If Paul means that there is no use in being a Jew or in circumcision, why was that nation called, and why was circumcision given? How does Paul solve this problem? By the same means as he did before: he speaks not of their praises but of the benefits of God.

Even though the oracles of God are now entrusted to the Gentiles as well, they were first entrusted to the Jews, as Paul says. Is he speaking here of the letters and the books or of the meaning and the general gist of the law? For we see many Jews who from infancy to old age never stop studying, yet they never come to a knowledge of the truth. How can it be true that they have some advantage in having been entrusted with the oracles of God first, when they do not understand what they are saying or the things about which they are making assertions?^[1] . . . It must be understood that these things are being said about Moses, the prophets and others like them, to whom the oracles of God were entrusted, because there can be no doubt that they were Jews and that they had the circumcision. It would also apply to anyone who was wise, an intelligent listener or a gifted counselor. These the Lord is said to have removed from Jerusalem because he was offended by the ungodliness of the people.^[2] . . . Even the apostles of Christ and Paul himself, the vessel of election, came from the Jews and from the circumcision. He had far more in every way than those whom he taught who were of the Gentiles. For the oracles of God were entrusted to the Jews.

Note moreover that Paul says that the oracles of God were entrusted to the Jews, not merely the letter of the text. So it is possible for us to understand that those who read but do not understand, as well as those who read but do not believe, have had only the letter entrusted to them, of which the apostle says: The letter kills.^[3] But the oracles of God are entrusted to those who understand and believe what Moses wrote and who believe in Christ, as the Lord said: If you believed Moses you would believe me, for he wrote of me.^[4]

But if the Jew has received more in receiving the letter and something more in the oracles of God, does this mean that those of the Gentiles who have come to Christ are somehow left out? Or is there some way in which they have more than the Jews? Listen to what the Lord says to the Gentile centurion who believed: Truly I say to you, I have not found such faith even in Israel.^[5] Therefore you see that when it comes to faith, the Gentiles have much more. . . . When it comes to the letter, the Jews have much more in every way, but when it comes to faith, it is the Gentiles who have much more.

When Paul says To begin with, he does not go on to list a second or third item. He means rather that what he begins with is comprehensive of all good things. For what could be better than to believe the words of God?

Although Paul says that there are many things which pertain to the honor and merit of the seed of Abraham, he records only one of them openly, because it is their greatest boast: They were judged worthy to receive the law, by which they learned to distinguish right from wrong. Only after that was it possible for the value of other things to be understood. But as far as the Jews according to the flesh are concerned (that is, the unbelievers among them), Paul shows that the witness of their race is of no advantage to them. But so as not to appear to be treating them all, including the believers among them, badly, he teaches that the law is very useful to Jewish believers, because they are children of Abraham.

For it was to them that the oracles of God were entrusted. It is by the merits of their ancestors that they received the law and were called God’s people. . . . Egypt was hit by different plagues because of the wrongs which it did to them.^[1] They dined on heavenly manna;^[2] they were a terror to all nations, as Rahab the harlot bore witness.^[3] Moreover, it was to them that Christ the Savior was promised for their sanctification. Therefore Paul says that in many ways it was useful to the Jews, because they were the children of Abraham and came before the Gentiles.

What does entrusted mean? It means that the Jews had the law put into their hands because God thought so highly of them that he entrusted them with oracles which came down from on high. I know that some people take the entrusted not of the Jews but of the oracles, as if to say: The law was believed in. But the context does not allow this interpretation. For in the first place he is saying this in order to accuse them and to show that, in spite of the fact that they enjoyed many blessings from above, they still showed great ingratitude. Then look at [verse 3]. If some of the Jews did not believe, how is it that some say that the oracles were believed in? So what does Paul mean? He means that God entrusted the oracles to the Jews, not that the Jews entrusted themselves to the oracles, for the context does not make sense otherwise. ^[1] [PSEUDO-]CONSTANTIUS: The Jews benefited not because they accepted circumcision in the flesh but because they believed the oracles of God. ^[1]

The Jews were at an advantage because the oracles of God were entrusted to them, while nothing was entrusted to the Gentiles.

The oracles of God were entrusted to the Jews, as we have said above, but some of them did not believe either God or his oracles. Those who did not believe were carnal, as Paul says elsewhere: The unspiritual man does not receive the gifts of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him.^[1] But their faithlessness does not nullify the faithfulness of God. By God’s faithfulness we understand either the faith which God had when he entrusted his oracles to them or the faith by which those who received the oracles from God believed in him. We are therefore reminded that their faithlessness has not nullified the faithfulness of God, which he has shown to us.

The sanctity and worth of the confessors (i. e., martyrs) was not shattered because the faith of a few of them was broken.

Paul says this because it was not foreordained that believing Jews would not be thought worthy of receiving what God had promised just because the others were unbelieving, for the promise was such that the gift of grace would be given to those who believed.^[1]

Therefore God is not put out because of the unbelief of the Jews and will grant eternal life to their believers, which he promised would be given to those who believed in Christ.^[2] Those who did not believe excluded themselves from consideration without doing the rest any injury. Having said this, Paul commends Jewish believers, because it was not their fault that many of their kinsmen refused to believe.

Let it be agreed, Paul says, that God is faithful and true in every case, whereas men have been judged as unfaithful and untrue, so that God by his goodness may conquer the self-righteousness of men by bestowing his own right-eousness upon them.

The unbelief of the Jews does not reflect badly on God but rather shows his honor and love of man to be all the greater, in that God is seen to have bestowed honor on people who would dishonor him. Look how he has revealed them to be guilty of misdeeds because of what they gloried in. The honor God showed to them was so great that even when he saw what the result of it would be, he did not withhold his good will toward them. But the Jews made the honors bestowed on them a means of insulting him who honored them.

Paul said: What if some of them did not believe? Wasn’t it clear that it was all of them who did not believe? If Paul had told the truth directly he might have appeared to be a severe and hostile accuser.

The faithfulness meant here is that to the promises made to Abraham, to whom it was said that in your seed all the nations will be blessed.^[1]

God knew in advance who would obey the law and who would break it. Therefore those who did not believe were unable to stand in the way of his blessings.^[1]

If one is to be righteous, one must keep the law in every particular, which is almost impossible for human nature to achieve. Therefore every one is a liar. For since every man is a liar, it follows that on that day when the Lord comes to judgment with men, only he will be justified in what he says. For his words are true in everything, because they are the words of truth.

It should also be understood that this saying, i.e., that every man is a liar, is taken from Psalm 115:28 . . . Now someone might object that if all men are liars, then Paul too, being a man, will also be a liar! But in that case David, who originally said it, would also be a liar, and what he said would be false, just because he was a liar. . . . The whole statement would thus become nonsense, which is absurd!^[1]

If every man is a liar and God alone is true, what else ought we servants and bishops of God to do except to reject human errors and lies and to remain in the truth of God, obeying the precepts of the Lord?

Even if all men loved a lie before the coming of the truth, the true God nevertheless remained just, holding fast to the things which were proper to God and fulfilling everything which was said that was fitting.

Does God tell a lie? He does not. It is impossible for God to tell a lie. Is this an impossibility because of some weakness? Certainly not! How could he be the cause of all things if there were something which he could not cause? What then is impossible to him? Nothing that is difficult for his power but only that which is contrary to his nature. It is impossible, it is said, for him to tell a lie.^[1] The impossibility comes not from weakness but from his power and greatness, for truth admits of no lie.

Because God is true, he gives what he has promised. To fail is human, for the times and the foolishness of nature make man unstable in that he does not have foreknowledge. But God, for whom there is no future, remains unchanging, as he says: I the Lord do not change.^[1] Therefore Paul says that all men are liars, and this is true. For nature is fallible and is not unreasonably called a liar. It may be a liar intentionally or accidentally, but we must not expect God to be like that, for he is perfect and full of good will and will accomplish what he has promised. He even confirms this by the prophetic oracle: Thou art justified in thy sentence and blameless in thy judgment.^[2]

Paul is saying something like this: Even if every one of the Jews was an unbeliever . . . God would only be the more justified. What does the word justified mean? It means that if there were a trial and an examination of the things which God had done for the Jews and also of what they had done to him, the victory would be with God, and all the right would be on his side. ^[1] [PSEUDO-]CONSTANTIUS: God is said to be true because he does not give to sinners what he has promised to the saints. ^[1]

If everyone who utters a lie has already destroyed his soul, and all of us are liars, are we all going to perish? What Scripture says . . . we should interpret as referring to heretics. . . . The doer of the deed has indeed killed his own soul, but the heretic—the liar—has killed as many souls as he has seduced.

God in himself is true; you in yourself are a liar—in him you can be true!

Every man means the majority. Paul’s opponents had quoted this text as if David had meant: For this reason have I sinned, that thou might appear just in judging me. But the true meaning is that God promised to punish sinners without showing favoritism and that some thought his delay in doing so amounted to a lie. God prevails when he judges the deeds of those from whom no one thought vengeance would ever be exacted. Or it may also mean that God has shown that he is concerned about mankind . . . and that he has overthrown those who wrongly suggest that he is not interested in human affairs.

Human beings are thus given over to their own free will. Hence they are divided into two groups: those who prefer the worship of God and those who take the opposite path and come to a dire end, corresponding to their choice.

Paul says that it is wrong to say that God is unjust for bringing wrath on men. For how will the one who judges the world be thought to be unjust, when his very title of Judge shows that he does nothing without judgment? And where there is judgment, it follows that there will be justice. For the words judge and judgment are both derived from justice.

The idea being expressed here does not accord with God or with the wisdom of God, but with man and with what has just been said, viz.: All men are liars.^[1]

But it is perfectly logical and right to say that justice is the enemy of unrighteousness, just as life is the enemy of death and light is the enemy of darkness. Therefore God, in whom is justice, is said to bring wrath on men, in whom unrighteousness dwells. For justice and unrighteousness are natural enemies. So how could God be regarded as unjust, simply because he is fighting unrighteousness?

David had sinned in the case of Uriah the Hittite.^[1] Because he knew that the promise would not be given to sinners, he pleaded that the righteousness of the words of God might overrule the judgment which said that the promise should not be given to sinners and that it might sanctify the penitent in order to give him what God had promised he would give to the righteous. To this Paul adds that . . . if God is justified because we are sinners, it would be wrong of him to pardon us on that account. If it can really be said that our wickedness is of some advantage to God, then there is some measure of truth in this reasoning. But it is dangerous to speak like that. God is not unjust if he judges, because our unrighteousness is of no benefit to him. It is not as if he would somehow be justified by our sins or as if he would somehow rejoice at our sins, by which he alone would then appear to be righteous.

This way of thinking suits men but not God, because it does not happen that God should ever be unjust, only man. Nor does our unrighteousness make God righteous if he gives to us sinners what he promised to the saints, for although we are sinners, we are reformed by repentance so that it is not as sinners but as those who have been cleansed^[2] that we are readied to receive the promise.

What does Paul mean? God honored the Jews, but they dishonored him. This gives God the victory and shows the greatness of his love toward man, in that he continued to honor them in spite of what they were like.

But if this is true of us (someone might say), why am I to be punished when I have contributed to God’s victory by dishonoring him? Paul answers this by a corresponding absurdity. In effect, he says that if this man were the cause of God’s victory and he was punished as a result, it was an injustice. But if God is not unjust and the man was punished, then he could not have been the cause of God’s victory. . . . For God’s justice far exceeds what we think of as justice and is based on other ineffable criteria.

Now the apostle begins to answer the objection. It is unjust if God punishes sinners merely in order to appear even more righteous. ^[1] DEPRIVED OF GOD’S PROMISES. [PSEUDO-]CONSTANTIUS: It is not that our wickedness increases God’s justice, but at that time when we come into judgment with God we shall be deprived of his promises as retribution for not having obeyed his commands. ^[1]

When adversities come . . . or when by God’s just judgment hostility, dryness or death is imposed, we should attribute this to our sins rather than to God’s injustice.

In this passage the word world means the people who are in this world, just as we read elsewhere that the whole world is in the power of the evil one.^[1]

It is true that it would not have been just if God had judged the world if its sins were of some benefit to him, so that whenever sinners received forgiveness at his nod, God would appear to be good. Then if they had not sinned, according to this reasoning, he would not appear to be righteous. For if they had not sinned there would be nothing to forgive, and God would not be good. But this kind of thinking is absurd! ^[1] RIGHTEOUSNESS ^[1]

By what righteousness will God condemn the unrighteous, if in your opinion human wickedness makes him even more righteous?

There are many kinds of religion in this world, many schools of philosophy, and many teachings which promote false assertions and are backed up with lying arguments. Those who invent them have a false reputation for wisdom—people of little or no authority. We should recognize them for what they are. Because of them many false statements are commonly accepted as true. The whole world, including religion, is now burdened with lying opinions. Even the elect are being led astray, if you can imagine that. The truth of God is now attacking and refuting every lie. Faith in God’s truth, God’s wisdom and God’s Word is undercutting all claims of false teaching. By each of these lies which had previously been asserted by men, the truth of God is abounding, by demonstrating their superficiality and by communicating the simple truth of faith in each and every case. In this way, says the apostle, the truth of God abounds through the falsehood of men.

The logic of this argument can easily tend toward the absurdity that good comes out of evil and that evil is the cause of good. In that case, one of two options follows: Either God is clearly unjust in punishing, or if he does not punish, then he gets his victory from our vices. Either of these conclusions is absurd.

These people twist the Scriptures when they read them by their tone of voice, in order to serve their own preferences. They alter some of the accents and punctuation marks in order to force wise and constructive precepts to support their taste for luxury.

This is an argument raised by unjust people against the Christian faith. They blaspheme us even more by suggesting that because we believe that God’s truthfulness abounds in the falsehood of men and that his justice is confirmed by our unrighteousness, we also believe that we should do evil so that good may come of it and that we should tell lies so that God’s truthfulness will shine out even more clearly because of it. But in claiming that this is what we think they are blaspheming us, as if these things were somehow the logical conclusion of our beliefs. But in fact the logic of our beliefs does not accept this line of reasoning, because we understand that God is a just and true judge.

This is why the apostle asked himself this question. The matter was raised by opponents, as if this were the meaning of the preaching of the forgiveness of sins—that they should do evil and good would come of it. That is, they should sin so that by forgiving their sins God should appear to be good, according to what has just been said above. Paul calls this blasphemy and rejects it as a bad interpretation of God’s teaching. Faith is not meant to encourage people to sin by preaching that God will ultimately be vindicated. Rather, it gives sinners a remedy so that having recovered their health they may live under the law of God and not sin again.

The people Paul is referring to here are Gentiles who thought in this way themselves. ^[1] WHETHER WITHOUT MY LIES GOD WOULD NOT APPEAR TO BE TRUE. [PSEUDO-]CONSTANTIUS: This is aimed at the Carpocratians, who are the worst of heretics and Gentiles to boot. The text is directed at those who say that unless they sin God’s grace will not abound, and unless they tell lies God will not appear to be true. The apostle answers them by saying that if what they think is true, then they should not be judged as sinners. But given that vengeance is wreaked on sinners, Paul says that they have not thought correctly. ^[1]

It is not true that, as some people think we say, the more evil we have done, the greater good we shall receive.

This was not the intention of the apostles’ teaching. On the contrary, they demanded that everyone abstain from all manner of wickedness.

Here it must be understood that the reference is to all men, whether they are under the written law [of Moses] or the natural law. For we understand that this applies to the Gentiles in the same way as we have already said above.^[1] When they begin to do the works of the law by nature and become a law for themselves, then they are reproached by their conscience for the things they do which are contrary to that law. For this reason it seems to me that those who have thought that the law of nature is the law of God and that the law of Moses is merely the written law are correct. If Paul was speaking of the written law, the law of Moses, when he said: Sin is not imputed when there is no law,^[2] neither Cain^[3] nor those who perished in the flood^[4] nor those who were burnt with fire at Sodom^[5] would have had their sins imputed to them. But since we see that not only did they have their sins imputed to them, they also suffered retribution for them, it is clear that Paul was speaking here of the natural law, which with the exception of the early years of childhood, is present in all men. For this reason he was quite right to say that all are under the power of sin. Whence it seems to me that the philosophers were right when they said that every mortal being on coming to the age of discretion, when by the entry of the natural law it might distinguish between good and evil, first of all discovers what is evil and afterward combats it by means of instructions, precepts and warnings, so as to move on to virtue. I think that Paul was agreeing with them when he said: But when the commandment came, sin sprang to life. ^[6] . . . It must not be thought that everyone is guilty of all the sins which are listed below. Rather, some are guilty of some of them, and others are guilty of others but in such a way that taken together the whole range of sinfulness is found in the human race.

Paul is saying: Why go on talking like this? For we have shown by the examples given that all, Jews and Gentiles alike, are guilty and that the law is being pursued in vain. For Paul first showed that the Gentiles are guilty according to the law of nature and also because they did not accept the law of Moses, for which reason their case is very dire indeed.^[1] Then he showed that the Jews were also guilty. While they appeared to be living under God’s law and defended their privilege by the merit of their ancestors, they in fact brought the grace of God into disrepute because they rejected the promise made to their ancestors.^[2]

Paul’s intention here is to say: Come then, after refuting their position, let us demonstrate the greatness of ours.

Paul finds no reason for saying that the Jews are better than others. . . . Both Jews and Gentiles are under sin—something we not only deduce by reason but also corroborate by the witness of the Jews themselves.

It may appear that there are other scriptural passages which seem to contradict this one by suggesting that some people were righteous, e.g., when it is said of Sodom in relation to Jerusalem: Sodom is righteous compared with you.^[1] But note carefully what Scripture actually says. It does not say that Sodom was righteous but that since Jerusalem had committed so many sins and what it was doing was so awful, Sodom appeared to be righteous by comparison. . . . For this reason, I am afraid that when I look at those of us who are in the church of God and who claim to follow his law and the commands of the gospel, there are not a few unbelievers who appear to be righteous by comparison.

That no one has done good, not even one, is a hard saying and difficult to understand. How is it possible that no one, Jew or Greek, has ever done anything good? Are we supposed to believe that nobody has ever shown hospitality, fed the hungry, clothed the naked, delivered the innocent from the hands of the powerful or done anything similar? It does not seem possible to me that Paul was intending to assert anything as incredible as that. I think that what he meant must be understood as follows. If someone lays the foundation for a house and puts up one or two walls or transports some building materials to the site, can he be said to have built the house, just because he has set to work on it? The man who will be said to have built the house is the one who has finished off each and every part of it. So I think that here the apostle is saying that no one has done good in the sense that no one has brought goodness to perfection and completion. If we ask ourselves who is truly good and who has done good perfectly, we shall find only him who said: I am the good shepherd, and again: The good shepherd lays down his life for the sheep.^[1]

From unrighteousness Paul goes on to list their evil deeds and even adds some worse ones, in order to show that there was no hope for them unless they cried out for the mercy of Christ, who forgives sins.

The psalm from which this quote is taken^[1] speaks of the fool. Paul shows that witness to the fool will be fulfilled particularly at the coming of Christ. When he appears, not one righteous person will be found.

Even the apostle Paul himself says that he knows in part and understands in part.^[1] So who is there who can make a claim that he understands? For however much he may understand, it will appear that he understands through a glass darkly and that only after he lays aside this earthly body will he see face to face.^[2] . . . Thus it is that no one understands, no one seeks for God. For as long as we are preoccupied with the cares of the body and seek the things of the body, we cannot seek God nor can we think his thoughts.

Seek God. Do not be like Asa the king of Judah, who after receiving many blessings from God fell so far that when he suffered lameness in his feet he would not seek God even though there was a prophet present.^[1]

One who does not understand does not seek. Or perhaps it is that one does not understand because one does not seek. One seeks for God by enquiring after his will. . . . The sinner has not known the will of his master.^[1] Know me, know my will, as the popular saying goes.

It seems to me that Scripture would not say that they had gone wrong if there had not been a time when they were standing in the right way. From this it appears that the original work of God in creating a rational nature was right and that this being was put in the right way by the gift of the Creator himself. But since he turned aside from this to sin, Scripture rightly says that he has gone wrong. Remember how Adam, the first man, was deceived by the serpent and turned aside from the right way of paradise to the fallen and crooked paths of this mortal life.^[1] As a consequence therefore, everyone who comes into this world in the following of Adam has gone wrong and become unworthy, just as he did.^[2]

One who does not look for support is bound to fall away and become useless for the work for which he was made. But if there is no one who does good, in what sense does Paul later on accuse those who devour God’s people and ruin the needy? For they were not God’s people if they did not do good. . . . But this has more to do with the exposition of the psalm than with the apostle’s concern here!

No one doubts that those who do not look to God for help are inclined to seek help from vain things, and vanity is an idol. Thus they become useless. Once that happens they cannot do good either, for those who have already fallen just go from bad to worse.

Paul did not treat this passage as if it were prophetic but rather because what David said about transgressors was still a good summary of what was going on in Paul’s day. Even now we still cite texts of this kind in our sermons, because what they say can be applied to our congregations.

This comes from Psalm 5[:10]. It seems to me that Paul is using this text to describe different types of human sin. The analogy: Every grave contains the uncleanness of the dead body inside. This is why our Lord said in the Gospel that the scribes and Pharisees were whited sepulchres. On the outside they appear to be beautiful, but on the inside they are full of all sorts of uncleanness.^[1] But in this passage Paul seems to be revealing something more than this about the sins of those whom he is talking about, because he says that they are an open grave, not one which is shut and covered up. Those who were called a closed sepulchre had enough sense of shame not to reveal their sins to the public. But these people are called an open grave because they have their uncleanness and impurity on display, and they are so accustomed to evil that . . . whenever they open their mouth, instead of speaking the Word of God, the word of life, they open their throat and speak the word of death, the word of the devil, not from the heart but from the grave. Whenever you see a man cursing and swearing, you may be sure that he is one of this type.

They use their tongues to deceive. To deceive means to say one thing and think another. I am not certain that even the justified and the elect are entirely free of this sin. Some commit it more and others less. The only one who is perfect in this respect is the one of whom it is written: He had committed no sin, and there was no deceit in his mouth.^[2] There may be someone who is careful and cautious enough to avoid major failings in this respect, but who is there who does not fall into this trap either from a sense of shame or from neglect? Occasionally things which should be done are overlooked because of forgetfulness, and in order for no blame to appear they are excused in a way which does not correspond to the facts. This is why Peter, realizing that these are all different types of deception, wrote this in his epistle: Put away all malice and all guile and insincerity and envy and all slander. Like newborn babes, long for pure spiritual milk, that by it you may grow up to salvation.^[3]

The bite of the serpent kills the body with its poison. Even a bite of a poisonous word may kill the soul by deception.^[4] This may be applied both to those who surround others with slanderous remarks and of those who, by heretical teaching tainted with the poison of the devil, deceive the souls of the simple.

Already chained to evil, they wanted if possible to devour the good, so that just as a sepulchre is open to receive corpses, so their throat is open to devour the good. . . . The words of men are like tiny mice. They speak in order to deceive, and just as poison flows from the lips of a serpent, so trickery and deceit flow from their lips.

The stench of their teaching and flattery contaminates and kills those who listen. This is why a grave is carefully sealed, so that it does not continue to breed disease among the living by its odor. They express one thing with their mouths but another with their hearts. The venom of asps is mentioned because it is supposed to be themost harmful.

Paul did not say that their lips were full of the poison of asps. For although many may be involved in sins of that kind, there are not many who are totally given over to the harm which that poison can do. On the other hand, there are many whose mouths are full of curses and bitterness. For whose mouth is so pure that he never curses? I am not speaking now of those who deserve to be cursed but of those whom God has not cursed, i.e., the just and innocent. For this vice is so prevalent and so automatic a trait of human weakness, especially with respect to those who are under or inferior to us, that many people would not even think to call it cursing.

It is clear and obvious that evil people are always throwing curses and bitterness at the good in an attempt to harm and distract them.

There is not just one kind of malicious talk. What is said out of malice is without doubt said recklessly.

This may seem to be an infrequent crime. But we take it to include not only those who shed blood by killing the body but also those who by some deception or other separate the soul from God. . . . For if the one who separates the body from the soul which gives it life is called a murderer, how much more truly will the one who separates the soul from the true life, which is God, be called a murderer?

Feet in this passage refers to the way we live our life, as the prophet says: My feet had almost stumbled.^[1]

Scripture says this about the murder of the prophets, whom they killed without hesitation—slow to do good but swift to murder.^[1]

Either Paul is referring to murderers or he means those who kill souls by flattery, which is why Paul said in the Acts of the Apostles: I am innocent of the blood of all of you, for I did not shrink from declaring to you the whole counsel of God.^[1]

Since they hastened to do evil, Paul called their path a ruinous and unhappy way.

Souls are exhausted and made miserable by their teaching and behavior.

Christ is our peace.^[1] Therefore the way of peace is the way of Christ, which sinners do not know.

Everything which resembles the teaching of God is at peace with him, but everything which is contrary to it is at odds with him.

Having chosen the way of hostility, along which they were heading toward the second death, they did not want to know about the way which leads to eternal life. This is called the way of peace, because with God as its guardian it will have no disturbance. Those who will the good have this rest with God.^[1]

If someone is always thinking of what will please or displease God, then it can be said that the fear of God is always before his eyes. But such a person must be experienced and diligently instructed in the law of God so as not to be afraid when there is no reason to fear. For the fear of God must always be placed before our eyes: not the eyes of the flesh—for it is not something visible or corporeal that we are talking about here—but the eyes of the mind, to which an understanding and awareness of the fear of God are evident and by which, as we have said above, we can discover what ought and ought not to be feared. The one who fears God does not fear the powers of this world.

Since people of this kind have no sense, they have no fear of God. For the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, says Solomon.^[1] But Scripture did not say that they did not have the fear of God. It said: There is no fear of God before their eyes. For seeing how evil their works were and not being horrified by them, they are said not to have the fear of God before their eyes.

Paul concludes with the fear of God, because if the people had always kept that before their eyes they would not have transgressed, for a servant will not dare sin when his master is present.

Here we must consider carefully what this law is that speaks to those who are under the law. By what it says to them it deprives them of every excuse, so that they can find no hiding place for their sins. It is this which stops every mouth and makes the whole world accountable to God. Now if we want to take this as referring to the law of Moses, which without doubt spoke only to those who had been circumcised from their mother’s womb and had learned what the law was, how is it possible that by that law, which applies to only one nation, every mouth should be stopped and the whole world should be held accountable to God? What have the other nations to do with that law, and why does it affect the entire world? And how is it that a knowledge of sin is said to have originated with the law of Moses, when there were many before his time who were well aware of their sins?

From this it appears that the apostle Paul is not speaking here about the law of Moses but about the natural law which is written on the hearts of men. . . . This natural law speaks to all men who are under that law with the sole exception, it seems to me, of those children who are not yet able to distinguish good from evil. . . .

When Paul says the whole world he is not talking about trees and rocks and so on but about the rational animal, i.e., the human being. Anything which is not rational is excluded from consideration in this context.

It is clear that the law censures those who did not believe first of all their leader Moses nor their ancestors the prophets, whom they killed, nor the apostles who were their kinsmen according to the flesh, whose blood they spilled. They were always ungodly and rebellious against God, so as to be condemned by the law whose authority they thought should be despised.

Paul says this because with the Jews bound in sin the whole world has become subject to God. For there is no doubt that the pagans were immersed in sins and wickedness and that for that reason the whole world bowed before God in order to obtain forgiveness. The whole world means Jews and Gentiles, from whom believers are set apart. Therefore when Paul affirms that the Jews, who had received God’s law and to whom the promise had been given, were bound in sin, there is no doubt that all the Gentiles were guilty of death . . . for all have been found guilty and need the mercy of God, whether they be Jews or Gentiles.

Note that Paul was in the habit of referring to the entire Old Testament as the law . . . for here he calls a psalm the law.

When he talks about every mouth being stopped, he does not mean that the purpose of their sinning was to shut them up but that the reason they were rebuked was that they might not sin in ignorance. Furthermore, it was not just the Jews^[1] he was referring to but the whole of mankind. ^[2] THE ^[1]

In case the Jews might claim that these verses of the psalm were spoken about the Gentiles, Paul indicates that what has been said in the law has been said to those who are under the law. Of course, it is a question as to who is meant by saying that the fool claims that there is no God. The Jews did not say this in words^[1] but in deeds, for they claimed to know God but denied it by their behavior. Paul is not talking to the Gentiles here, because he has already made similar statements about them.^[2]

The law did not create sin; it revealed it.

Let us see in what way knowledge of sin comes through the law. It comes insofar as we learn through the law what to do and what not to do, what is sin and what is not sin. It is not, as the heretics claim, that God’s law is a bad root or a bad tree through which a knowledge of sin comes. Rather the law is like a medicine through which we perceive the true nature of our disease. . . . The medicine itself is good, not least because it enables us to isolate the disease and seek to cure it.

Paul never says that they will not be justified before God because they have not kept the law of righteousness in the commandments but because they have refused to believe the sacrament of the mystery of God, which is in Christ. For God has declared that they should be justified by Christ and not by the law, which may justify for a time, but not before God. Therefore those who keep the law are justified in time, not before God, because faith, by which they are justified before God, is not in them. For faith is greater than the law. The law pertains to us but faith pertains to God. The law has a temporary righteousness, but faith has an eternal one. When Paul says all flesh he means every human being . . . but when he says in the flesh he means those who are bound by sin. For just as righteousness makes them spiritual, so also sins make them carnal, and they take the name from the deed.

By faith the law is abolished, and faith then follows. What then is this law through which he says that sin is made known? Made known how? It is evident that long before Moses the patriarchs were not ignorant of sin. Joseph was thrown into prison, albeit by the wickedness of others, and both the butler and the baker of Pharaoh were in prison because of their sins.^[1] In what way then did sin lie dormant?

In fact, the law has three aspects to it. The first concerns the mystery of God’s divinity. The second is what is fitting according to natural law, which forbids sin. And the third is the deeds of the law, e. g., sabbaths, new moons, circumcision, etc. Here Paul refers to the natural law which was partly reformed and partly confirmed by Moses, which made sin known to all who were bound in wickedness. . . . The law shows the coming judgment of God and that no sinner will escape punishment, in case someone who has escaped for a time thinks that the law is an illusion. This is what the law shows: that sin will be dealt with by God.

Once more Paul jumps on the law but this time with restraint, for what he says is an accusation not against the law but against the negligence of the covenant people. . . . The law accomplished its task of disclosing sin to them, but then it was their duty to flee it. But since they did not flee it, they brought an even greater punishment on themselves, and the good deeds of the law have just provided an excuse for greater chastisement from God. ^[1] THE ^[1]

Some think that statements like this are an attack on the law. But they must be read very carefully, so that neither is the law condemned by the apostle nor is free will taken away from man. Therefore, let us distinguish the following four states of human existence: before the law, under the law, under grace and at rest. Before the law we follow the lust of the flesh. Under the law we are dragged along by it. Under grace we neither follow it nor are dragged along by it. At rest^[1] there is no lust of the flesh.

Prior to being addressed by the law, we do not struggle, because not only do we lust and sin, we even approve of sinning.

Under the law we struggle but are defeated. We admit that what we do is evil and that we do not want to do it, but because there is as yet no grace, we are defeated. In this state we discover how far down we lie, and when we want to rise up and yet we fall, we are all the more gravely afflicted. The law is good because it forbids what ought to be forbidden and requires what ought to be required. But when anyone thinks he can fulfill the law in his own strength and not through the grace of his Deliverer, this presumption does him no good but rather harms him so much that he is seized by an even stronger desire to sin and by his sins ends up as a transgressor. So when the man who has fallen realizes that he cannot raise himself, let him cry to his Deliverer for help.

Then comes grace, which can pardon previous sins, give aid to the struggling, supplement justice with love and take away fear. When this takes place, although fleshly desires continue to fight against our spirit in this life and try to lead us into sin, yet our spirit does not give in to these desires because it is rooted in the grace and love of God and ceases to sin. For we do not sin by having these perverse desires but by giving in to them.

These desires arise from the mortality of the flesh, which we inherit from the first sin of the first man, which is why we are born carnal. Nor will they cease until, by the resurrection of the body, we shall obtain the transformation which has been promised to us. Then we shall be in the fourth state, where there is perfect peace. Perfect peace is the state in which nothing will resist us because we do not resist God. Free will existed perfectly in the first man, but in us, prior to grace, there is no free will which would enable us not to sin but only enough that we do not want to sin. But grace makes it possible not only for us to want to do what is right but actually to do it not in our own strength but by the help of our Deliverer, who at the resurrection will give us that perfect peace which is the consequence of good will.

By the works of the law Paul means circumcision, the sabbath and the other ceremonies, which had less to do with righteousness than with carnal pleasure. Through the law comes neither forgiveness nor sin itself but rather recognition of sin. Through the law a man realizes what sin is, either because the natural law had been forgotten or because before the written law was given, the lesser sins [i.e., the sins which were more harmful to oneself than others, like lust, drunkenness, etc.] were not recognized as sins.

The purpose of the law, says Paul, is to give us a knowledge of sin not only to forbid the doing of things which are inappropriate but also to punish those who do such things.

We have just said that in the above verses Paul was speaking about the natural law and not about the law of Moses, but now it appears that there can be no doubt that he is referring to the law of Moses, by which the righteousness of God is made manifest through faith in Christ Jesus in all who believe, whether they are Jews or Gentiles, and who are justified not by works but by the grace of God, who has redeemed them in Jesus Christ. Does this mean that our interpretation of the foregoing was mistaken? . . .

Just as there is nothing in this verse which makes it possible for us to argue that it is talking about the natural law and not about the law of Moses, so there is nothing in the preceding verses to indicate that they are talking about the law of Moses and not about the natural law. Thus we would argue that just as the foregoing cannot be used to interpret what we now have before us, so neither should our interpretation of it be altered simply because what follows cannot be read in the same way.

Does this mean that the apostle has contradicted himself? There are plenty of people who would like to think so! . . . But we shall try to show how this passage does not go against our interpretation of the foregoing one. We have often said, and have expounded this most clearly in the preface, that the apostle mentions many different kinds of law in this epistle, and only the most attentive reader will be able to detect when he is shifting from one to another. . . . The law of nature was able to explain the nature of sin and give us some knowledge of it, but the righteousness of God is above and beyond this, and the human mind is unable to attain it by its natural senses. . . . For this the law of Moses was required, to teach us what God’s righteousness is. Do not be surprised that the word law is used here in two different senses! . . .

Moreover, there is a way to tell which meaning of the word law is intended. The Greek language uses articles in front of proper names. Thus when the law of Moses is intended, the article is used, but when the natural law is meant, the article is omitted.

[The righteousness of God] has not been manifested in opposition to the law but as an increase of good and as the free gift of God, so that we may no longer be judged according to human righteousness, which is always under judgment, but that we may be made perfect by the righteousness which comes from God. For this is the righteousness which comes by faith in Christ to all who believe and which dwells in them all.

It is clear that the righteousness of God has now appeared apart from the law, but this means apart from the law of the sabbath, the circumcision, the new moon and revenge, not apart from the sacrament of God’s divinity, because the righteousness of God is all about God’s divinity. For when the law held them guilty, the righteousness of God forgave them and did so apart from the law so that until the law was brought to bear God forgave them their sin. And lest someone think that this was done against the law, Paul added that the righteousness of God had a witness in the Law and the Prophets, which means that the law itself had said that in the future someone would come who would save mankind. But it was not allowed for the law to forgive sin.

Therefore, what is called the righteousness of God appears to be mercy because it has its origin in the promise, and when God’s promise is fulfilled it is called the righteousness of God. For it is righteousness when what is promised has been delivered. And when God accepts those who flee to him for refuge, this is called righteousness, because wickedness would not accept such people.

Paul does not say that the righteousness of God has been given but that it has been manifested, thus destroying the accusation that it is something new. For what is manifested is old but previously concealed. He reinforces this point by going on to mention that the Law and the Prophets had foretold it. ^[1] THE ^[1]

The righteousness of God is not that by which God is righteous but that with which he clothes man when he justifies the ungodly. To this the Law and the Prophets bear witness. . . . The righteousness of God is not manifested outside the law, since in that case it could not have been witnessed to in the law. It is a righteousness of God apart from the law because God confers it on the believer through the Spirit of grace without the help of the law.

The righteousness which has been given to us freely by God, not acquired by our effort, has been made plain without the written law, and having been hidden in the law has been revealed with greater clarity by the examples of Christ, which are more obvious. The law and the prophets foretold that this righteousness would come in the last times, or perhaps this means that they both bore witness to the recognition of sin.

What else comes through faith in Jesus Christ except the righteousness of God which is the revelation of Christ? For it is by faith in the revelation of Jesus Christ that the gift long ago promised by God is acknowledged and received.

In order to stop anyone from asking: How can we be saved without contributing anything at all to our salvation? Paul shows that in fact we do contribute a great deal toward it—we supply our faith!

How could Paul have promised glory, honor and peace to the good works of Gentiles apart from the grace of the gospel? Because there otherwise is no acceptance of persons with God. And because it is not the hearers but the doers of the law who are justified, he argues that all, whether Jew or Gentile, shall alike have salvation in the gospel.

This refers to the faith by which one believes in Jesus Christ. In this there is no distinction between Jew and Gentile.

Paul says for all meaning first the Jews, in that it was from among them that salvation first arose, and then the Gentiles, in that from the Jews grace had abounded even to them so that now both share in it together. This grace is not given in general but only to those who believe, but it is common to all these without distinction.

We ought not to be puffed up or severe on those of ancient times, but ought ourselves to fear, lest after we have come to the knowledge of Christ we obtain no further forgiveness of sins. If later we do things displeasing to God, we are shut out of his kingdom.

Paul shows that nature has failed the Gentiles and that both nature and the law have failed the Jews, before going on to mention the grace of the gospel and saying: What do we have by grace which is special and superior? Faith, made effective by the righteousness of Christ. . . . Paul does not say that all have broken the law but that all have sinned in a general sense. Now the one who is lacking something tries to make up his deficiency. The Jews had the law, but they were lacking the fullness of grace.

This includes both Jews and Greeks. For all here includes even the saints in order to show that nobody can keep the law without faith. For the law was given in such a way that faith was also embedded in it. This faith looked toward a future salvation. Thus the death of Christ benefits everyone, because it has here in this world taught what is to be believed and observed, and in the future it will deliver everyone from hell.

There is no difference at all between the Greek, the Scythian, the Thracian or even the Jew, for all are in the same plight. . . . Even if you have not done the same sins as others, you have still been deprived of God’s glory just as they have been, because you are among those who have offended. . . . However, Paul was saying this not to cast them into despair but rather to show the love of the Lord toward man, as he goes on to say [in the following verses].

All sinners need the glory of God because they do not have their own.

Redemption is the word used for what is given to enemies in order to ransom captives and restore them to their liberty. Therefore human beings were held in captivity by their enemies until the coming of the Son of God, who became for us not only the wisdom of God, and righteousness and sanctification,^[1] but also redemption. He gave himself as our redemption, that is, he surrendered himself to our enemies and poured out his blood on those who were thirsting for it. In this way redemption was obtained for believers.

They are justified freely because they have not done anything nor given anything in return, but by faith alone they have been made holy by the gift of God. Paul testifies that the grace of God is in Christ, because we have been redeemed by Christ according to the will of God so that once set free we may be justified, as he says to the Galatians: Christ redeemed us by offering himself for us.^[1] For he achieved this despite the fierce attacks of the devil, who was outwitted. For the devil received Christ (in hell) thinking that he could hold him there, but because he could not withstand his power he lost not only Christ but all those whom he held at the same time.

We have been justified without the works of the law, through baptism. In this way God has freely forgiven our sins even though we are undeserving. Christ has redeemed us with the blood of his death. . . . For we were all condemned to death, to which Christ handed himself over, though he had no need to, in order to redeem us by his blood. . . . Note also that Christ did not merely buy us but bought us back, because we were once his by nature, even though we were separated from him by our sins. If we stop sinning, our redemption will indeed be profitable for us.

Grace is the glory of God, not the merit of him who has been freed. ^[1] AN EXPIATION BY CHRIST’S BLOOD. Origen: Although the holy apostle teaches many wonderful things about our Lord Jesus Christ which are said mysteriously about him, in this passage he has given special prominence to something which, I think, is not readily found in other parts of Scripture. For having just said that Christ gave himself as a redemption for the entire human race so that he might ransom those who were held captive by sin . . . now he adds something even more sublime, saying that God put him forward as an expiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This means that by the sacrifice of Christ’s body God has made expiation on behalf of men and by this has shown his righteousness, in that he forgave their previous sins, which they had committed in the service of the worst possible tyrants. God endured this and allowed these things to happen. ^[1]

Paul says this, because in Christ God put forward, i.e., appointed, himself as a future expiation for the human race if they believed. This expiation was by his blood. We have been set free by his death so that God might reveal him and condemn death by his passion. This was in order to make his promise clear, by which he set us free from sin as he had promised before. And when he fulfilled this promise he showed himself to be righteous.

God knew the purpose of his lovingkindness, by which he determined to come to the rescue of sinners, both those living on earth and those who were held bound in hell. He waited a very long time for both. He nullified the sentence by which it seemed just that everyone should be condemned in order to show us that long ago he had decided to liberate the human race, as he promised through Jeremiah the prophet, saying: I will forgive their iniquity and I will remember their sin no more.^[1] And in case it might be thought that this promise was for the Jews only, he said through Isaiah: My house will be called a house of prayer for all peoples.^[2]

For although the promise was made to the Jews, God knew in advance that the ungodly Jews would reject his gift. Therefore he promised that he would allow the Gentiles to share in his grace. In view of this the ungodly negligence of the Jews was thwarted.

Christ, being an expiation by his blood, teaches each one thinking of this to become himself a propitiation, sanctifying his soul by the mortification of his members.

Paul calls the redemption an expiation to show that, if the Old Testament type had such power, much more did its New Testament counterpart have it. . . . What does it mean to show God’s righteousness? It is like declaring his riches not only for him to be rich himself but also to make others rich. . . . Do not doubt, for righteousness is not of works but of faith.

God has set forth Christ in public so that anyone who wants to be redeemed may draw near to him. Christ performs the work of expiation for all who believe that they need to be set free by his blood. Christ died for our former sins in order to reverse God’s judgment, by which he had finally determined to punish us for them.

The mercy seat was gold-plated and placed on top of the ark. On each side was the figure of a cherub.^[1] When the high priest approached it, the holy kindness of God was revealed.^[2]

The apostle teaches us that Christ is the true mercy seat, of which the one in the Old Testament was but a type. The name applies to Christ in his humanity, not in his divinity. For as God Christ responded to the expiation made at the mercy seat. It is as man that he receives this label, just as elsewhere he is called a sheep, a lamb, sin and a curse.

Furthermore, the ancient mercy seat was bloodless because it was inanimate. It could only receive the drops of blood pouring from the sacrificial victims. But the Lord Christ is both God and the mercy seat, both the priest and the lamb, and he performed the work of our salvation by his blood, demanding only faith from us.^[3]

God allowed all this so that afterward, that is to say in our time, he might show forth his righteousness. For at the end of the age, in the most recent times, God has manifested his righteousness and given Christ to be our redemption. He has made him our propitiator. If he had sent him as the propitiator at some earlier time, there would have been fewer people whose sins needed propitiating than there are now. For God is just, and therefore he could not justify the unjust. Therefore he re-quired the intervention of a propitiator, so that by having faith in him those who could not be justified by their own works might be justified. These are the presuppositions on which the apostle’s exposition here is based.

Paul was right to add at the present time, because at the moment God’s righteousness is revealed for our justification. But when the day of judgment comes, it will be revealed for retribution.

The present time means our time, in which God has given what long before he had promised to give at the time at which he gave it. Paul has rightly said that God gave what he promised in order to be revealed as righteous. For he had promised that he would justify those who believe in Christ, as he says in Habakkuk: The righteous will live by faith in me.^[1] Whoever has faith in God and Christ is righteous.

Paul wants to show that God had waited for sinners to reform themselves but that they had abused his patience and gone on to greater sins. The believer in Jesus is the only one who has been found righteous, and God has justified him not by works but by faith.

Paul tells those who live under the law that they have no reason to boast basing themselves on the law and claiming to be of the race of Abraham, seeing that no one is justified before God except by faith.

Paul is at great pains to show that faith is powerful to a degree which no one ever imagined the law could be. For after saying that God justifies man by faith, he takes up the question of the law again. He does not say: Where are the good works of the Jews? but: Where is their boasting? Thus he takes every opportunity to demonstrate that it was all talk and that they had no deeds to back them up.

What is the principle of faith? This is salvation by grace. Here Paul shows God’s power in that he has not only saved, he has also justified and led them to boast in a different way—not relying on works but glorying only in their faith. In saying this Paul is trying to get believing Jews to behave with moderation and to reassure unbelieving Jews so that they might be persuaded to accept his point of view. For if the one who has been saved is proud because he abides by the law, he will be told that he has stopped his own mouth, that he has accused himself, that he has renounced any claim to salvation and that he has excluded boasting. But the unbeliever may be humbled by these same means and brought to accept the faith. See how great faith is, in that it has removed us from the former things and does not even allow us to boast of them!

Now you say to me (says Paul), What new law has thrown the old one out? For when the ruler adds to the law, the law is changed. Paul answers: When the law of works came in it did not abolish the former law—on the contrary, it actually contained the former law. But when the law of faith appeared it did abolish the earlier law, having overcome the boasting which came from the law of works. These things have been given to us by the grace of God, which our forefathers, however hard they may have tried, were unable to obtain. ^[1] AN ^[1]

This is addressed to the Jew. The principle of faith is . . . the New Testament, which is God’s appointed object of faith.

For who will glory, or for what, when everyone has become worthless and gone out of the right way, and nobody does good works anymore? Therefore he says that all glorying is excluded. . . . How? We have acquired the forgiveness of our former sins and have been justified freely by the mercy and grace of Christ.^[1]

By boasting Paul means the proud spirits of the Jews and their excessive arrogance. For they thought they were the only ones who enjoyed God’s providence. But after the divine grace appeared and spread to all nations, the boasting of the Jews ceased. . . . Paul calls faith a law, recalling the words of the prophet Jeremiah: Behold, the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the House of Israel and the House of Judah, not like the covenant which I made with their fathers.^[1]

It remains for us who are trying to affirm everything the apostle says, and to do so in the proper order, to inquire who is justified by faith alone, apart from works. If an example is required, I think it must suffice to mention the thief on the cross, who asked Christ to save him and was told: Truly, this day you will be with me in paradise.^[1] . . . A man is justified by faith. The works of the law can make no contribution to this. Where there is no faith which might justify the believer, even if there are works of the law these are not based on the foundation of faith. Even if they are good in themselves they cannot justify the one who does them, because faith is lacking, and faith is the mark of those who are justified by God.

Paul says that a Gentile can be sure that he is justified by faith without doing the works of the law, e. g., circumcision or new moons or the veneration of the sabbath.

Paul does not say a Jew or one under the law but widens the discussion and opens the doors of faith to the world, saying a man, i.e., the name common to our race.

Paul did not say we hold be-cause he was himself uncertain. He said it in order to counter those who concluded from this that anyone who wished to could be justified simply by willing faith. Note carefully that Paul does not say simply without the law, as if we could just perform virtue by wanting to, nor do we do the works of the law by force. We do them because we have been led to do them by Christ. ^[1] [PSEUDO-]CONSTANTIUS: Paul says this because we cannot be justified by the works of the law but only by faith. ^[1]

This must not be understood in such a way as to say that a man who has received faith and continues to live is righteous, even though he leads a wicked life.

Some people misinterpret this verse in order to do away with the works of righteousness, saying that faith by itself is enough, even though Paul says elsewhere: If I have all faith, so as to remove mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.^[1] If this seems to contradict the sense of the other [verses], what works did the apostle mean when he said that a man is justified by faith, without works? Obviously, these are the works of circumcision, the sabbath and so on, and not the works of righteousness about which St. James says: Faith without works is dead.^[1] [In this verse] Paul is speaking about the man who comes to Christ and is saved when he first believes by faith alone. But by adding the works of the law Paul is saying that there are also works of grace which believers ought to perform. ^[2]

One righteous person is no different from another righteous person, whether Jew or Greek. For God is not only the Lord of the Jews but of all humanity. He is the Father of all who know him. To live well and according to the law is to live. To live rationally according to reason is to live. Those who lived rightly before the law were classed under faith and judged to be righteous. Those who were outside the law, having lived rightly, on hearing the voice of the Lord . . . may turn and believe with all speed.

Is not all humankind one flock of God? Is not the same God both Lord and Shepherd of all nations?^[1]

Here Paul gives a short sharp answer to those who would say that there is one God for the Jews and another for the Gentiles, i.e., one God of the law and another of the gospel.

Undoubtedly there is only one God for everybody. For even the Jews cannot claim that their God is not the God of the Gentiles also, because they believe that the origin of all people is from the one Adam and that no one who comes willingly to the law may be prevented from accepting it. Some Gentiles actually went with the Israelites into the desert of Egypt, and the Israelites were ordered to accept them as long as they agreed to be circumcised and eat unleavened bread, or the Passover, together with the rest of them.^[1] Then again Cornelius, a Gentile who was not judaized, received the gift of God, and it is clear from holy Scripture that he was justified.^[2]

Paul shows that the Jews, by trying to put the Gentiles in their place, were insulting God’s glory by not allowing him to be the God of all. But if God is God of all, then he takes care of all, and if he takes care of all, then he saves all alike by faith.

Did God create only the Jews, and is he exclusively concerned with them? For even if the Gentiles sinned, so did the Jews, and even if the Jews repent, so do the Gentiles. If Christ came to the Jews as promised by the law, he came to the Gentiles as well. For the prophets often spoke of the calling of the Gentiles. Paul wants to show the Gentiles that the first saints had not been circumcised and that Abraham was righteous before his circumcision. But he adds as well, so as not to appear to be excluding the Jews.

We were prefigured in the Jews, and they are represented in us, that is, in the church, and they receive the reward for what they achieved.

Not only does Paul say that there is only one God for both Jews and Gentiles, but he adds that this God is the one who justifies the circumcised on the ground of their faith and the uncircumcised through their faith. . . . Neither the circumcision nor the uncircumcision enjoys any advantage in this.

By the circumcised Paul means the Jews who have been justified by their faith in the promise and who believe that Jesus is the Christ whom God had promised in the law. By the uncircumcised he means the Gentiles who have been justified with God by their faith in Christ. Thus God has justified both Jews and Gentiles. For because God is one, everyone has been justified in the same way. What benefit then is there in circumcision? Or what disadvantage is there in uncircumcision when only faith produces worthiness and merit?

Paul shows clearly that righteousness depends not on the merit of man but on the grace of God, who accepts the faith of those who believe without the works of the law.

There is only one God, who is Lord of all, both Jew and Gentile. Even in ancient times the blessings of providence were shared by both, although in different ways. The Jews had the written law, and the Gentiles had the natural law, but in this they lacked nothing, because if they tried hard enough they could always surpass the Jews in their observance. . . . If there was no difference then, much less is there any now, and this Paul establishes even more firmly by demonstrating that both alike stand in equal need of faith.

Paul says the ground of their faith with respect to the Jews because, although they had other ways of seeking righteousness, they could not obtain it except through their faith. When speaking about the Gentiles, he says through their faith because this is the only claim to righteousness which they have.

The difference of preposition (on the ground of versus through) does not indicate any difference of meaning but serves simply to vary the phrase.

Jews and Gentiles have both believed in the same God and in the same Christ.

Whoever does not believe in Christ, of whom Moses wrote in the law, destroys the law. But whoever believes in Christ, of whom Moses wrote, confirms the law through faith, because he believes in Christ.

The Lord himself said: I have not come to abolish the law but to fulfill it.^[1] None of the saints nor even the Lord himself has destroyed the law. Rather its glory, which is temporal and transient, has been destroyed and replaced by a glory which is eternal and permanent.

Paul says that the law is not nullified by faith but fulfilled. For its status is confirmed when faith bears witness that what it said would come has actually happened. Paul says this because of the Jews who thought that faith in Christ was inimical to the law because they did not understand the true meaning of the law. For Paul does not nullify the law when he says that it must come to an end, because he asserts that at the time it was given it was rightly given, but now it does not have to be kept any longer. In the law itself it is said that a time would come when the promise would be fulfilled and the law would no longer have to be kept. . . . Behold the days are coming, says the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and the house of Judah, not like the covenant which I made with their fathers.^[1]

Paul’s use of the word uphold shows that the law was failing. . . . The purpose of the law was to make man righteous, but it had no power to do that. But when faith came it achieved what the law could not do, for once a man believes he is immediately justified. Faith therefore established what the law intended and brought to fulfillment what its provisions aimed for. Consequently faith has not abolished the law but perfected it. ^[1] ABRAHAM JUSTIFIED BY FAITH. [PSEUDO-] CONSTANTIUS: Paul does not contradict what he said above [in verse 27]. What he means by up-holding the law is that the law tells me that Abraham was justified not by works but by faith.^{[1] [2]}

How should the law be upheld if not by righteousness? By a righteousness, moreover, which is of faith, for what could not be fulfilled through the law is fulfilled through faith.

Do we then make void freedom of choice through grace? God forbid! Rather, we establish freedom of choice. As the law is not made void by faith, so freedom of choice is not made void but established by grace. Freedom of choice is necessary to the fulfillment of the law. But by the law comes the knowledge of sin; by faith comes the obtaining of grace against sin; by grace comes the healing of the soul from sin’s sickness; by the healing of the soul comes freedom of choice; by freedom of choice comes the love of righteousness; by the love of righteousness comes the working of the law. Thus, as the law is not made void but established by faith, since faith obtains the grace whereby the law may be fulfilled, so freedom of choice is not made void but established by grace, since grace heals the will whereby righteousness may freely be loved.

The law is confirmed by faith. Apart from faith the law merely commands, and it holds guilty those who do not fulfill its commands, so that it might thereafter turn to the grace of the Deliverer those groaning in their inability to do what is commanded.

Is the law which enjoins us to be circumcised unnecessary? Not at all! On the contrary, we enable it to stand firm when we show that what it said is true, viz., that (spiritual) law would follow after (physical) law, (spiritual) testament after (physical) testament, (spiritual) circumcision after (physical) circumcision.

On account of his humanity Emmanuel is called a prophet, who following Moses is the mediator between God and humanity. The law was a shadow, but even so it presented an image of the truth. Furthermore, the truth hardly destroys its images; rather it makesthem clearer.