Study of ROMANS 3:21-31

Verse 21. But now. The apostle, having shown the entire failure of all attempts to be justified by the law, whether among Jews or Gentiles, proceeds to state fully the plan of justification by Jesus Christ in the gospel. To do this was the main design of the epistle, Romans 1:17. He makes, therefore, in the close of this chapter, an explicit statement of the nature of the doctrine; and in the following parts of the epistle he fully-proves it, and illustrates its effects.

The righteousness of God. God's plan of justifying men. See Barnes "Romans 1:17".

Without the law. In a way different from personal obedience to the law. It does not mean that God abandoned his law; or that Jesus Christ did not regard the law, for he came to "magnify" it, Isaiah 42:21 or that sinners after they are justified have no regard to the law; but it means simply what the apostle had been endeavouring to show, that justification could not be accomplished by personal obedience to any law of Jew or Gentile, and that it must be accomplished in some other way.

Being witnessed. Being borne witness to. It was not a new doctrine; it was found in the Old Testament. The apostle makes this observation with special reference to the Jews. He does not declare any new thing, but that which was fully declared in their own sacred writings.

By the law. This expression here evidently denotes, as it did commonly among the Jews, the five books of Moses. And the apostle means to say that this doctrine was found in those books; not that it was in the ten commandments, or in the law, strictly so called. It is not a part of law to declare justification except by strict and perfect obedience. That it was found in those books the apostle shows by the case of Abraham, Romans 4. See also his reasoning on Leviticus 18:5, and Deuteronomy 30:12-14, in Romans 10:5-11; comp. Exodus 34:6,7.

And the prophets. Generally, the remainder of the Old Testament. The phrase "the law and the prophets" comprehended the whole of the Old Testament, Matthew 5:17; 11:13; 22:40; Acts 13:15; 28:23. That this doctrine was contained in the prophets, the apostle showed by the passage quoted from Habakkuk 2:4, in Habakkuk 1:17, "The just shall live by faith." The same thing he showed in Romans 10:11 from Isaiah 28:16; 49:23 and Romans 4:6-8, from Psalms 22. The same thing is fully taught in Isaiah 53:11; Daniel 9:24. Indeed, the general tenor of the Old Testament-- the appointment of sacrifices, etc.--taught that man was a sinner, and that he could not be justified by obedience to the moral law.

{z} "by the Law and the Prophets" Acts 26:22

Verse 22. Even the righteousness of God. The apostle, having stated that the design of the gospel was to reveal a new plan of becoming just in the sight of God, proceeds here more fully to explain it. The explanation which he offers makes it plain that the phrase so often used by him, "righteousness of God," does not refer to an attribute of God, but to his plan of making men righteous. Here he says that it is by faith in Jesus Christ; but surely an attribute of God is not produced by faith in Jesus Christ. It means God's mode of regarding men as righteous through their belief in Jesus Christ.

By faith of Jesus Christ. That is, by faith in Jesus Christ. Thus the expression, Mark 11:22, "Have the faith of God," (margin,) means, have faith in God. So Acts 3:16, the "faith of his name," (Greek,) means, faith in his name. So Galatians 2:20, the "faith of the Son of God" means, faith in the Son of God. This cannot mean that faith is the meritorious cause of salvation, but that it is the instrument or means by which we become justified. It is the state of mind, or condition of the heart, to which God has been pleased to promise justification. (On the nature of faith, See Barnes "Mark 16:16".) God has promised that they who believe in Christ shah be pardoned and saved. This is his plan in distinction from the plan of those who seek to be justified by works.

Unto all and upon all. It is evident that these expressions are designed to be emphatic, but why both are used is not very apparent. Many have supposed that there was no essential difference in the meaning. If there be a difference, it is probably this: the first expression, "unto all"--\~eiv pantav\~--may denote that this plan of justification has come (Luther) unto all men, to Jews and Gentiles; i.e. that it has been provided for them and offered to them without distinction. The plan was ample for all, was fitted for all, was equally necessary for all, and was offered to all. The second phrase, "upon all"--\~epi pantav\~--may be designed to guard against the supposition that all therefore would be benefited by it, or be saved by the mere face that the announcement had come to all. The apostle adds, therefore, that the benefits of this plan must actually come upon all, or must be applied to all, if they would be justified. They could not be justified merely by the fact that the plan was provided, and that the knowledge of it had come to all, but by their actually coming under this plan, and availing themselves of it. Perhaps there is reference in the last expression, "upon all," to a robe, or garment, that is placed upon one to hide his nakedness, or sin. Comp. Isaiah 64:6, also Philippians 3:9.

For there is no difference. That is, there is no difference in regard to the matter under discussion. The apostle does not mean to say that there is no difference in regard to the talents, dispositions, education, and property of men; but there is no distinction in regard to the way in which they must be justified. All must be saved, if saved at all, in the same mode, whether Jews or Gentiles, bond or free, rich or poor, learned or ignorant. None can be saved by works; and all are therefore dependent on the mercy of God in Jesus Christ.

{a} "faith of Jesus Christ" Romans 5:1

Verse 23. For all have sinned. This was the point which he had fully established in the discussion in these chapters.

And come short. Greek, Are deficient in regard to; are wanting, etc. Here it means, that they had failed to obtain, or were destitute of.

The glory of God. The praise or approbation of God. They had sought to be justified, or approved, by God; but all had failed. Their works of the law had not secured his approbation; and they were therefore under condemnation. The word glory--\~doxa\~--is often used in the sense of praise, or approbation. John 5:41,44; John 7:18;; 8:50,54; 12:43.

{b} "all have sinned" Ecclesiastes 7:20

Verse 24. Being justified. Being treated as if righteous; that is, being regarded and treated as if they had kept the law. The apostle has shown that they could not be so regarded and treated by any merit of their own, or by personal obedience to the law. He now affirms that if they were so treated, it must be by mere favour, and as a matter not of right, but of gift. This is the essence of the gospel. And to show this, and the way in which it is done, is the main design of this epistle. The expression here is be understood as referring to all who are justified, Romans 3:22. The righteousness of God, by faith in Jesus Christ, is "upon all who believe," who are all "justified freely by his grace."

Freely--\~dwrean\~. This word stands opposed to that which is purchased, or which is obtained by labour, or which is a matter of claim. It is a free, undeserved gift, not merited by our obedience to the law, and not that to which we have any claim. The apostle uses the word here in reference to those who are justified. To them it is a mere undeserved gift. It does not mean that it has been obtained, however, without any price or merit from any one, for the Lord Jesus has purchased it with his own blood, and to him it becomes a matter of justice that those who were given to him should be justified, 1 Corinthians 6:20; 7:23; 2 Peter 2:1; 1 Peter 2:9, (Greek.) Acts 20:28; Isaiah 53:11. We have no offering to bring, and no claim. To us, therefore, it is entirely a matter of gift.

By his grace. By his favour; by his mere undeserved mercy. See Barnes "Romans 1:7".

Through the redemption--\~dia thv apolutrwsewv\~. The word used here occurs but ten times in the New Testament, Luke 21:28; Romans 3:24; 8:23; 1 Corinthians 1:30 Ephesians 1:7,14; 4:30; Colossians 1:14; Hebrews 9:15; 11:35. Its root--\~lutron\~ lutron--properly denotes the price which is paid for a prisoner of war; the ransom, or stipulated purchase-money, which being paid, the captive is set free. The word here used is then employed to denote liberation from bondage, captivity, or evil of any kind, usually keeping up the idea of a price, or a ransom paid, in consequence of which the delivery is effected. It is sometimes used, in a large sense, to denote simple deliverance by any means, without reference to a price paid, as in Luke 21:28; Romans 8:23; Ephesians 1:14. That this is not the sense here, however, is apparent. For the apostle in the next verse proceeds to specify the price which has been paid, or the means by which this redemption has been effected. The word here denotes that deliverance from sin, and from the evil consequences of sin, which has been effected by the offering of Jesus Christ as a propitiation, Romans 3:25.

That is in Christ Jesus. Or, that has been effected by Christ Jesus; that of which he is the author and procurer. Comp. John 3:16.

Verse 25. Whom God hath set forth. Margin, Fore-ordained --\~proeyeto\~. The word properly means, to place in public view; to exhibit in a conspicuous, situation, as goods are exhibited or exposed for sale, or as premiums or rewards of victory were exhibited to public view in the games of the Greeks. It sometimes has the meaning of decreeing, purposing, or constituting, as in the margin, (comp. Romans 1:13; Ephesians 1:9) and many have supposed that this is its meaning here. But the connexion seems to require the usual signification of the word; and it means that God has publicly exhibited Jesus Christ as a propitiatory sacrifice for the sins of men. This public exhibition was made by his being offered on the cross, in the face of angels and of men. It was not concealed; it was done openly. He was put to open shame; and so put to death as to attract towards the scene the eyes of angels, and of the inhabitants of all worlds.

To be a propitiation--\~ilasthrion\~. This word occurs but in one other place in the New Testament: Hebrews 9:5, "And over it (the ark) the cherubim of glory shadowing the mercy-seat." It is used here to denote the lid or cover of the ark of the covenant. It was made of gold, and over it were the cherubim. In this sense it is often used by the LXX. Exodus 25:17, "And thou shalt make a propitatory--\~ilasthrion\~, of gold," \\Ex 25:18-20,22 30:6 31:7 35:12 37:6-9 40:20 Le 16:2,13\\. The Hebrew name for this was capphoreth, from the verb caphar, to cover, or conceal. It was from this place that God was represented as speaking to the children of Israel: Exodus 25:22, "And I will speak to thee front above the Ilasterion," the propitiatory, the mercy-seat; Leviticus 16:2, "For I will appear in the cloud upon the mercy.seat." This seat, or cover, was covered with the smoke o{ the incense, when the high priest entered the most holy place, Leviticus 16:13. And the blood of the bullock offered on the great day of atonement was to be sprinkled "upon the mercy-seat," and "before the mercy-seat," "seven times," Leviticus 16:14,15. This sprinkling or offering of blood was called making "an atonement for the holy place, because of the uncleanness of the children of Israel," etc., Leviticus 16:16. It was from this mercy-seat that God pronounced pardon, or expressed himself as reconciled to his people. The atonement was made, the blood was sprinkled, and the reconciliation thus effected. The name was thus given to that cover of the ark, because it was the place from which God declared himself reconciled to his people. Still the inquiry is, why is this name given to Jesus Christ? In what sense is he declared to be a propitiation? It is evident that it cannot be applied to him in any literal sense. Between the golden cover of the ark of the covenant and the Lord Jesus the analogy must be very slight, if any such analogy can be perceived. We may observe, however,

(1.) that the main idea, in regard to the cover of the ark called the mercy-seat, was that of God's being reconciled to his people; and that this is the main idea in regard to the Lord Jesus, whom "God hath set forth."

(2.) This reconciliation was effected then by the sprinkling of blood on the mercy-seat, Leviticus 16:15,16. The same is true of the Lord Jesus --by blood.

(3.) In the former case it was [by] the blood of atonement; the offering of the bullock on the great day of atonement, that the reconciliation was effected, Leviticus 16:17,18. In the case of the Lord Jesus it was also by blood--by the blood of atonement. But it was by his own blood. This the apostle distinctly states in this verse.

(4.) In the former case there was a sacrifice, or expiatory offering; and so it is in reconciliation by the Lord Jesus. In the former, the mercy-seat was the visible, declared place where God would express his reconciliation with his people. So in the latter, the offering of the Lord Jesus is the manifest and open way by which God will be recon- ciled to men.

(5.) In the former, there was joined the idea of a sacrifice for sin, Leviticus 16:1. So in the latter. And hence the main idea of the apostle here is to convey the idea of a sacrifice for sin; or to set forth the Lord Jesus as such a sacrifice. Hence the word "propitiation" in the original may express the idea of a propitiatory sacrifice, as well as the cover to the ark. The word is an adjective, and may be joined to the noun sacrifice, as well as to denote the mercy-seat of the ark. This meaning accords also with its classic meaning to denote a propitiatory offering, or an offering to produce reconciliation. Christ is thus represented, not as a mercy-seat, which would be unintelligible; but as the medium, the offering, the expiation, by which reconciliation is produced between God and man.

Through faith. Or, by means of faith. The offering will be of no avail without faith. The offering has been made; but it will not be applied, except where there is faith. He has made an offering which may be efficacious in putting away sin; but it produces no reconciliation, no pardon, except where it is accepted by faith.

In his blood. Or, in his death--his bloody death. Among the Jews, the blood was regarded as the seat of life, or vitality, Leviticus 17:11, "The life of the flesh is in the blood." Hence they were commanded not to eat blood: Genesis 9:4, "But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat." Leviticus 19:26; Deuteronomy 12:23; 1 Samuel 14:34. This doctrine is contained uniformly in the sacred Scriptures. And it has been also the opinion of not a few celebrated physiologists, as well in modern as in ancient times. The same was the opinion of the ancient Pharisees and Hindoos. Homer thus often speaks of blood as the seat of life, as in the expression \~porfureov yanatov\~, or purple death. And Virgil speaks of purple life,

Purpuream vomit ille animam. AEniad, ix. 349.
Empedocles and Critias, among the Greek philosophers, also embraced this opinion. Among the moderns, Harvey, to whom we are indebted for a knowledge of the circulation of the blood, fully believed it. Hoffman and Huxham believed it. Dr. John Hunter has fully adopted the belief, and sustained it, as he supposed, by a great variety of considerations. See Good's Book of Nature, pp. 102, 108, Edit. New York, 1828. This was undoubtedly the doctrine of the Hebrews; and hence with them to shed the blood was a phrase signifying to kill; hence the efficacy of their sacrifices was supposed to consist in the blood, that is, in the life of the victim. Hence it was unlawful to eat it, as it was the life, the seat of vitality; the more immediate and direct gift of God. When therefore the blood of Christ is spoken of in the New Testament, it means the offering of his life as a sacrifice, or his death as an expiation. His life was given to make atonement. See the word blood thus used in Romans 5:9; Ephesians 1:7; Colossians 1:14; Hebrews 9:12,14; Hebrews 13:12; Revelation 1:5; 1 Peter 1:19; 1 John 1:7. By faith in his death as a sacrifice for sin; by believing that he took our sins; that he died in our place; by thus, in some sense, making his offering ours; by approving it, loving it, embracing it, trusting it, our sins become pardoned, and our souls made pure.
To declare. \~eiv endeixin\~. For the purpose of showing, or exhibiting; to present it to man. The meaning is, that the plan was adopted; the Saviour was given; he suffered and died; and the scheme is proposed to men, for the purpose of making a full manifestation of his plan, in contradistinction from all the plans of men.

His righteousness. His plan of justification. The method or scheme which he has adopted, in distinction from that of man, and which he now exhibits, or proffers to sinners. There is great variety in the explanation of the word here rendered righteousness. Some explain it as meaning veracity; others as holiness; others as goodness; others as essential justice. Most interpreters, perhaps, have explained it as referring to an attribute of God. But the whole connexion requires us to understand it here as in Romans 1:17, not of an attribute of God, but of his plan of justifying sinners. He has adopted and proposed a plan by which men may become just by faith in Jesus Christ, and not by their own works. His acquitting men from sin; his regarding them and treating them as just, is set forth in the gospel by the offering of Jesus Christ as a sacrifice on the cross.

For the remission of sins. Margin, Passing over. The word here used (\~paresin\~) occurs nowhere else in the New Testament, nor in the Septuagint. It means passing by, as not noticing; and hence forgiving. A similar idea occurs in 2 Samuel 24:10; Micah 7:18: "Who is a God like unto thee, that passeth by the transgression of the remnant of his inheritance?" In Romans it means for the pardoning, or in order to pardon past transgression.

That are past. That have been committed; or that have existed before. This has been commonly understood to refer to past generations, as affirming that sins under all dispensations of the world are to be forgiven in this manner, through the sacrifice of Christ. And it has been supposed that all who have been justified have received pardon by the merits of the sacrifice of Christ. This may be true; but there is no reason to think that this is the idea in this passage, for

(1.) the scope of the passage does not require it. The argument is not to show how men had been justified, but how they might be. It is not to discuss an historical fact, but to state the way in which sin was to be forgiven under the gospel.

(2.) The language has no immediate or necessary reference to past generations. It evidently refers to the past lives of the individuals who are justified, and not to the sins of former times. All that the passage means, therefore, is, that the plan of pardon is such as completely to remove all the former sins of the life, not of all former generations. If it referred to the sins of former times, it would not be easy to avoid the doctrine of universal salvation.

Through the forbearance of God. Through his patience, his long-suffering. That is, he did not come forth in judgment when the sin was committed; he spared us, though deserving of punishment; and now he comes forth completely to pardon those sins concerning which he has so long and so graciously exercised forbearance. This expression obviously refers not to the remission of sins, but to the fact that they were committed while he evinced such long-suffering. Comp. Acts 17:30. I do not know better how to show the practical value and bearing of this important passage of Scripture, than by transcribing a part of the affecting experience of the poet Cowper. It is well known that before his conversion he was oppressed by a long and dreadful melancholy; that this was finally heightened to despair; and that he was then subjected to the kind treatment of Dr. Cotton in St. Alban's, as a melancholy case of derangement. His leading thought was, that he was doomed to inevitable destruction, and that there was no hope. From this he was roused only by the kindness of his brother, and by the promises of the gospel. (See Taylor's Life of Cowper.) The account of his conversion I shall now give in his own words. "The happy period,, which was to shake off my fetters, and afford me a clear discovery of the free mercy of God in Christ Jesus was now arrived. I flung myself into a chair near the window, and, seeing a Bible there, ventured once more to apply to it for comfort and instruction. The first verse I saw was the 25th of the third chapter of Romans, Whom God hath set forth, etc. Immediately I received strength to believe, and the full beam of the Sun of Righteousness shone upon me. I saw the sufficiency of the atonement he had made for my pardon and justification. In a moment I believed, and received the peace of the gospel. Unless the almighty Arm had been under me, I think I should have been overwhelmed with gratitude and joy. My eyes filled with tears, and my voice choked with transport. I could only look up to heaven in silent fear, overwhelmed with love and wonder. How glad should I now have been to have spent every moment in prayer and thanksgiving. I lost no opportunity of repairing to a throne of grace; but flew to it with an earnestness irresistible, and never to be satisfied."

{1} "set forth" or, "fore-ordained"
{2} "remission of sins" or, "passing over"

Verse 26. At this time. The time now since the Saviour has come, now is the time when he manifests it.

That he might be just. This verse contains the substance of the gospel. The word "just" here does not mean benevolent, or merciful, though it may sometimes have that meaning, (See Barnes "Matthew 1:19", also See Barnes "John 17:25") but it refers to the fact that God had retained the integrity of his character as a moral Governor; that he had shown a due regard to his law, and to the penalty of the law, by his plan of salvation. Should he forgive sinners without an atonement, justice would be sacrificed and abandoned. The law would cease to have any terrors for the guilty, and its penalty would be a nullity. In the plan of salvation, therefore, he has shown a regard to the law by appointing his Son to be a substitute in the place of sinners; not to endure its precise penalty, for his sufferings were not eternal, nor were they attended with remorse of conscience, or by despair, which are the proper penalty of the law; but he endured so much as to accomplish the same ends as if those who shall be saved by him had been doomed to eternal death. That is, he showed that the law could not be violated without introducing suffering; and that it could not be broken with impunity, he showed that he had so great a regard for it, that he would not pardon one sinner without an atonement. And thus he secured the proper honour to his character as a lover of his law, a hater of sin, and a just God. He has shown that if sinners do not avail themselves of the offer of pardon by Jesus Christ, they must experience in their own souls for ever the pains which this substitute for sinners endured in behalf of men on the cross. Thus, no principle of justice has been abandoned; no threatening has been modified; no claim of his law has been let down; no disposition has been evinced to do injustice to the universe by suffering the guilty to escape. He is in all this great transaction, a just moral governor, as just to his law, to himself, to his Son, to the universe, when he pardons, as he is when he sends the incorrigible sinner down to hell. A full compensation, an equivalent, has been provided by the sufferings of the Saviour in the sinner's stead, and the sinner may be pardoned.

And the justifier of him, etc. Greek, Even justifying him that believeth, etc. This is the peculiarity and the wonder of the gospel, Even while pardoning, and treating the ill-deserving as if they were innocent, he can retain his pure and holy character. His treating the guilty with favour does not show that he loves guilt and pollution, for he has expressed his abhorrence of it in the atonement. His admitting them to friendship and heaven does not show that he approves their past conduct and character, for he showed how much he hated even their sins by giving his Son to a shameful death for them. When an executive pardons offenders, there is an abandonment of the principles of justice and law. The sentence is set aside; the threatenings of the law are departed from; and it is done without compensation. It is declared that, in certain cases, the law may be violated, and its penalty not be inflicted. But not so with God. He shows no less regard to his law in pardoning than in punishing. This is the grand, glorious, peculiar feature of the gospel plan of salvation.

Him which believeth in Jesus. Gr., Him who is of the faith of Jesus; in contradistinction from him who is of the works of the law; that is, who depends on his own works for salvation.

{c} "that he might be just" Acts 13:38,39

Verse 27. Where is boasting then? Where is there ground or occasion of boasting or pride? Since all have sinned, and since all have failed of being able to justify themselves by obeying the law, and since all are alike dependent on the mere mercy of God in Christ, all ground of boasting is of course taken away. This refers particularly to the Jews, who were much addicted to boasting of their peculiar privileges. See Barnes "Romans 3:1", etc.

By what law? The word law here is used in the sense of arrangement, rule, or economy. By what arrangement, or by the operation of what rule, is boasting excluded? Stuart. See Galatians 3:21; Acts 21:20.

Of works? The law which commands works, and on which the Jews relied. If this were complied with, and they were thereby justified, they would have had ground of self-confidence, or boasting, as being justified by their own merits. But a plan which led to this, which ended in boasting, and self-satisfaction, and pride, could not be true.

Nay. No.

The law of faith. The rule, or arrangement which proclaims that we have no merit; that we are lost sinners; and that we are to be justified only by faith.

Verse 28. Therefore. As the result of the previous train of argument.

That a man. That all who are justified; that is, that there is no other way.

Is justified by faith. Is regarded and treated as righteous, by believing in the Lord Jesus Christ.

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

{d} "that a man" Romans 3:20-22; 8:3; Galatians 2:16

Verses 29, 30. Is he the God, etc. The Jews supposed that he was the God of their nation only, that they only were to be admitted to his favour. In these verses Paul showed that as all had alike sinned, Jews and Gentiles, and as the plan of salvation by faith was adapted to sinners, without any special reference to Jews, so God could show favours to all, and all might be admitted on the same terms to the benefits of the plan of salvation.

Verse 30. It is one God. The same God; there is but one, and his plan is equally fitted to Jews and Gentiles.

The circumcision. Those who are circumcised--the Jews.

The uncircumcision. Gentiles; all who were not Jews.

By faith--through faith. There is no difference in the meaning of these expressions. Both denote that faith is the instrumental cause of justification, or acceptance with God.

{e} "which shall justify" Galatians 3:8,28

Verse 31. Do we then make void the law. Do we render it vain and useless; do we destroy its moral obligation; and do we prevent obedience to it, by the doctrine of justification by faith ? This was an objection which would naturally be made; and which has thousands of times been since made, that the doctrine of justification by faith tends to licentiousness. The word law here, I understand as referring to the moral law, and not merely to the Old Testament. This is evident from Romans 3:20,21, where the apostle shows that no man could be justified by deeds of law, by conformity with the moral law. See Note.

God forbid. By no means. See Barnes "Romans 3:4". This is an explicit denial of any such tendency.

Yea, we establish the law. That is, by the doctrine of justification by faith; by this scheme of treating men as righteous, the moral law is confirmed, its obligation is enforced, obedience to it is secured. This is done in the following manner:

(1.) God showed respect to it, in being unwilling to pardon sinners without an atonement. He showed that it could not be violated with impunity; that he was resolved to fulfil its threatenings.

(2.) Jesus Christ came to magnify it, and to make it honourable. He showed respect to it in his life; and he died to show that God was determined to inflict its penalty.

(3.) The plan of justification by faith leads to an observance of the law. The sinner sees the evil of transgression. He sees the respect which God has shown to the law. He gives his heart to God, and yields himself to obey his law. All the sentiments that arise from the conviction of sin; that flow from gratitude for mercies; that spring from love to God; all his views of the sacredness of the law, prompt him to yield obedience to it. The fact that Christ endured such sufferings to show the evil of violating the law, is one of the strongest motives prompting to obedience. We do not easily and readily repeat that which overwhelms our best friends in calamity; and we are brought to hate that which inflicted such woes on the Saviour's soul. The sentiment recorded by Watts is as true as it is beautiful :--

'"Twas for my sins my dearest Lord Hung on the cursed tree, And groan'd away his dying life For thee, my soul, for thee.
"Oh, how I hate those lusts of mine That crucified my Lord; Those sins that pierc'd and nail'd his flesh Fast to'the fatal wood.

"Yes, my Redeemer, they shall die, My heart hath so decreed, Nor will I spare the guilty things That made my Saviour bleed."

This is an advantage in moral influence which no cold, abstract law ever has over the human mind. And one of the chief glories of the plan of salvation is, that while it justifies the sinner, it brings a new set of influences from heaven, more tender and mighty than can be drawn from any other source, to produce obedience to the law of God.