Some, in order to avoid what seems inconsistent, have held that former sins are said to have
been forgiven, lest there should seem to he a liberty given to sin in future. It is indeed true that no
pardon is offered but for sins committed; not that the benefit of redemption fails or is lost, when
we afterwards fall, as Novatus and his sect dreamed, but that it is the character of the dispensation
of the gospel, to set before him who will sin the judgment and wrath of God, and before the sinner
his mercy. But what I have already stated is the real sense.
He adds, that this remission was through forbearance; and this I take simply to mean gentleness,
which has stayed the judgment of God, and suffered it not to burst forth to our ruin, until he had at
length received us into favor. But there seems to be here also an implied anticipation of what might
be said; that no one might object, and say that this favor had only of late appeared. Paul teaches
us, that it was an evidence of forbearance.
26.For a demonstration,^121 etc. The repetition of this clause is emphatical; and Paul resignedly
made it, as it was very needful; for nothing is more difficult than to persuade man that he ought to
disclaim all things as his own, and to ascribe them all to God. At the same time mention was
intentionally made twice of this demonstration, that the Jews might open their eyes to behold it. —
At this time,etc. What had been ever at all times, he applies to the time when Christ was revealed,
and not without reason; for what was formerly known in an obscure manner under shadows, God
openly manifested in his Son. So the coming of Christ was the time of his good pleasure, and the
day of salvation. God had indeed in all ages given some evidence of his righteousness; but it
appeared far brighter when the sun of righteousness shone. Noticed, then, ought to be the comparison
between the Old and the New Testament; for then only was revealed the righteousness of God when
Christ appeared.
That he might be just,etc. This is a definition of that righteousness which he has declared was
revealed when Christ was given, and which, as he has taught us in the first chapter, is made known
in the gospel: and he affirms that it consists of two parts — The first is, that God is just, not indeed
as one among many, but as one who contains within himself all fullness of righteousness; for
complete and full praise, such as is due, is not otherwise given to him, but when he alone obtains
the name and the honor of being just, while the whole human race is condemned for injustice: and
then the other part refers to the communication of righteousness; for God by no means keeps his
riches laid up in himself, but pours them forth upon men. Then the righteousness of God shines in
us, whenever he justifies us by faith in Christ; for in vain were Christ given us for righteousness,
unless there was the fruition of him by faith. It hence follows, that all were unjust and lost in
themselves, until a remedy from heaven was offered to them.^122
(^121) There is a different preposition used here, , while is found in the preceding verse. The meaning seems to be the same,
for both prepositions are used to designate the design, end, or object of any thing. This variety seems to have been usual with
the Apostle; similar instances are found in Romans 3:22, as to and , and in Romans 3:30, as to and. “By both,” says
Wolfius, “the final cause (causa finalis) is indicated.” Beza renders them both by the same preposition, ad, in Latin; and Stuart
regards the two as equivalent. There is, perhaps, more refinement than truth in what Pareus says, — that intimates the proximate
end — the forgiveness of sins; and , the final end — the glory of God in the exhibition of his justice as well as of his mercy.
There is, at the same time, something in the passage which seems favorable to this view. Two objects are stated at the end of
the passage, — that God might appear just, and be also the justifier of such as believe. The last may refer to , and the former
to ; and this is consistent with the usual style of the Apostle; for, in imitation of the Prophets, where two things are mentioned
in a former clause, the order is reversed in the second. — Ed.
(^122) A parallel passage to this, including the two verses, Romans 3:25 and 26, is found in Hebrews 9:15; where a reference, as
here, is made to the effect of Christ’s death as to the saints under the Old testament. The same truth is implied in other parts of
Scripture, but not so expressly declared. Stuart makes here an important remark — that if the death of Christ be regarded only