Online Resource Library
Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | DownloadInternational Critical Commentary NT - Romans 10:1 - 10:99
(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)
This Chapter Verse Commentaries:
10:1. There is no break in the argument between this chapter and vv. 30-33 of chap. 9; but before expanding this part of the subject, the Apostle pauses for a moment, impelled by his own strong feelings and the deep tragedy of his countryman’s rejection, to express his sorrow and affection.
Marcion admitted into his text ver. 2-4, which he was able to use as a proof text of his fundamental doctrine that the Jews had been ignorant of the ‘higher God.’ The whole or almost the whole passage which follows 10:5-11:32, he appears to have omitted, Zahn, p. 518. Tert. Adv. Marc. v. 13.
ἀεφί The position increases the emphasis of a word always used by the Apostle when he wishes to be specially emphatic The thought of the Christian brotherhood intensifies the contrast with the Israelites who are excluded.
μν without a corresponding δ. The logical antithesis is given in ver. 3.
εδκα ‘good will,’ ‘good pleasure,’ not ‘desire,’ which the word never means.
The word εδκαmeans ‘good pleasure’ either (1) in relation to oneself when it comes to mean ‘contentment,’ Ecclus. 29:23 ἐὶμκῷκὶμγλ εδκα ἔε ib. 35(32):14 ο ὀθίοτςερσυιεδκα: 2Th_1:11 κὶπηώῃπσνεδκα ἀαωύη κὶἔγνπσεςἐ δνμι Ps. Sol. 16:12: or (2) in relation to others, ‘good will,’ ‘benevolence,’ Ecclus. 9:12 μ εδκσςἐ εδκᾳἀεῶ: Php_1:15 τνςμνδὰφόο κὶἔι, τνςδ κὶδʼεδκα τνΧιτνκρσοσν (3) in this sense it came to be used almost technically of the good will of God to man, Eph_1:5 κτ τνεδκα τῦθλμτςατῦ 1:9 κτ τνεδκα ατῦ Ps. Sol. 8:39.
The above interpretation of the word is different from that taken by Fritzsche (ad loc.), Lft. (ad Php_1:15), Grm. Thayer, Lex. (s. v.), Philippi and Tholuck (ad loc.). The word seems never to be used unqualified to mean ‘desire’; the instance quoted by Lft. does not support it.
ἡδηι: non orasset Paulus si absolute reprobati essent. Beng.
εςστρα = ἵασθσ; cf. ver. 4 εςδκισννand 1:5 εςὑαονπσες
The additions ἡbefore πὸ τνΘό and ἐτνbefore εςστρα in the TR. are grammatical explanations. The reading τῦἸρή for ατνmay have been merely an explanatory gloss, or may have arisen through the verse being the beginning of a lesson in church services.
2. μρυῶγρ This gives the reason for St. Paul’s grief. He had been a Jew πρσοέω ζλτςὑάχν(Gal_1:14; cf. Act_22:3) and hence he knew only too well the extent both of their zeal and of their ignorance.
ζλνΘο. Obj. genitive: ‘zeal for God’ (not as in 2Co_11:2). An O. T. expression: Judith. 9:4 ἐήωα τνζλνσυ Psa_68 [69]; 118[119]:139 ὁζλςτῦοκυσυ 1 Macc. 2:58 ζλςνμυ Jowett quotes Philo, Leg. ad Caium, §16 (Mang. ii. 562) ‘Ready to endure death like immortality rather than suffer the neglect of the least of their national customs.’ St. Paul selects the very word which the Jew himself would have chosen to express just that zeal on which more than anything else he would have prided himself.
κτ ἐίνσν The Jews were destitute, not of γῶι, but of the higher disciplined knowledge, of the true moral discernment by which they might learn the right way. ἐίνσς(see Lft. on Col_1:9, to whose note there is nothing to add) means a higher and more perfect knowledge, and hence it is used especially and almost technically for knowledge of God, as being the highest and most perfect form: see on 1:28 and cf. 3:20.
3. ἀνονε γρ This verse gives the reason for ο κτ ἐίνσν and the antithesis to ἡμνεδκα ἀνονε means ‘not knowing,’ ‘being ignorant of,’ not ‘misunderstanding.’ St. Paul here states simply the fact of the ignorance of his fellow-countrymen; he does not yet consider how far this ignorance is culpable: that point he makes evident later (vv. 14 sq.).
τντῦΘο δκισνν…τνἰίν St. Paul contrasts two methods of righteousness. On the one side there was the righteousness which came from God, and was to be sought in the manner He had prescribed, on the other was a righteousness which they hoped to win by their own methods, and by their own merit. Their zeal had been blind and misdirected. In their eagerness to pursue after the latter, they had remained ignorant of and had not submitted to the method (as will be shown, a much easier one) which God Himself had revealed.
ὑεάηα. Middle, ‘submit themselves,’ cf. Jam_4:7; 1Pe_2:13; 1Pe_5:5; Winer, §xxxix, 2. p. 327 E.T.
The second δκισννafter ἰίνof the TR. is supported by אonly among good authorities, and by Tisch. only among recent editors; it is omitted by A B D E P, Vulg. Boh. Arm., and many Fathers.
4. τλςγρνμυκτλ St. Paul has in the preceding verse been contrasting two methods of obtaining δκισν; one, that ordained by God, as 9:32 shows, a method ἐ πσες the other that pursued by the Jews, a method δὰνμυ The latter has ceased to be possible, as St. Paul now proves by showing that, by the coming of Christ Law as a means of obtaining righteousness had been brought to an end. The γρtherefore introduces the reason, not for the actual statement of ver. 3, that the Jews had not submitted to the Divine method, but for what was implied—that they were wrong in so doing.
τλς ‘end,’ ‘termination.’ Law as a method or principle of righteousness had been done away with in Christ. ‘Christ is the end of law as death is the end of life.’ Gif. Cf. Dem. C. Eubuliden, 1306, 25 κίο πσνἐτνἀθώοςτλςτῦβο θντς(quoted by Fri. and by many writers after him).
The theological idea of this verse is much expanded in later Epistles, and is connected definitely with the death of Christ: Eph_2:15 ‘He abolished in His flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances’; Col_2:14 ‘Having blotted out the bond written in ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us: and He hath taken it out of the way, nailing it to the cross.’ This last passage is paraphrased by Lft.: ‘Then and there [Christ] cancelled the bond which stood valid against us (for it bore our own signature), the bond which engaged us to fulfil all the law of ordinances, which was our stern pitiless tyrant. Ay, this very bond hath Christ put out of sight for ever, nailing it to His cross, and rending it with His body, and killing it in His death.’ And as he points out, a wider reference must be given to the expression; it cannot be confined to the Jews. The ordinances, although primarily referring to the Mosaic law, ‘will include all forms of positive decrees in which moral or social principles are embodied or religious duties defined; and the “bond” is the moral assent of the conscience which (as it were) signs and seals the obligation.’
‘Although the moral law is eternal, yet under the Gospel it loses its form of external law, and becomes an internal principle of life.’ Lid.
νμυ ‘Law’ as a principle (so Weiss, Oltramare, Gif.), not the Law, the Mosaic Law (so the mass of commentators). It is not possible indeed to lay stress on the absence of the article here, because the article being dropped before τλςit is naturally also dropped before νμυ(see on 2:13), and although St. Paul might have written τ γρτλςτῦνμυ yet this would not exactly have suited his purpose, for τλςis the predicate of the sentence thrown forward for emphasis. But that the application of the term must be general is shown by the whole drift of the argument (see below), by the words πνὶτ πσεοτ proving that the passage cannot be confined to the Jews, and consequently not to the Mosaic law, and by the correct reading in ver. 5 τνἐ νμυ(see critical note).
The interpretation of this verse has been much confused owing to incorrect translations of τλς(fulfilment, aim), the confusion of νμςand ὁνμς and a misapprehension of the drift of the passage. That the version given above is correct is shown (1) by the meaning of τλς It is quite true that Christ is the τλίσςof the Law, that in Him what was typical has its fulfilment; but τλςnever means τλίσς(as it is taken here by Orig. Erasmus, &c.). Again, it is equally true that the Law is the πιαωό that brings men to Christ, and that Christ can be described as the object or goal of the Law (as the passage is taken by Chrys., other fathers, and Va. amongst English commentators): but τλςis only used once in this sense in St. Paul’s Epistles (1Ti_1:5), Χιτςwould become the predicate, τλςwould then require the article, and νμςwould have to be interpreted of the Jewish Law. The normal meaning of the word, and the correct one here, is that of ‘termination’ (so Aug. De W. Mey. Fri. Weiss, Oltramare); (2) by the meaning of νμς(see above). This is interpreted incorrectly of the Jewish Law only by almost all commentators (Orig. Chrys. and all the Fathers, Erasmus, Calv. De. W. Mey. Va.); (3) by the context. This verse is introduced to explain ver. 3, which asserts that of two methods of obtaining righteousness one is right, the other wrong. St. Paul here confirms this by showing that the one has come to an end so as to introduce the other. It is his object to mark the contrast between the two methods of righteousness and not their resemblance.
But the misinterpretation is not confined to this verse, it colours the interpretation of the whole passage. It is not St. Paul’s aim to show that the Jews ought to have realized their mistake because the O. T. dispensation pointed to Christ, but to contrast the two methods. It is only later (vv. 14 f.) that he shows that the Jews had had full opportunities and warnings.
εςδκισννπνὶτ πσεοτ: ‘so that δκισν may come to everyone that believes,’ ‘so that everyone by believing may obtain δκισν.’
Omni credenti, tractatur τ credenti v. 5:5 sq., τ omni v. 5:11 sq. πνι omni ex iudaeis et gentibus. Beng.
5-10. St. Paul proceeds to describe the two modes of obtaining δκισν in language drawn from the O. T., which had become proverbial.
5. Μσςγργάε κτλ Taken from Lev_18:5, which is quoted also in Gal_3:12. The original (ἃπισςἄθωο ζστιἐ ατῖ) is slightly modified to suit the grammar of this passage, τνδκισνντνἐ νμυbeing made the object of πισς St. Paul quotes the words to mean that the condition of obtaining life by law is that of fulfilment, a condition which in contrast to the other method described immediately afterwards is hard, if not impossible. On this difficulty of obeying the law he has laid stress again and again in the first part of the Epistle, and it is this that he means by τννμντνἐτλνin Eph_2:15 (quoted above).
ζστι shall obtain life in its deepest sense both here and hereafter (see pp. 180, 196).
There are a number of small variations in the text of this verse. (1) ὅιis placed before τνδκισννby א A D*, Vulg. Boh., Orig.-lat., after νμυby א B Dc E F G K L P &c., Syrr., Chrys. Thdrt. &c. (2) ἐ νμυis read by אB, ἐ τῦνμυby the mass of later authorities. (3) ὁπισςis read without any addition by א A D E, Vulg., Orig.-lat., ατ is added by B F G K L P &c., Syrr., Chrys. Thdrt. &c., eam by d**e† (4) ἄθωο is om. by F G, Chrys. (5) ἐ ατ is read by אA B minusc. pauc., Vulg. Boh. Orig.-lat., ἐ ατῖ D E F G K L R &c. Syrr., Chrys. Thdrt. &c.
The original text was ὅιτνδκισνντνἐ νμυὁπισςἄθωο ζστιἐ ατ. The alteration of ατ …ατῖ came from a desire to make the passage correspond with the LXX, or Gal_3:12 (hence the omission of ἄθωο), and this necessitated a change in the position of ὅι τῦνμυarose from an early misinterpretation. The mixed text of B γάε τνδκισνντνἐ νμυὅιὁπισςατ ἄθωο ζστιἐ ατ and of D γάε ὅιτνδκισνντνἐ τῦνμῦὁπισςἄθωο ζστιἐ ατῖ are curious, but help to support אA Vulg. Boh.
6-8. The language of St. Paul in these verses is based upon the LXX of Deu_30:11-14. Moses is enumerating the blessings of Israel if they keep his law: ‘if thou shalt obey the voice of the Lord thy God, to keep His commandments and His statutes which are written in this book of the law; if thou turn unto the Lord thy God with all thine heart, and with all thy soul’; he then goes on (the RV. translation is here modified to suit the LXX): ‘11[For this commandment which I command thee this day, it is not too hard for thee, nor is it far from thee. 12Not in heaven above] saying, Who shall go up for us into heaven [and receive it for us, and having heard of it we shall do it? 13Nor is it beyond the sea], saying, Who will go over to the further side of the sea for us, [and receive it for us, and make it heard by us, and we shall do it?] 14But the word is very nigh thee, in thy mouth, and in thy heart, [and in thy hands, that thou mayest do it].’ The Apostle selects certain words out of this passage and uses them to describe the characteristics of the new righteousness by faith as he conceives it.
It is important to notice the very numerous variations between the quotation and the LXX. In the first place only a few phrases are selected: the portions not quoted are enclosed in brackets in the translation given above. Then in those sentences that are quoted there are very considerable changes: (1) for the λγνof the LXX, which is an ungrammatical translation of the Hebrew, and is without construction, is substituted μ επςἐ τ κρί συfrom Deu_8:17, Deu_9:4: (2) for τςδαεάε ἡῖ εςτ πρντςθλση is substituted τςκτβστιεςτνἄυσνin order to make the passage better suit the purpose for which it is quoted: (3) in ver. 8 the words σόρ …ἐ τῖ χρίσυare omitted (this agrees with the Hebrew), as also πιῖ ατ.
6. ἡδ ἐ πσεςδκισν οτ λγι It is noticeable that St. Paul does not introduce these words on the authority of Scripture (as ver. 11), nor on the authority of Moses (as ver. 5), but merely as a declaration of righteousness in its own nature. On the personification compare that of Wisdom in Pro_1:20; Luk_11:49; of πρκηι Heb_12:5.
τςἀαήεα εςτνορνν In the original passage these words mean: The law which I command you is not far off, it is not in heaven, so that you will have to ask, Who will go up to bring it down for us? it is very near and not hard to attain. St. Paul uses the same words to express exactly the same idea, but with a completely different application. ‘The Gospel as opposed to the Law is not difficult or hard to attain to.’
τῦʼἔτ, Χιτνκτγγῖ: ‘that is to say, to bring Christ down.’ Just as Moses had said that there was no need for anyone to go up into heaven to bring down the law, so it is true—far more true indeed—to say that there is no need to go into heaven to bring down the object of faith and source of righteousness—Christ. Christ has become man and dwelt among us. Faith is not a difficult matter since Christ has come.
The interpretations suggested of this and the following verses have been very numerous. τῦʼἔτνoccurs three times in this passage, and we must give it the same force in each place. In the third instance (ver. 8) it is used to give a meaning or explanation to the word τ ῥμ, which occurs in the quotation; it introduces in fact what would be technically known as a ‘Midrash’ on the text quoted (so Mey. Lid. Lips. and apparently Va. Gif.). That is the meaning with which the phrase has been used in 9:8, and is also the meaning which it must have here. The infinitive cannot be dependent on τῦʼἔτ (for in all the passages where the phrase is used the words that follow it are in the same construction as the words that precede), but is dependent on ἀαήεα which it explains: so Xen. Mem. I. v. 2 (Goodwin, Greek Moods and Tenses, §97) ε βυομθ τ ἐιρψιἢπῖα πιεσι ἢχήααδαῶα. In this and similar cases it is not necessary to emphasize strongly the idea of purpose as do Fri. (nempe ut Christum in orbem terrarum deducat) and Lips. (nä um Christum herabzuholen), the infinitive is rather epexegetical (so apparently Va. Gif.). The LXX here reads τςἀαήεα …κὶλψτι the construction is changed because τῦʼἔτνκὶκτξιwould hardly have been clear.
Of other interpretations, some do not suit the grammar. ‘That would be the same thing as to say Who will bring Christ down?’ would require τςκτξιτνΧιτν Weiss translates ‘that would be the same thing as to bring Christ down,’ apparently making the infinitive dependent on τῦʼἔτν Other translations or paraphrases do not suit the context: ‘Do not attempt great things, only believe’: or, ‘Do not waver and ask, Is Christ really come? only believe.’ The object of the passage is not to exhort to faith or to show the necessity of faith—that has been done in the early part of the Epistle; but to prove that the method of faith was one which, for several reasons, should not have been ignored and left on one side by the Jews.
7. ἤ Τςκτβστι…ἀααεν ‘nor is it necessary to search the depth, since Christ is risen from the dead.’ St. Paul substitutes τςκτβστιεςτνἄυσνfor the more ordinary τςδαεάε ἡῖ εςτ πρντςθλση, both because it makes a more suitable contrast to the first part of the sentence, and because it harmonizes better with the figurative meaning he wishes to draw from it. ἄυσςin the O. T. meant originally the ‘deep sea,’ ‘the great deep’ or ‘the depths of the sea,’ Psa_106(107):26 ἀαανυι ἕςτνορνν κὶκτβίοσνἕςτνἀύσν and the deep places of the earth, Psa_70(71):20 κὶἐ τνἀύσντςγςπλνἀήαέ μ, and so had come to mean Tartarus or the Lower World; τνδ τραο τςἀύσυJob_41:23, where the reference to τραο is due to the LXX; cf. Eur. Phoen. 1632 (1605) τράο ἄυσ χσαα Elsewhere in the N. T. it is so used of the abode of demons (Luk_8:31) and the place of torment (Rev_9:1). This double association of the word made it suitable for St. Paul’s purpose; it kept up the antithesis of the original, and it also enabled him to apply the passage figuratively to the Resurrection of Christ after His human soul had gone down into Hades.
On the descensus ad inferos, which is here referred to in indefinite and untechnical language, cf. Act_2:27; 1Pe_3:19; 1Pe_4:6; and Lft. on Ign. Magn. ix; see also Swete, Apost.-creed, p. 57 ff.
8. τ ῥμ τςπσες ‘The message, the subject of which is faith’; πσι does not mean ‘the faith,’ i. e. ‘the Gospel message’ (Oltramare), but, as elsewhere in this chapter, faith as the principle of righteousness. Nor does the phrase mean the Gospel message which appeals to faith in man (Lid.), but the Gospel which preaches faith, cf. 10:17. On ῥμ cf. 1Pe_1:25 τ δ ῥμ Κρο μνιεςτναῶα τῦοδ ἐτ τ ῥμ τ εαγλσὲ εςὑᾶ.
ὃκρσοε. This gives the reason why the new way of righteousness is easy to attain, being as it is brought home to every one, and suggests a thought which is worked out more fully in ver. 14 f.
In what sense does St. Paul use the O. T. in vv. 6-8? The difficulty is this. In the O. T. the words are used by Moses of the Law: how can St. Paul use them of the Gospel as against the Law?
The following considerations will suggest the answer to be given:
(1) The context of the passage shows that there is no stress laid on the fact that the O. T. is being quoted. The object of the argument is to describe the characteristics of δκισν ἐ πσες not to show how it can be proved from the O. T.
(2) The Apostle carefully and pointedly avoids appealing to Scripture, altering his mode of citation from that employed in the previous verse. Mosen non citat, quia sensum Mosis non sequitur, sed tantum ab illo verba mutuatur, Vatablus, ap. Crit. Sacr. ad loc.
(3) The quotation is singularly inexact. An ordinary reader fairly well acquainted with the O. T. would feel that the language had a familiar ring, but could not count it as a quotation.
(4) The words had certainly become proverbial, and many instances of them so used have been quoted. Philo, Quod omn. prob. lib. §10 (quoted by Gifford), ‘And yet what need is there either of long journeys over the land, or of long voyages for the sake of investigating and seeking out virtue, the roots of which the Creator has laid not at any great distance, but so near, as the wise law-giver of the Jews says, “They are in thy mouth, and in thy heart, and in thy hands,” intimating by these figurative expressions the words and actions and designs of men?’ Bava Mezia, f. 94. 1 (quoted by Wetstein) Si quis dixerit mulieri, Si adscenderis in firmamentum, aut descenderis in abyssum, eris mihi desponsata, haec conditio frustranea est; 4 Ezr_4:8 dicebas mihi fortassis: In abyssum non descendi, neque in infernum adhuc, neque in coelis unquam ascendi; Baruch 3:29, 30 τςἀέηεςτνορννκὶἔαε ατν κὶκτββσνατνἐ τννφλν τςδέηπρντςθλση κὶερνατν(of Wisdom); Jubilees xxiv. 32 ‘For even if he had ascended to heaven, they would bring him down from there …and even if he descends into Sheô there too shall his judgement be great’; cp. also Amo_9:2.
(5) St. Paul certainly elsewhere uses the words of Scripture in order to express his meaning in familiar language, cf. ver. 18; 11:1.
For these reasons it seems probable that here the Apostle does not intend to base any argument on the quotation from the O. T., but only selects the language as being familiar, suitable, and proverbial, in order to express what he wishes to say.
It is not necessary therefore to consider that St. Paul is interpreting the passage of Christ by Rabbinical methods (with Mey. Lid. and others), nor to see in the passage in Deuteronomy a prophecy of the Gospel (Fri.) or a reference to the Messiah, which is certainly not the primary meaning. But when we have once realized that no argument is based on the use of the O. T., it does not follow that the use of its language is without motive. Not only has it a great rhetorical value, as Chrysostom sees with an orator’s instinct: ‘he uses the words which are found in the O. T., being always at pains to keep quite clear of the charges of love of novelties and of opposition to it’; but also there is to St. Paul a correspondence between the O. T. and N. T.: the true creed is simple whether Law on its spiritual side or Gospel (cf. Aug. De Natura et Gratia, §83).
9. ὅιἐνὁοοήῃ κτλ This verse corresponds to and applies the preceding verse. The subject of the ῥμ which is preached by the Apostles is the person of Christ and the truth of His Resurrection. Κρο refers to ver. 6, the Resurrection (ὅιὁΘὸ ατνἤερνἐ νκῶ) to ver. 7. The power of Christ lies in these two facts, namely His Incarnation and His Resurrection, His Divine nature and His triumph over death. What is demanded of a Christian is the outward confession and the inward belief in Him, and these sum up the conditions necessary for salvation.
The ordinary reading in this verse is ἐνὁοοήῃ ἐ τ σόαίσυΚρο Ἰσῦ, for which WH. substitute τ ῥμ ἐ τ σόαίσυὅιΚρο Ἰσῦ. τ ῥμ has the authority of B 71, Clem.-Alex. and perhaps Cyril, ὅιΚ Ἰ of B, Boh., Clem.-Alex. and Cyril 2/3. The agreement in the one case of B and Boh., in the other of B and Clem.-Alex. against nearly all the other authorities is noticeable.
10. κρί γρπσεεα κτλ St. Paul explains and brings out more fully the application of the words he has last quoted. The beginning of the Christian life has two sides: internally it is the change of heart which faith implies; this leads to righteousness, the position of acceptance before God: externally it implies the ‘confession of Christ crucified’ which is made in baptism, and this puts a man into the path by which in the end he attains salvation; he becomes σζμνς
11. λγιγρἡγαήκτλ Quoted from Isa_28:16 (see above, 9:33) with the addition of πςto bring out the point on which emphasis is to be laid. St. Paul introduces a proof from Scripture of the statement made in the previous verse that faith is the condition of salvation, and at the same time makes it the occasion of introducing the second point in the argument, namely, the universal character of this new method of obtaining righteousness.
In ver. 4 he has explained that the old system of δκισν ἐ νμυhas been done away with in Christ to make way for a new one which has two characteristics: (1) that it is ἐ πσες this has been treated in vv. 5-10; (2) that it is universal: this he now proceeds to develope.
12. ο γρἐτ δατλ Ἰυαο τ κὶἝλνς St. Paul first explains the meaning of this statement, namely, the universal character of the Gospel, by making it clear that it is the sole method for Jews as well as for Gentiles. This was both a warning and a consolation for the Jews. A warning if they thought that, in spite of the preaching of the Gospel, they might seek salvation in their own way; a consolation it once they realized the burden of the law and that they might be freed from it. The Jews have in this relation no special privileges (cf. 1:16; 2:9, 10; 3:9; 1Co_1:24; 1Co_12:13; Gal_3:28; Col_3:11); they must obtain δκισν by the same methods and on the same conditions as the Gentiles. This St. Paul has already proved on the ground that they equally with the Gentiles have sinned (3:23). He now deduces it from the nature and the work of the Lord.
ὁγρατςΚρο πνω, cf. 1Co_12:5. This gives the reason for the similarity of method for all alike: ‘it is the same Lord who redeemed all mankind alike, and conferred upon all alike such wealth of spiritual blessings.’ It is better to take Κρο πνω as predicate for it contains the point of the sentence, ‘The same Lord is Lord of all’ (so the RV.).
Κρο must clearly refer to Christ, cf. vv. 9, 11. He is called Κρο πνω Act_10:36, and cf. 9:5, and Php_2:10, Php_2:11.
ποτν ‘abounding in spiritual wealth,’ cf. esp. Eph_3:8 τῖ ἔνσνεαγλσσα τ ἀεινατνποτςτῦΧιτῦ
τὺ ἐιαομνυ ατν ἐιαεσα τνΚρο, or more correctly ἐιαεσα τ ὄοατῦΚρο, is the habitual LXX translation of a common Hebrew formula. From the habit of beginning addresses to a deity by mentioning his name, it became a technical expression for the suppliant to a god, and a designation of his worshippers. Hence the Israelites were ο ἐιαομνιτνΚρο or τ ὄοαΚρο. They were in fact specially distinguished as the worshippers of Jehovah. It becomes therefore very significant when we find just this expression used of the Christians as the worshippers of Christ, ὁΚρο, in order to designate them as apart from all others, cf. 1Co_1:2 σνπσ τῖ ἐιαομνι τ ὄοατῦΚρο ἡῶ ἸσῦΧιτῦ There is a treatise on the subject by A. Seeberg, Die Anbetung des Herrn bei Paulus, Riga, 1891, see especially pp. 38, 43-46.
13. πςγρὃ ἂ ἐιαέηα. St. Paul sums up and clenches his argument by the quotation of a well-known passage of Scripture, Joe_2:32 (the quotation agrees with both the LXX and the Hebrew texts). The original passage refers to the prophetic conception of the ‘day of the Lord.’ ‘The sun shall be turned into darkness, and the moon into blood, before the great and terrible day of the Lord come.’ At that time ‘whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord’ shall be saved. This salvation (σθστι cf. ver. 9 σθσ, 10 στρα), the Jewish expectation of safety in the Messianic kingdom when the end comes, is used of that Christian salvation which is the spiritual fulfilment of Jewish prophecy.
Κρο. The term Κρο is applied to Christ by St. Paul in quotations from the O. T. in 2Th_1:9; 1Co_2:16; 1Co_10:21, 1Co_10:26; 2Co_3:16, and probably in other passages.
This quotation, besides concluding the argument of vv. 1-13, suggests the thought which is the transition to the next point discussed —the opportunities offered to all of hearing this message.
ISRAEL’S UNBELIEF NOT EXCUSED BY WANT OF OPPORTUNITY
10:14-21. This unbelief on the part of Israel was not owing to want of knowledge. Fully accredited messengers— such a body as is necessary for preaching and for faith— have announced the Gospel. There is no land but has heard the voices of the Evangelical preachers (vv. 14-18). Nor was it owing to want of understanding. Their own Prophets warned them that it was through disobedience that they would reject God’s message (vv. 19-21).
14 All then that is required for salvation is sincerely and genuinely to call on the Lord. But there are conditions preliminary to this which are necessary; perhaps it may be urged, that these have not been fulfilled. Let us consider what these conditions are. If a man is to call on Jesus he must have faith in Him; to obtain faith it is necessary that he must hear the call; that again implies that heralds must have been sent forth to proclaim this call. 15 And heralds imply a commission. Have these conditions been fulfilled? Yes. Duly authorized messengers have preached the Gospel. The fact may be stated in the words of the Prophet Isaiah (52:7) describing the welcome approach of the messengers who bring news of the return from captivity—that great type of the other, Messianic, Deliverance: ‘How beautiful are the feet of them that preach good tidings.’
16 But it may be urged, in spite of this, all did not give it a patient and submissive hearing. This does not imply that the message has not been given. In fact Isaiah in the same passage in which he foretold the Apostolic message, spoke also of the incredulity with which the message is received (53:1) ‘Lord, who hath believed our message?’ 17 Which incidentally confirms what we were saying a moment ago: Faith can only come from the message heard, and the message heard implies the message sent— the message, that is, about Christ.
18 But it may be alleged: We grant it was preached, but that does not prove that Israel heard it. Is that possible, when in the words of Psalm xix ‘the voices of God’s messengers went forth into all lands, and their words to the limits of the known world?’
19 Or another excuse: ‘Israel heard but did not understand.’ Can you say that of Israel? From the very beginning of its history a long succession of its Prophets foretold the Divine scheme. Moses, to begin with, wrote (Deu_32:21) ‘I will excite you to jealousy at a nation outside the pale, that does not count as a nation at all. I will rouse your anger at seeing yourselves outstripped by a nation whom you regard as possessing no intelligence for the things of religion.’ 20 Isaiah too was full of boldness. In the face of his fellow-countrymen he asserted (65:1) that God’s mercies should be gained by those who had not striven after them (the Gentiles). 21 And then he turns round to Israel and says that although God had never ceased stretching out His arms to them with all the tenderness of a mother, they had received His call with disobedience, and His message with criticism and contradiction. The Jews have fallen, not because of God’s unfaithfulness or injustice, not because of want of opportunity, but because they are a rebellious people—a people who refuse to be taught, who choose their own way, who cleave to that way in spite of every warning and of every message.
14-21. This section seems to be arranged on the plan of suggesting a series of difficulties, and giving short decisive answers to each: (1) ‘But how can men believe the Gospel unless it has been fully preached?’ (5:14). Answer. ‘It has been preached as Isaiah foretold’ (ver. 15). (2) ‘Yet, all have not accepted it’ (ver. 16). Answer. ‘That does not prove that it was not preached. Isaiah foretold also this neglect of the message’ (vv. 16, 17). (3) ‘But perhaps the Jews did not hear’ (5:18). Answer. ‘Impossible. The Gospel has been preached everywhere.’ (4) ‘But perhaps they did not understand’ (ver. 19). Answer. ‘That again is impossible. The Gentiles, a people without any real knowledge, have understood. The real fact is they were a disobedient, self-willed people.’ The object is to fix the guilt of the Jews by removing every defence which might be made on the ground of want of opportunities.
‘The passage which follows (14-21) is in style one of the most obscure portions of the Epistle.’ This statement of Jowett’s is hardly exaggerated. ‘The obscurity arises,’ as he proceeds to point out, ‘from the argument being founded on passages of the Old Testament.’ These are quoted without explanation, and without their relation to the argument being clearly brought out. The first difficulty is to know where to make a division in the chapter. Some put it after ver. 11 (so Go.) making vv. 11-21 a proof of the extension of the Gospel to the Gentiles; some after ver. 13 (Chrys. Weiss, Oltr. Gif.); some after ver. 15 (Lid. WH. Lips.). The decision of the question will always depend on the opinion formed of the drift of the passage, but we are not without structural assistance. It may be noticed throughout these chapters that each succeeding paragraph is introduced by a question with the particle ον so 9:14 τ ονἐομν 30; 11:1, 11. And this seems to arise from the meaning of the particle: it sums up the conclusion of the preceding paragraph as an introduction to a further step in the argument. This meaning will exactly suit the passage under consideration. ‘The condition of salvation is to call on the Lord’—that is the conclusion of the last section: then the Apostle goes on, ‘if this be so, what then (ον are the conditions necessary for attaining it, and have they been fulfilled?’ the words forming a suitable introduction to the next stage in the argument. This use of ονto introduce a new paragraph is very common in St. Paul. See especially Rom_5:1, Rom_5:6:1, Rom_5:12:1; Eph_4:1; 1Ti_2:1; 2Ti_2:1, besides other less striking instances. It may be noticed that it is not easy to understand the principle on which WH. have divided the text of these chapters, making no break at all at 9:29, beginning a new paragraph at chap. 10, making a break here at ver. 15, making only a slight break at chap. 11, and starting a new paragraph at ver. 13 of that chapter at what is really only a parenthetical remark.
10:14, 15. The main difficulty of these verses centres round two points: With what object are they introduced? And what is the quotation from Isaiah intended to prove?
1. One main line of interpretation, following Calvin, considers that the words are introduced to justify the preaching of the Gospel to the Gentiles; in fact to support the πςof the previous verse. God must have intended His Gospel to go to the heathen, for a duly commissioned ministry (and St. Paul is thinking of himself) has been sent out to preach it. The quotation then follows as a justification from prophecy of the ministry to the Gentiles. The possibility of adopting such an interpretation must depend partly on the view taken of the argument of the whole chapter (see the General Discussion at the end), but in any case the logical connexion is wrong. If that were what St. Paul had intended to say, he must have written, ‘Salvation is intended for Gentile as well as Jew, for God has commissioned His ministers to preach to them: a commission implies preaching, preaching implies faith, faith implies worship, and worship salvation. The conversion of the Gentiles is the necessary result of the existence of an apostolate of the Gentiles.’ It will be seen that St. Paul puts the argument exactly in the opposite way, in a manner in fact in which he could never prove this conclusion.
2. Roman Catholic commentators, followed by Liddon and Gore, consider that the words are introduced in order to justify an apostolic or authorized ministry. But this is to introduce into the passage an idea which is quite alien to it, and which is unnecessary for the argument.
3. The right interpretation of the whole of this paragraph seems to be that of Chrysostom. The Jews, it has been shown, have neglected God’s method of obtaining righteousness; but in order, as he desires, to convict them of guilt in this neglect, St. Paul must show that they have had the opportunity of knowing about it, that their ignorance (ἀνονε ver. 3) is culpable. He therefore begins by asking what are the conditions necessary for ‘calling upon the Lord?’ and then shows that these conditions have been fulfilled. There may still be some question as to the meaning of the quotation. (1) It may be introduced merely as corroborative of the last chain in the argument (so most commentators). This need of a commissioned ministry corresponds to the joy and delight experienced when they arrive. Or better, (2) it may be looked upon as stating the fulfilment of the conditions. ‘Yes, and they have come, a fact that no one can fail to recognize, and which was foretold by the Prophet Isaiah.’ So Chrysostom, who sums up the passage thus: ‘If the being saved, then, came of calling upon Him, and calling upon Him from believing, and believing from hearing, and hearing from preaching, and preaching from being sent, and if they were sent, and did preach, and the prophet went round with them to point them out, and proclaim them, and say that these were they whom they showed of so many ages ago, whose feet even they praised because of the matter of their preaching; then it is quite clear that the not believing was their own fault only. And that because God’s part had been fulfilled completely.’
14. πςονἐιαέωτι The word ον as often in St. Paul, marks a stage in the argument. ‘We have discovered the new system of salvation: what conditions are necessary for its acceptance?’ The question is not the objection of an adversary, nor merely rhetorical, but rather deliberative (see Burton, M. and T. §169): hence the subjunctive (see below) is more suitable than the future which we find in 9:30. The subject of ἐιαέωτιis implied in vv. 12, 13, ‘those who would seek this new method of salvation by calling on the name of the Lord.’
In this series of questions in vv. 14, 15 the MSS. vary between the subjunctive and the future. Generally the authority for the subjunctive strongly preponderates: ἐιαέωτιאA B D E F G, πσεσσνאB D E F G P, κρξσνאA B D E K L P. In the case of ἀοσσνthere is a double variation. א A (A latet) B and some minuscules read ἀοσσν אD E F G K P and some minuscules read ἀοσνα; L etc., Clem.-Alex. Ath. Chrys. edd. Theodrt. and the TR. read ἀοσυι Here however the double variant makes the subjunctive almost certain. Although the form ἀοσυιis possible in N.T. Greek, it is most improbable that it should have arisen as a corruption from ἀοσνα, and it is too weakly supported to be the correct reading. ἀοσσν which will explain both variants and harmonizes with the other subjunctives, is therefore correct. B here alone among the leading MSS. is correct throughout.
ο οκἤοσν ‘how can they believe on Him whom they have not heard preaching?’ ο is for εςτῦο ο: and as ἀοεντνςmeans not ‘to hear of some one,’ but ‘to hear some one preaching or speaking,’ it must be so translated, and what follows must be interpreted by assuming that the preaching of Christ’s messengers is identical with the preaching of Christ Himself. This interpretation (that of Mey. and Gif.), although not without difficulties, is probably better than either of the other solutions proposed. It is suggested that ο may be for ὅ, and the passage is translated ‘of whom they have not heard’; but only a few instances of this usage are quoted, and they seem to be all early and poetical. The interpretation of Weiss, ο = where, completely breaks the continuity of the sentences.
15. κρξσν The nominative is ο κρσοτς which is implied in κρσοτς
By means of this series of questions St. Paul works out the conditions necessary for salvation back to their starting-point. Salvation is gained by calling on the Lord; this implies faith. Faith is only possible with knowledge. Knowledge implies an instructor or preacher. A preacher implies a commission. If therefore salvation is to be made possible for everyone, there must have been men sent out with a commission to preach it.
κθςγγατι Ὡ ὡαο ο πδςτνεαγλζμννἀαά By introducing this quotation St. Paul implies that the commissioned messengers have been sent, and the conditions therefore necessary for salvation have been fulfilled. ‘Yes, and they have been sent: the prophet’s words are true describing the glorious character of the Evangelical preachers.’
The quotation is taken from Isa_52:7, and resembles the Hebrew more closely than our present LXX text. In the original it describes the messengers who carry abroad the glad tidings of the restoration from captivity. But the whole of this section of Isaiah was felt by the Christians to be full of Messianic import, and this verse was used by the Rabbis of the coming of the Messiah (see the references given by Schoettgen, Hor. Heb. ii. 179). St. Paul quotes it because he wishes to describe in O. T. language the fact which will be recognized as true when stated, and to show that these facts are in accordance with the Divine method. ‘St. Paul applies the exclamation to the appearance of the Apostles of Christ upon the scene of history. Their feet are ώαο in his eyes, as they announce the end of the captivity of sin, and publish ερν (Eph_6:15 τ εαγλο τςερνς made by Christ, through the blood of His Cross, between God and man, between earth and heaven (2Co_5:18-20; Eph_2:17; Col_1:20); and all the blessings of goodness (τ ἀαά which God in Christ bestows on the Redeemed, especially δκισν.’ Liddon.
There are two critical questions in connexion with this quotation: the reading of the Greek text and its relation to the Hebrew and to the LXX.
(1) The RV. reads ὡ ὡαιο πδςτνεαγλζμννἀαά the T. R. inserts τνεα. ερννafter ο πδς The balance of authority is strongly in favour of the RV. The clause is omitted by אA B C minusc. pauc. Aegyptt. (Boh. Sah.) Aeth., Clem.-Alex. Orig. and Orig.-lat.: it is inserted by D E F G K L P &c., Vulg. Syrr. (Pesh. Harcl.) Arm. Goth., Chrys. Iren.-lat. Hil. al. The natural explanation is that the insertion has been made that the citation may correspond more accurately to the LXX. This end is not indeed altogether attained, for the LXX reads ἀονερνς and the omission might have arisen from Homoeoteleuton; but these considerations can hardly outweigh the clear preponderance of authority.
There is a somewhat similar difficulty about a second minor variation. The RV. reads ἀαάwith A B C D E F G P, Orig. Eus. Jo.-Damasc., the T. R. has τ ἀαάwith אetc. Clem.-Alex. Chrys. and most later authorities. Here the LXX omits the article, and it is difficult quite to see why it should have been inserted by a corrector; whereas if it had formed part of the original text he could quite naturally have omitted it.
(2) The LXX translation is here very inexact. πριιὡ ὥαἐὶτνὀέν ὡ πδςεαγλζμνυἀονερνς ὡ εαγλζμνςἀαά St. Paul’s words approach much more nearly to the Hebrew (RV.) ‘How beautiful upon the mountains are the feet of him that bringeth good tidings, that publisheth peace, that bringeth good tidings of good, that publisheth salvation.’ He shortens the quotation, makes it plural instead of singular to suit his purpose, and omits the words ‘upon the mountains,’ which have only a local significance.
16. ἀλ ο πνε. An objection suggested. ‘Yet, in spite of the fact that this message was sent, all did not obey the Gospel.’ ο πνε is a meiosis; cf. τ γρε ἠίτσντνς (3:3).
ὑήοσν like ὑεάηα (ver. 3), seems to imply the idea of voluntary submission: cf. 6:16, 17 δῦο ἐτ ᾧὑαοεε…ὑηοστ δ ἐ κρίςεςὃ πρδθτ.
τ εαγλῳ The word is of course suggested by the quotation of the previous verse.
Ἡαα γρλγικτλ ‘But this fact does not prove that no message had been sent; it is indeed equally in accordance with prophecy, for Isaiah, in a passage immediately following that in which he describes the messengers, describes also the failure of the people to receive the message.’ With γρcf. Mat_1:20 ff. The quotation is from the LXX of Isa_53:1. Κρε as Origen pointed out, does not occur in the Hebrew.
ἀο: means (1) ‘hearing,’ ‘the faculty by which a thing is heard’; (2) ‘the substance of what is heard,’ ‘a report, message.’ In this verse it is used in the second meaning, ‘who hath believed our report?’ In ver. 17, it shades off into the first, ‘faith comes by hearing.’ It is quite possible of course to translate ‘report’ or ‘message’ there also, but then the connexion of idea with ver. 18 μ οκἤοσνis obscured.
It has been questioned to whom St. Paul is referring in this and the preceding verses—the Gentiles or the Jews. The language is quite gener