Christ as present with us, as searching the heart, as capable of detecting insincerity, hypocrisy, and perjury, and as therefore divine. My conscience - Conscience is that act or judgment of the mind by which we decide on the lawfulness or unlawfulness of our actions, and by which we instantly approve or condemn them. It exists in every man, and is a strong witness to our integrity or to our guilt. Bearing me witness - Testifying to the truth of what Isay. In the Holy Ghost - He does not say that he speaks the truth by or in the Holy Spirit, as he had said of Christ; but that the conscience pronounced its concurring testimony by the Holy Spirit; that is, conscience as enlightened and influenced by the Holy Spirit. It was not simply natural conscience, but it was conscience under the full influence of the Enlightener of the mind and Sanctifier of the heart. The reasons of this solemn asseveration are probably the following: (1) His conduct and his doctrines had led some to believe that he was an apostate, and had lost his love for his countrymen. He had forsaken their institutions, and devoted himself to the salvation of the Gentiles. He here shows them that it was from no lack of love to them. (2) the doctrines which he was about to state and defend were of a similar character; he was about to maintain that no small part of his own countrymen, notwithstanding their privileges, would be rejected and lost. In this solemn manner, therefore, he assures them that this doctrine had not been embraced because he did not love them, but because it was solemn, though most painful truth. He proceeds to enumerate their privileges as a people, and to show to them the strength and tenderness of his love.

With the eighth chapter, the discussion of the plan of salvation, and of its immediate consequences, was brought to a close. The consideration of the calling of the Gentiles, and the rejection of the Jews, commences with the ninth, and extends to the end of the eleventh. Paul, in the first place, shows that God may consistently reject the Jews, and extend the blessings of the Messiah’s reign to the Gentiles, 9:1-24; and in the second place, that he has already declared that such was his purpose, Romans 9:25-29 . Agreeably to these prophetic declarations, the apostle announces that the Jews were cast off and the Gentiles called; the former having refused submission to the righteousness of faith, and the latter having been obedient, Romans 9:30-33 . In the tenth chapter, Paul shows the necessity of this rejection of the ancient people of God, and vindicates the propriety of extending the invitation of the gospel to the heathen, in accordance with the predictions of the prophets. In the eleventh, he teaches that this rejection of the Jews was neither total nor final. It was not total, inasmuch as many of the Jews of that generation believed; and it was not final, as the period approached when the great body of that nation should acknowledge Jesus as the Messiah, and be reingrafted into their own olive tree. So that we have in this and the following chapters, 1st, Paul’s lamentation over the rejection of the Jews, is. Romans 9:1-5 . 2nd, The proof that God had the right to deal thus with his ancient people, 9:6-29. 3rd, The proof that the guilt of this rejection was on the Jews themselves, Romans 9:30-33 , 10:1-21. 4th, The consolation which the promises and revealed purposes of God afford in view of this sad event. Contents In entering on the discussion of the question of the rejection of the jews, and the calling of the gentiles, the apostle assures his brethren of his love for them, and of his respect for their national privileges, Romans 9:1-5 . That his doctrine on this subject was true, he argues, First, because it was not inconsistent with the promises of god, who is perfectly sovereign in the distribution of his favors, vv. 6-24. And Secondly, because it was distinctly predicted in their own scriptures, Romans 9:25-29 . The conclusion from this reasoning is stated in Romans 9:20-33 . The jews are rejected for their unbelief, and the gentiles admitted to the messiah’s kingdom. Romans 9:1-5 As the subject about to be discussed was of all others the most painful and offensive to his Jewish brethren, the apostle approaches it with the greatest caution. He solemnly assures them that he was grieved at heart on their account; and that his love for them was ardent and disinterested, Romans 9:1-3 . Their peculiar privileges he acknowledged and respected. They were highly distinguished by all the advantages connected with the Old Testament dispensation, and, above all, by the fact that the Messiah was, according to the flesh, a Jew, Romans 9:4 , Romans 9:5 . Romans 9:1 I say the truth in Christ, I lie not, etc. There are three ways in which the words in Christ , or by Christ , may here be understood. 1. They may be considered as part of the formula of an oath, I (swear) by Christ , I speak the truth . But in oaths the preposition πρός , and not ἐν , is used. In a few cases, indeed, where a verb of swearing is used, the latter preposition occurs but not otherwise. In addition to this objection, it may be urged that no instance occurs of Paul’s appealing to Christ in the form of an oath. The case which looks most like such an appeal is 1 Timothy 5:21 , “I charge thee before God, and the Lord Jesus Christ, and the elect angels,” etc. But it is evident from the mention of the angels, that this is not of the nature of an oath. Paul merely wishes to urge Timothy to act as in the presence of God, Christ, and angels. This interpretation, therefore, is not to be approved. 2. The words in Christ may be connected with the pronoun I . ‘I in Christ,’ i.e., as a Christian, or, ‘In the consciousness of my union with Christ, I declare,’ etc. So the words are used in a multitude of cases, “You in Christ,” “I in Christ,” “We in Christ,” being equivalent to you , I , or we , as Christians , i.e. considered as united to Christ. See 1 Corinthians 1:30 , “Of him are ye in Christ,” i.e. ‘By him ye are Christians, or united to Christ;’ Romans 16:3 , Romans 16:7 , Romans 16:9 ; 1 Corinthians 3:1 , and frequently elsewhere. 3. The words may be used adverbially, and be translated after a Christian manner . This also is a frequent use of this and analogous phrases. See 1 Corinthians 7:39 , “Only in the Lord,” i.e. only after a religious manner, in the Lord being equivalent with in a manner becoming or suited to the Lord . Romans 16:22 , “I salute you in the Lord.” Philippians 2:29 , “Receive him, therefore, in the Lord;” Ephesians 6:1 ; Colossians 3:18 . The sense of the passage is much the same, whether we adopt the one or the other of the last two modes of explanation. Paul means to say that he speaks in a solemn and religious manner, as a Christian, conscious of his intimate relation to Christ. I say the truth, and lie not . This mode of assertion, first affirmatively, and then negatively, is common in the Scriptures. “Thou shalt die and not live,” Isaiah 38:1 . “He confessed, and denied not,” John 1:20 . There is generally something emphatic in this mode of speaking. It was a solemn and formal assertion of his integrity which Paul here designed to make. My conscience also bearing me witness; συμμαρτυρούσης , my conscience bearing witness with my words. In the Holy Ghost. These words are not to be taken as an oath, nor are they to be connected with the subject of οὐ ψεύδομαι , ‘ I , instructed, or influenced by the Holy Ghost, lie not;” but rather with συμμαρτυρούσης , his conscience bore this testimony guided by the Holy Spirit, Spiritu Sancto duce et moderatore , as Beza expresses it.