W. (William) Sanday.

A critical and exegetical commentary on the Epistle to the Romans online

. (page 14 of 71)
Online LibraryW. (William) SandayA critical and exegetical commentary on the Epistle to the Romans → online text (page 14 of 71)
Font size
QR-code for this ebook

from office at Basel on a charge of heterodoxy he became Pro-
fessor in the Remonstrants' College at Amsterdam. His Greek
Testament appeared 1751, 1752. Wetstein was one of those inde-
fatigable students whose first-hand researches form the base of
other men's labours. In the history of textual criticism he deserves
to be named by the side of John Mill and Richard Bentley ; and
besides his collation of MSS. he collected a mass of illustrative
matter on the N. T. from classical, patristic, and rabbinical sources
which is still of great value.

4. Modern Period.

Tholuck, F. a. G., 1799-1877 ; Professor at Halle. Tholuck
was a man of large sympathies and strong religious character, and


both personally and through his commentary (which came out first
in 1824 and has been more than once translated) exercised a wide
influence outside Germany ; this is specially marked in the American

Fritzsche, C. F. a. (Fri.), 1801-1846, Professor at Giessen.
Fritzsche on Romans (3 vols. 1 836-1 843), like Liicke on St. John
and Block on Hebrews, is a vast quarry of materials to which all
subsequent editors have been greatly indebted. Fritzsche was one
of those philologists whose researches did most to fix the laws of
N. T. Greek, but his exegesis is hard and rationalizing. He
engaged in a controversy with Tholuck the asperity of which he
regretted before his death. He was however no doubt the better
scholar and stimulated Tholuck to self-improvement in this respect.

Meyer, H. A. W. (Mey.), 1800-1873; Consistorialrath in the
kingdom of Hanover. IMeyer's famous commentaries first began
to appear in 1832, and were carried on with unresting energy in a
succession of new and constantly enlarged editions until his death.
There is an excellent English translaiion of the Commentary on
Romans published by Messrs. T. and T. Clark under the editor-
ship of Dr. W. P. Dickson in 1873, 1874. Meyer and De Wette
may be said to have been the founders of the modern style of
commenting, at once scientific and popular : scientific, through its
rigorous — at times too rigorous — application of grammatical and
philological laws, and popular by reason of its terseness and power
of presenting the sifted results of learning and research. Since
Meyer's death the Commentary on Romans has been edited with
equal conscientiousness and thoroughness by Dr. Bernhaid Weiss,
Professor at Berlin (hence ' Mey.-W.'). Dr. Weiss has not all his
predecessor's vigour of style and is rather difficult to follow, but
especially in textual criticism marks a real advance.

De Wette, W. M. L. (De W.), 1 780-1849; Professor for a short
time at Berlin, whence he was dismissed, afterwards at Basel. His
Kurzgefasstes exegeiisches Handbuch zum Neuen Testament first
appeared in 1 836-1848. De Wette was an ardent lover of freedom
and rationalistically inclined, but his commentaries are models of
brevity and precision.

Stuart, IMoses, 1 780-1 852 ; Professor at Andover, Mass. Comm.
on Romans first published in 1832 (British edition with preface by
Dr. Pye-Smith in 1833). At a time when Biblical exegesis was
not being very actively prosecuted in Great Britain two works of
solid merit were produced in America. One of these was by
Moses Stuart, who did much to naturalize German methods. He
expresses large obligations to Tholuck, but is independent as
a commentator and modified considerably the Calvinism of his

Hodge, Dr. C, 1 797-1 878; Professor at Princeton, New Jersey.



His Comm. on Romans first published in 1835, rewritten in 1864,
is a weighty and learned doctrinal exposition based on the pririciples
of the Westminster Confession. Like Moses Stuart, Dr. Hodge
also owed much of his philological equipment to German) where
he had studied.

Alford, Dr. H. (Alf.), 1810-1871; Dean of Canterbury. His
Greek Testament (1849-1861, and subsequently) was the first to
import the results of German exegesis into many circles in England.
Nonconformists (headed by the learned Dr. J. Pye-Smith) had been
141 advance of the Established Church in this respect. Dean Alford's
laborious work is characterized by vigour, good sense, and scholar-
ship, sound as far as it goes ; it is probably still the best complete
Greek Testament by a single hand.

Wordsworth, Dr. Christopher, 1809-1885; Bishop of Lincoln.
Bishop Wordsworth's Greek Testaynent (i 856-1 860, and subse-
quently) is of an older type than Dean Alford's, and chiefly valuable
for its patristic learning. The author was not only a distinguished
prelate but a literary scholar of a high order (as may be seen by
his Athens and Attica, Conjectural Emendatiojis 0/ Ancient Authors,
and many other publications) but he wrote at a time when the
reading public was less exigent in matters of higher criticism and

JowETT, B., 18 1 7-1893; widely known as Master of Balliol
College and Regius Professor of Greek in the University of Oxford.
His edition of St. Paul's Epistles to the Thessalonians, Galatians,
and Romans first appeared in 1855; second edition 1859; recently
re-edited by Prof. L. Campbell. Professor Jowett's may be said to
have been the first attempt in England at an entirely modern view
of the Epistle. The essays contain much beautiful and suggestive
writing, but the exegesis is loose and disappointing.

Vaughan, Dr. C. J. (Va.); Dean of Llandaff. Dr. Vaughan's
edition first came out in 1859, and was afterwards enlarged; the
edition used for this commentary has been the 4th (1874). It is
a close study of the Epistle by a finished scholar with little further
help than the Concordance to the Septuagint and Greek Testament :
its greatest value lies in the careful selection of illustrative passages
from these sources.

Kelly, W. ; associated at one time with the textual critic
Tregelles. His Notes on the Epistle to the Romajis (London, 1873),
are written from a detached and peculiar standpoint ; but they are
the fruit of sound scholarship and of prolonged and devout study,
and they deserve more attention than they have received.

Beet, Dr. J. Agar; Tutor in the Wesleyan College, Richmond.
Dr. Beet's may be described as the leading Wesleyan commentary:
it starts from a very careiul exposition ot the text, but is intended
throughout as a contribution to systematic theology. The first


edition appeared in 1877, the second in i88i, and there have been

several others since.

GoDET, Dr. F. (Go.), Professor at Neuchatel. Commentaire sur
VEpitre aux domains, Paris, &c., 1879, English translation in
T. and T. Clark's series, 1881. Godet and Oltramare are both
Franco-Swiss theologians with a German training ; and their com-
mentaries are somewhat similar in character. They are extremely
full, giving and discussing divergent interpretations under the names
of their supporters. Both are learned and thoughtful works,
strongest in exegesis proper and weakest in textual criticism.

Oltramare, Hugues (Oltr.), 1813-1894; Professor at Geneva.
Commentaire sur I Epitre aux Romatns, published in 1 881, 1882
(a volume on chaps, i-v. 11 had appeared in 1843). Resembling
Godet in many particulars, Oltramare seems to us to have the
stronger grip and greater individuality in exegesis, though the
original views of which he is fond do not always commend them-
selves as right.

MouLE, Rev. H. C. G. (Mou.); Principal of Ridley Hall,
Cambridge. Mr. Moule's edition (in the Cambridge Bible for
Schools) appeared in 1879. ^^ reminds us of Dr. Vaughan's in
its elegant scholarship and seeming independence of other com-
mentaries, but it is fuller in exegesis. The point of view approaches
as nearly as an English Churchman is likely to approach to Cal-
vinism. Mr. Moule has also commented on the Epistle in The
Expositor's Bible.

GiFFORD, Dr. E. H. (Gif.); sometime Archdeacon of London,
The Epistle to the Romans in The Speaker's Commentary (1881)
was contributed by Dr. Gifford, but is also published separately.
We believe that this is on the whole the best as it is the most
judicious of all English commentaries on the Epistle. There are
few difficulties of exegesis which it does not fully face, and the
solution which it offers is certain to be at once scholarly and well
considered : it takes account of previous work both ancient and
modern, though the pages are not crowded with names and
references. Our obli^^aiions to this commentary are probably
higher than to any other.

LiDDON, Dr. H. P. (Lid.); Explanatory Analysis of St. Paul's
Epistle to the Romans, published posthumously in 1893, after being
in an earlier form circulated privately among Dr. Liddon's pupils
during his tenure of the Ireland Chair (1870-188 2). ThQ Attalysis
was first printed in 1876, but after that date much enlarged. It is
what its name implies, an analysis of the argument with very full
notes, but not a complete edition. It is perhaps true that fhe
analysis is somewhat excessively divided and subdivided ; in
exegesis it is largch based on Meyer, but it shows everywhere the
hand of a most lucid writer and accomplished theologian.


Barmbt, Dr. James; formerly Principal of Bishop Hatfield's
Hall, Durham. Dr. Barmby contributed Romans to the Pulpii
Commentary (London, 1890) ; a sound, independent and vigorous

Lipsius, Dr. R. A. (Lips.), 1830-1892 ; Professor at Jena. Thi-
most unwearied worker won and maintained his fame in oilur
fields than exegesis. He had however written a popular com-
mentary on Romans for the Protestanttnhibel (English translation,
published by Messrs. Williams & Norgate in 1883), and he edited
the same Epistle along with Galatians and Philippians in the
Handcommentar zum Netien Testament (Freiburg i. B., 1891).
This is a great improvement on the earlier work, and is perliaps
in many respects the best, as it is the latest, of German commen-
taries; especially on the side of historical criticism and Biblical
theology it is unsurpassed. No other commentary is so different
from those of our own countrymen, or would serve so well to
supplement their deficiencies.

ScHAEFER, Dr. A.; Professor at Miinster. Dr. Schaefer's Er-
kldrung d. Brief es an die Romer (Miinster i. W., 1891) may be
taken as a specimen of Roman Catholic commentaries. It is
pleasantly and clearly written, with fair knowledge of exegetical
literature, but seems to us often just to miss the point of the
Apostle's thought. Dr. Schanz, the ablest of Roman Catholic
commentators, has not treated St. Paul's Episdes.

We are glad to have been able to refer, through the kindness of
a friend, to a Russian commentary.

Theophanes, ob. 1893; was Professor and Inspector in the
St. Petersburgh Ecclesiastical Academy and afterwards Bishop of
Vladimir and Suzdal. He early gave up his see and retired to
a life of learning and devotion. His commentary on the Romans
was published in 1890. He is described as belonging to an
old and to a certain extent antiquated school of exegesis. His
commentary is based mainly on that of Chrysostom. Theophanes
has both the strength and weakness of his master. Like him he is
often historical in his treatment, like him he sometimes fails to
grasp the more profound points in the Apostle's teaching.


esiasHcal Writert (

see p.

xcviii ff.).

Amb. Ambrose.

Ambrstr. • «

, • Ambrosiaster.

Ath. .

1 , Athanasius.

Aug. .

• • Augustine.

Bas. . • <

t . Basil.

Chrys. •

• Chrysostom.


. . Clement of Alexandria.


• Clement of Rome.

Cypr. .

. Cyprian.

Cyr.-Alex. .

. Cyril of Alexandria.

Cyr.-Jerus. .

. • Cyril of Jerusalem.


. Epiphanius.

Eus. .

• Eusebius.


. Euthymius Zigabenus.

Hippol. •

, . Hippolyius.

Ign. .

, . Ignatius.

Jer. (Hieron.)

, . Jerome.

Jos. .

, Josephus.


, Methodius.


, . Novatian.

Oecum. ,

, . Oecumenius.

Orig. . . .

, . Origen.

Orig.-lat .

. Latin Version of Origan,


, Pelagius.

Phot. .

. Photius.

Ruf. .

, Rufinus.

SeduL .

. Sedulius.

Tert. .

. Tertullian.

Theod.-Mops. •

, Theodore of Mopsuessia.

TheodrL .

. Theodoret.

Theoph. • ,

. Theophylact



Versions (see p. Ixvi f.).


Aeth. .
Arrr., .
Goth. .
Latt .

Lat. Vet.

Syrr. .


Cov. .
Tyn. ,
Wic. .
AV. .
RV. .

Editors (see p. cv
Alf. .
Del. .
Fri. .
Gil .
Ga .
Lft. .
Lid. .
Lip«. .
Mey. .
Oltr. .
Va. .









Vetus Latina.







Rheims (or Douay).



Authorized Version.

Revised Version.

Textus Receptus.



Westcott and Hort




De Wette.


Fritzsche (C. F. A.^












C./.G. . • .

• • Corpus Inscriptionum



• • Corpus Inscriptionum



, • . Grimm -Thayer's Lexi-


Trench, Syn, • «

• • Trench on Synonyms.


• • Winer's Grammar.


, • . Expositor.

JBExeg. •

• • Journal of the Society of

Biblical Literature

and Exegesis.


• . Zeitschrift fUr wissen-

schaftliche Theologie.

add. • • . .

• • addit, addunt, &c


» • . alii, alibi.

cat. {eaten) . . ,

, catena.

codd. . , , ,

• . codices.

edd. . . . .

. . editores.

edd. pr. . . ,

• , editores priores (older


Om. • • • a

• . omittit, omittunt, ftc.

pauc. • •

. . pauci.


• . plerique.


. , plures.

praem. • • ,

, • . praemittit, praemittunt.


rel. . . . ,

. . reliqui.

a/3. 4/5, &c

• • • twice out of three times,

four out of five times,
In text-critical notes adverbs {his, semel &c.), statistics ('/„ */,) and
cod. codd., ed. edd., &c., always qualify the word which precedes, not
that which follows : ' Vulg. codd.' = some MSS. of the Vulgate,
Epiph. cod, or Epiph. ed.= n, MS. or some printed edition of

N.B. — The text commented upon is that commonly known as the
BeTixers' Qreek Text (i. e. the Greek Text presupposed in the Ke vised
Veriion of 1881) published by the Clarendon Press. The few instancea
Ia whioh th* editors diMeut from this text are noted as they ooour.



1. 1, 7. * Paul^ a divinely chosen and accredited Apostle^
gives Christian greethig to the Roman Churchy itself also
divinely called.

"Paul, a devoted servant of Jesus Christ, an Apostle called
by divine summons as much as any member of the original
Twelve, solemnly set apart for the work of delivering God's
message of salvation ; 'Paul, so authorized and commissioned,
gives greeting to the whole body of Roman Christians (whether
Jewish or Gentile), who as Christians are special objects of the
Divine love, called out of the mass of mankind into the inner
society of the Church, consecrated to God, like Israel of old, as
His own peculiar people. May the free unmerited favour of
God and the peace which comes from reconciliation with Him be
yours 1 May God Himself, the heavenly Father, and the Lord
Jesus Messiah, grant them to you!

I. 2-6. I preach, in accordance with our Jewish ScriP'
tures, Jesus the Son of David and Son of God, whose
commission I bear.

'The message which I am commissioned to proclaim is no
startling novelty, launched upon the world without preparation,
but rather the direct fulfilment of promises which God had
inspired the prophets of Israel to set down in Holy Writ. 'It
relates to none other than His Son, whom it presents in a twofold
aspect ; on the one hand by physical descent tracing His lineage

* In this one instance we have ventured to break up the long and heavily-
weighted sentence in the Greek, and to treat its two main divisions separately.
But the second of these is not in the strict sense a parenthesis : the consUuction
of the whole paragraph is continuous.


to David, as the Messiah was to do, *and on the other hand, in
virtue of the Holiness inherent in His spirit, visibly designated or
declared to be Son of God by the miracle of the Resurrection. He,
I say, is the sum and substance of my message, Jesus, the Jew's
Messiah, and the Christian's Lord. "And it was through Him that
I, like the rest of the Apostles, received both the general tokens of
God's favour in that I was called to be a Christian and also the
special gifts of an Apostle. 'IMy duty as an Apostle is among
all Gentile peoples, and therefore among you too at Rome, to win
men over to the willing service of loyalty to Him ; and the end
to which all my labours are directed is the honour of His Holy

1-7. In writing to the Church of the imperial city, which he

had not yet visited, St. Paul delivers his credentials with some
solemnity, and with a full sense of the magnitude of the issues in
which they and he alike are concerned. He takes occasion at
once to define (i) his own position, (ii) the position of his readers,
(iii) the central truth in that common Christianity which unites

The leading points in the section may be summarized thus:
(i) I, Paul, am an Apostle by no act of my own, but by the
deliberate call and in pursuance of the long-foreseen plan of God
(vv. 1,7). (ii) You, Roman Christians, are also special objects of
the Divine care. You inherit under the New Dispensation the
same position which Israel occupied under the Old (w. 6, 7).
(iii) The Gospel which I am commissioned to preach, though new
in the sense that it puts forward a new name, the Name of Jesus
Christ, is yet indissolubly linked to the older dispensation which
it fulfils and supersedes (w. 2, 7 ; see note on k\tjtois &yiois). (iv)
Its subject is Jesus, Who is at once the Jewish Messiah and the
Son of God (w. 3, 4). (v) From Him, the Son, and from the Father,
may the blessedness of Christians descend upon you (ver. 7).

This opening section of the Epistle affords a good opportunity
to watch the growth of a Christian Theology, in the sense of
reflection upon the significance of the Life and Death of Christ
and the relation of the newly inaugurated order of things to the
old. We have to remember (i) that the Epistle was written about
the year 58 a.d., or within thirty years of the Ascension; (2) that
in the interval the doctrinal language of Christianity has had to
be built up from the foundations. We shall do well to note which
of the terms used are old and which new, and how far old terms
have had a new face put upon them. We will return to this point
at the end of the paragraph.


1. SouXos 'irjCToo XpiCTTou : SovXor Qeov or Kvpiov is an Old Testa-
ment phrase, applied to the prophets in a body from Amos onwards
(Am. iii. 7; Jer. vii. 25 and repeatedly; Dan. ix. 6; Ezra ix, 11);
also with slight variations to Moses {dtpdncov Josh. i. 2), Joshua
(Josh. xxiv. 29 ;' Jud. ii. 8), David (title of Ps. xxxvi. [xxxv,] ; Pss.
Ixxviii. [Ixxvii.] 70; Ixxxix. [Ixxxviii.] 4, 21 ; also mus Kvpiov, title
of Ps. xviii. [xvii.]), Isaiah {vah Is. xx. 3); but applied also to
worshippers generally (Pss. xxxiv. [xxxiii.] 23 ; cxiii. [cxii.] i
jralSes; cxxxvi. [cxxxv.] 22 oflsrael. &c.).

^This is the first instance of a similar use in the New Testament ;
it is found also in the greetings of Phil., Tit., Jas., Jude, 2 Pet., show-
ing that as the Apostolic age progressed the assumption of the title
became established on a broad basis. But it is noticeable how
quietly St. Paul steps into the place of the prophets and leaders of
the Old Covenant, and how quietly he substitutes the name of His
own Master in a connexion hitherto reserved for that of Jehovah.

'It]<toO Xpio-ToO. A small question of reading arises here, which is per-
haps of somewhat more importance than may appear at first sight In the
opening verses of most of St. Pauls Epistles the MSB. vary between 'Ir^aov
XpiffTov and Xpiarov 'Itjctov. There is also evidently a certain method in the
variation. The evidence stands thus (where that on one side only is given
it may be assumed that all remaining authorities are on the other) : —
I Thess. i. i 'Itjcov 'KpiarZ unquestioned,
a Thess. i. i 'l-qaov Xpiar^ Edd. ; Xpiar^ 'Irjcrov D E F^' G, Ambrstr.

(f jf ed. Ballerini).
Gal. i. I 'Irjcrov Xpiarov unquestioned.
I Cor. i. I Xpiarov 'l-qaov BDEFG 17 al. fauc., Vulg. codd., Chrys.

Ambrstr. Aug. semel, Tisch , \VH. viarg.
a Cor. i. I Xpiaiov 'Irjaov N BMP 17 marg.. Hard, Euthal. cod. Theodrt

Tisch. WH. RV.
Rom. i. I Xpiarov 'Irjaov B, Vulg. codd., Orig. bis (contra Oiig.-lat. its)

Aug. semel Kmh. Ambrstr. al. Lat., Tisch. WH. marg.
Phil. i. I \piarov 'Irjaod N B D E, Boh., Tisch. WH. RV.
Eph. i. I Xpiarov 'Irjaov BDEP17, Vulg. codd. Boh. Goth. Hard.,

Orig. {ex Caten.) Jo.-Damasc. Ambrstr., Tisch. WH. RV.
Col. i. I Xpiarov 'l-qaov N A B F G L P 1 7, Vulg. codd. Boh. Hard., Euthal.

cod. Jo.-Damasc. Ambrstr. Hieron. al.. Tisch. WH. RV.
Philem. i. i Xp.arov 'I?;<roC N AD«FGKP {def. B), &c.. Boh., Hieron.

(uivid.) Ambrstr. al., Tisch. WH. RV.
I Tim. i. 1 Xpiarov 'Ir^aov XDFGP {def. B), Vulg. codd. Boh. Hard.,

Jo.-Damasc. Ambrstr., Tisch. WH. RV.
a Tim. i. I Xpiarov 'Irjaod NDEFGKP (de/. B) 17 al., Vulg. codd.
Boh. Sah. Hard., Euthal. r^i/. Jo.-Damasc. Ambrstr. al., Tisch. WH.
Tit. i. I Irjaov Xpiarov N D" E F G &c., Vulg. codd. Goth. Pesh. Arm.
Aeth., Chrys. Euthal. cod. Ambrstr. (ed. Ballerin.) al., Tisch. WH.
{sed Xpiarov ['Irjcrov] marg.) RV. ; Xpiarov 'Irjaov A minusc. ires, Vulg.
codd. Boh. Hard., Cassiod. ; Xpiarov tantum D^-*.
It will be observed that the Epistles being placed in a roughly chrono^
logical order, those at the head of the list read indubitably 'I7 'oC XpiaroZ
(or X/)jffTy), while those in the latter part (with the single exception of Tit^,
which is judidously treated by WH.) as indubitably read Xpiarov '117*01!,


Jnst aoout the group l and a Cor. Rom. there is a certain amount of


Remembering the Western element which enters into B in Ejip. Paul., it
looks as if the evidence for x^ i" i'l Cor. Rom. might be entirely Western;
but that is not quite clear, and the reading may possibly be right. In any
case it would seem that just about this time St. Paul fell into the habit of
writing Xpiarus 'irjaovs. The interest of this would lie in the fact that in
XptOTus 'Irjoovs the first word would seem to be rather more distinctly a
proper name than in 'iT^trovs Xpicrrus. No doubt the latter phrase is rapidly
passing into a proper name, but Xptarii would seem to have a little of its
sense as a title still clinging to it : the phrase would be in fact transitional
between XptffToi or 6 Xpiaros of the Gospels and the later Xpiards 'Irjaovs or
Xpi<TT<$s simply as a proper name (see Sanday, Bampton Lectures, p. 189 f.,
and an article by the Rev. F. Herbert Stead in Expos. 18S8, i. 386 ft'.). The
subject would repay working out on a wider scale of induction.

k\t)tos diToaToXos. kKijo-is is another idea which has its roots in
the Old Testament. Eminent servants of God become so by an
express Divine summons. The typical examples would be
Abraham (Gen. xii. 1-3), Moses (Ex. iii. 10), the prophets (Isa. vi.
8, 9 ; Jer. i. 4, 5, &c.). The verb KoXelv occurs in a highly typical

passage, HoS. Xi. 1 e^ AlyvnTov fifTeKa\((Ta t(i TfKva ^ov. For the

particular form kXtjtos we cannot come nearer than the * guests '
(KXrjTcii) of Adonijah (i Kings i. 41, 49). By his use of the term
St. Paul places himself on a level at once with the great Old
Testament saints and with the Twelve who had been ' called '
expressly by Christ (Mark i. 17; ii. 14 ||). The same coinbina-
tion KXrjTos dnoa-T. occurs in i Cor. i. i, but is not used elsewhere
by St. Paul or any of the other Apostles. In these two Epistles
St. Paul has to vindicate the parity of his own call (on the way

Online LibraryW. (William) SandayA critical and exegetical commentary on the Epistle to the Romans → online text (page 14 of 71)