CONTENTS.
THIS chapter may be divided into three parts. The first contains a brief statement and refutation of the Jewish objections to the apostle’s reasoning, vs. 1—8. The second, a confirmation of his doctrine from the testimony of Scripture; and a formal drawing out and declaration of his conclusion, that by the works of the law no flesh living can be justified before God, vs. 9—20. The third, an exposition of the gospel method of justification, vs. 21—31.
ROMANS III. 1—8.
ANALYSIS.
THE first objection to Paul’s reasoning here presented is, that according to his doctrine the Jew has no advantage over the Gentile, ver. 1. The apostle denies the correctness of this inference from what he had said, and admits that the Jews have great advantages over all other people, ver. 2. The second objection is, that God having promised to be the God of the Jews, their unfaithfulness, even if admitted, does not release him from his engagements, or make his promise of no effect, ver. 3. Paul, in answer, admits that the faithfulness of God must not be called in question, let what will happen, vs. 4, 5; but he shows that the principle on which the Jews expected exemption from punishment, viz. because their unrighteousness commended the righteousness of God, was false. This he proves by showing first, that if their principle was correct, God could not punish any one, Gentile or Jew, vs. 5—7; and secondly, that it would lead to this absurdity, that it is right to do evil that good may come, ver. 8.
COMMENTARY.
VERSE 1. What then is the advantage of the Jew? The conclusion at which the apostle had arrived at the end of the preceding chapter was, that the Jews, no less than the Gentiles, are to be judged according to their works, and by their knowledge of the divine will; and that being thus judged, they are exposed to condemnation, notwithstanding their circumcision and all their other advantages. The most obvious objection in the mind of a Jew to this conclusion must have been, that it was inconsistent with the acknowledged privileges and superiority of his nation. This objection the apostle here presents; the answer follows in the next verse: Περισσός, over and above, abundant; and in a comparative sense, better, and substantively, as in the present instance, excellence, preëminence. What is the preeminence or superiority of the Jew? Comp. Eccles. vi. 11, τί περισσὸν τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ; what advantage has man? The second question in this verse, what is the benefit of circumcision? is by some considered as a repetition of the first; circumcision being taken as the mere sign of Judaism. ‘What is the advantage of the Jew? or what is the benefit of Judaism?’ But circumcision as a rite was so important in the estimation of the Jews, and is made so prominent by the apostle in the preceding context, that it is better to consider the second question as referring to the rite itself.
VERSE 2. Much, in every way. The answer to the objection implied in the preceding verse, is a denial of its correctness as an inference from the apostle’s reasoning. It does not follow, because the Jews are to be judged according to their works, that there is no advantage in being the peculiar people of God, having a divine revelation, &c. Πρῶτον μὲν γάρ. These words are rendered by Beza, primarium enim (illud est;) comp. Luke xix. 47, Acts v. 2. Calvin says, “πρῶτον significat præcipue vel præsertim, hoc sensu, Etsi unum istud esset, quod habent Dei oracula sibi commissa, satis valere debet ad eorum dignitatem.” Our translators adopt the same view. But to both of the interpretations the particle γάρ furnishes an objection. The third and simplest view is, that the words in question mean first, in the first place, as in 1 Cor. xi. 18; γάρ is then namely, for example. That the enumeration is not carried on, is no serious objection to this explanation, as we have other examples of the same kind. See chap. i. 8. Because they were entrusted with the oracles of God. The subject of ἐπιστεύθησαν, viz. Ἰουδαῖοι is implied by the connection; τὰ λόγια is the accusative; comp. Gal. ii. 7: πεπίστευμαι τὸ εὐαγγέλιον, 1 Cor. ix. 17, 1 Thess. ii. 4. Some, as Theodoret, Beza, &c., understand by τὰ λόγια τοῦ Θεοῦ, the law; others, as Grotius, Tholuck, &c., the Messianic promises; others, as Calvin, Rosenmüller, De Wette, the whole Scriptures. In favour of this last is the usage of the phrase which in the Old Testament is used for the revelation of God in general, and in the New Testament, for any divine communication. Heb. v. 12, 1 Pet. iv. 11. The words therefore are general in their meaning, and there is nothing in the context to limit them; for the apostle is speaking of the treasure committed to the safe custody of the Jews; that deposit of divine knowledge by which they were distinguished from all other nations. Here, as in innumerable other places, the sacred writers of the New Testament use forms of expression which clearly imply that they regarded the sacred writings of the Jews as really the word of God.