things connected with redemption, but, on the contrary, to include the whole under one word: and
he mentioned “blood,” because by it we are cleansed. Thus, by taking a part for the whole, he points
out the whole work of expiation. For, as he had said before, that God is reconciled in Christ, so he
now adds, that this reconciliation is obtained by faith, mentioning, at the same time, what it is that
faith ought mainly to regard in Christ — his blood.
For (propter) the remission of sins,^120 etc. The causal preposition imports as much as though
he had said, “for the sake of remission,” or, “to this end, that he might blot out sins.” And this
definition or explanation again confirms what I have already often reminded you, — that men are
pronounced just, not because they are such in reality, but by imputation: for he only uses various
modes of expression, that he might more clearly declare, that in this righteousness there is no merit
of ours; for if we obtain it by the remission of sins, we conclude that it is not from ourselves; and
further, since remission itself is an act of God’s bounty alone, every merit falls to the ground.
It may, however, be asked, why he confines pardon to preceding sins? Though this passage is
variously explained, yet it seems to me probable that Paul had regard to the legal expiations, which
were indeed evidences of a future satisfaction, but could by no means pacify God. There is a similar
passage in Hebrews 9:15, where it is said, that by Christ a redemption was brought from sins, which
remained under the former Testament. You are not, however, to understand that no sins but those
of former times were expiated by the death of Christ — a delirious notion, which some fanatics
have drawn from a distorted view of this passage. For Paul teaches us only this, — that until the
death of Christ there was no way of appeasing God, and that this was not done or accomplished by
the legal types: hence the reality was suspended until the fullness of time came. We may further
say, that those things which involve us daily in guilt must be regarded in the same light; for there
is but one true expiation for all.
(^120) The words are,. They seem connected, not with the first clause, but with the one immediately preceding; and
may be rendered here in; see a note on Romans 2:26; or more properly, perhaps, on account of. “For a proof of his own
righteousness in passing by the sins,” etc., Macknight; “In order to declare his justification with respect to the remission of sins,”
Stuart
What is God’s “righteousness” here has been variously explained. Some regard it his righteousness in fulfilling his promises,
as Beza; others, his righteousness in Christ to believers, mentioned in chapter. 1:17, as Augustine; and others, his righteousness
as the God of rectitude and justice, as Chrysostom Some, too, as Grotius, view it as meaning goodness or mercy, regarding the
word as having sometimes this sense.
It is the context that can help us to the right meaning. God exhibited his Son as a propitiation, to set forth this righteousness;
and this righteousness is connected with the remission of, or rather; as the word means, the preterition of or connivance at sins
committed under the old dispensation: and those sins were connived at through the forbearance of God, he not executing the
punishment they deserved; and the purpose is stated to be, — that God might be or appear just, while he is the justifier of those
who believe in Christ. Now, what can this righteousness be but his administrative justice? As the law allowed no remission, and
God did remit sins, there appeared to be a stain on divine justice. The exhibition of Christ as an atonement is what alone removes
it. And there is a word in the former verse, as Venema justly observes, which tends to confirm this view, and that word is
redemption, , which is a deliverance obtained by a ransom, or by a price, such as justice requires.
Both Doddridge and Scott regard the passage in this light; and the latter gives the following version of it, —
“Whom God hath before appointed to be a propitiation, through faith in his blood, for a demonstration of his justice, on
account of the passing by of sins, that had been committed in former times, through the forbearance of God; I say, for a
demonstration of his justice, in this present time, in order that he might be just, and the justifier of him that believeth in Jesus.”
— Nothing can be clearer than this version.
The last words are rightly rendered, though not literally; — “him of the faith of Jesus,” or, “him of faith in
Jesus.” Him of faith is him who believes, as μ — “them not of circumcision” means “them who are not circumcised,”
Romans 4:12; and — “those of contention,” signifies, “those who contend,” or, are contentious, Romans 2:8. — Ed.