언어
챗봇 KG 근거 인용 · draft✕
홈 › 주석[칼빈] › 로마서 › 3장

주석[칼빈] — 로마서 3장 · 믿음으로 얻는 의

요약
칼빈 주석 · 섹션 30개 · 한국어 번역 있음(한국어 우선) · 본문 보기
아래 주석은 원문(및 번역문) 그대로입니다.
← 2장4장 →

1절 카드 ↗

1. Though Paul has clearly proved that bare circumcision brought nothing to the Jews, yet since he could not deny but that there was some difference between the Gentiles and the Jews, which by that symbol was sealed to them by the Lord, and since it was inconsistent to make a distinction, of which God was the author, void and of no moment, it remained for him to remove also this objection. It was indeed evident, that it was a foolish glorying in which the Jews on this account indulged; yet still a doubt remained as to the design of circumcision; for the Lord would not have appointed it had not some benefit been intended. He therefore, by way of an objection, asks, what it was that made the Jew superior to the Gentile; and he subjoins a reason for this by another question, What is the benefit of circumcision? For this separated the Jews from the common class of men; it was a partition-wall, as Paul calls ceremonies, which kept parties asunder. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-2" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-3-1

Source

바울이 단순한 할례가 유대인들에게 아무것도 가져다 주지 않는다는 것을 분명히 증명했지만, 이방인들과 유대인들 사이에 어떤 차이가 있다는 것은 부인할 수 없었다. 그 차이는 그 상징으로 주님에 의해 그들에게 인쳐진 것이었다. 하나님이 저자이신 구분을 무효로 만들고 아무 의미 없게 하는 것은 일관성이 없었다. 따라서 이 반론도 제거하는 것이 남아 있었다. 유대인들이 그로 인해 허황된 자랑을 했다는 것은 명백했지만, 할례의 목적에 대한 의문은 여전히 남아 있었다. 주님이 어떤 유익이 의도되지 않았다면 그것을 제정하지 않으셨을 것이기 때문이다. 따라서 바울은 반론의 형식으로, 유대인이 이방인보다 무엇이 더 나은가를 묻는다. 그리고 또 다른 질문으로 이유를 덧붙인다. 할례의 유익이 무엇인가? 이것이 유대인들을 일반 사람들로부터 분리했기 때문이다. 그것은 바울이 예식들을 부르는 것처럼 당사자들을 분리하는 칸막이였다.

원주석

2절 카드 ↗

2. Much in every way, etc. ; that is, very much. He begins here to give the sacrament its own praise; but he concedes not, that on this account the Jews ought to have been proud; for when he teaches that they were sealed by the symbol of circumcision, by which they were counted the children of God, he does not allow that they became superior to others through any merit or worthiness of their own, but through the free mercy of God. If then regard be had to them as men, he shows that they were on a level with others; but if the favors of God be taken to the account, he admits that they possessed what made them more eminent than other men. First indeed, because, intrusted to them, etc. Some think there is here an unfinished period, for he sets down what he does not afterwards complete. But the word first seems not to me to be a note of number, but means chiefly” or especially, (88) and is to be taken in this sense — “Though it were but this one thing, that they have the oracles (89) of God committed to them, it might be deemed sufficient to prove their superiority.” And it is worthy of being noticed, that the advantage of circumcision is not made to consist in the naked sign, but its value is derived from the word; for Paul asks here what benefit the sacrament conferred on the Jews, and he answers, that God had deposited with them the treasure of celestial wisdom. It hence follows, that, apart from the word, no excellency remained. By oracles he means the covenant which God revealed first to Abraham and to his posterity, and afterwards sealed and unfolded by the law and the Prophets. Now the oracles were committed to them, for the purpose of preserving them as long as it pleased the Lord to continue his glory among them, and then of publishing them during the time of their stewardship through the whole world: they were first depositories, and secondly dispensers. But if this benefit was to be so highly esteemed when the Lord favored one nation only with the revelation of his word, we can never sufficiently reprobate our ingratitude, who receive his word with so much negligence or with so much carelessness, not to say disdain. (88) The word πρῶτον is thus used in other places. See Matthew 6:33 ; Mark 7:27 ; 2 Peter 1:20 . — Ed. (89) Λόγια, oracula, mean, in Greek authors, divine responses. [ Hesychius ] explains it by Θέσφατα — divine dictates. The word is used four times in New Testament. In Acts 7:38 , it means specifically the law of Moses; here it includes the whole of the Old Testament; in Hebrews 5:12 , and in 1 Peter 4:11 , it embraces the truths of the Gospel. The divine character of the Scriptures is by this word attested; they are the oracles of God, his dictates, or communications from him. — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-3" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-3-2

Source

"범사에 많으니라." 즉 매우 많다는 뜻이다. 여기서 그는 성례에 자체적인 칭찬을 부여하기 시작한다. 그러나 유대인들이 그 때문에 교만해야 한다고는 인정하지 않는다. 그들이 할례의 표징으로 인봉되어 하나님의 자녀로 여김을 받았다고 가르칠 때, 그는 그들이 자신들의 어떤 공로나 가치가 아니라 하나님의 자유로운 자비를 통해 다른 이들보다 우월하게 되었다는 것을 허용하지 않는다.

"첫째는 그들이 하나님의 말씀을 맡겼음이니라." 어떤 이들은 여기에 미완성 구문이 있다고 생각한다. 그러나 '첫째'는 수를 나타내는 표시가 아니라 '주로' 혹은 '특히'를 의미하는 것으로 이 의미로 이해해야 한다. "비록 이 한 가지뿐이라 해도, 즉 하나님의 말씀이 그들에게 맡겨졌다는 것만으로도 그들의 우월함을 증명하기에 충분하다." 주목할 만한 것은 할례의 유익이 단순한 표징 안에 있는 것이 아니라, 그 가치가 말씀에서 나온다는 것이다. 바울은 성례가 유대인들에게 어떤 유익을 주었는지 묻고, 그 답으로 하나님이 하늘의 지혜의 보화를 그들에게 맡겨 두셨다고 말한다.

"말씀들"은 하나님이 먼저 아브라함과 그 후손에게 계시하시고 이후 율법과 선지자들을 통해 인봉하고 펼치신 언약을 의미한다. 이 말씀들이 그들에게 맡겨진 것은 주님이 자신의 영광을 그들 가운데 계속하시기 원하시는 한 그것들을 보존하다가, 그 청지기직의 때에 온 세상에 선포하기 위함이었다. 그들은 먼저 수탁자였고, 그 다음 분배자였다. 만약 주님이 한 민족에게만 자신의 말씀의 계시를 베푸시는 것이 그토록 높이 평가받아야 한다면, 그토록 소홀하게, 아니 경멸로까지 그의 말씀을 받는 우리의 배은망덕을 충분히 꾸짖을 수 없다.

원주석

3절 카드 ↗

3. What indeed if some, etc. As before, while regarding the Jews as exulting in the naked sign, he allowed them no not even a spark of glory; so now, while considering the nature of the sign, he testifies that its virtue ( virtutem , efficacy ) is not destroyed, no, not even by their inconstancy. As then he seemed before to have intimated that whatever grace there might have been in the sign of circumcision, it had wholly vanished through the ingratitude of the Jews, he now, anticipating an objection, again asks what opinion was to be formed of it. There is here indeed a sort of reticence, as he expresses less than what he intended to be understood; for he might have truly said that a great part of the nation had renounced the covenant of God; but as this would have been very grating to the ears of the Jews, he mitigated its severity, and mentioned only some. Shall their unbelief, etc. Καταργεῖν is properly to render void and ineffectual; a meaning most suitable to this passage. For Paul’s inquiry is not so much whether the unbelief of men neutralizes the truth of God, so that it should not in itself remain firm and constant, but whether it hinders its effect and fulfillment as to men. The meaning then is, “Since most of the Jews are covenant-breakers, is God’s covenant so abrogated by their perfidiousness that it brings forth no fruit among them? To this he answers, that it cannot be that the truth of God should lose its stability through man’s wickedness. Though then the greater part had nullified and trodden under foot God’s covenant, it yet retained its efficacy and manifested its power, not indeed as to all, but with regard to a few of that nation: and it is then efficacious when the grace or the blessing of the Lord avails to eternal salvation. But this cannot be, except when the promise is received by faith; for it is in this way that a mutual covenant is on both sides confirmed. He then means that some ever remained in that nation, who by continuing to believe in the promise, had not fallen away from the privileges of the covenant. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-4" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-3-3

Source

"어떤 자들이 믿지 아니하였으면 어찌하리요." 앞에서는 유대인들이 단순한 표징을 자랑하는 것을 보면서 그들에게 영광의 불꽃조차 허용하지 않았다면, 이제 표징의 본질을 고려하면서 그 효능이 그들의 불성실함으로도 무너지지 않는다고 증언한다. 그러므로 앞에서 할례 표징에 어떤 은혜가 있었든 그것이 유대인들의 배은망덕으로 완전히 사라진 것처럼 암시했으므로, 이제 반론을 미리 막으면서 그것에 대해 어떤 견해를 가져야 할지 다시 묻는다.

"그들의 믿지 않음이 하나님의 미쁘심을 폐하겠느냐." 사람들의 불신앙이 하나님의 진리를 중립화시켜 그것이 자체로 확고하고 견고하게 남아 있지 못하게 하는가의 문제가 아니라, 그것이 사람들에게 미치는 효력과 성취를 방해하는가의 문제다. 의미는 이것이다. "유대인들의 대부분이 언약을 어겼는데, 그들의 배신으로 하나님의 언약이 그토록 폐기되어 그들 가운데 아무 열매도 맺지 못하게 되었는가?" 이에 그는 하나님의 진리가 사람의 악으로 인해 그 안정성을 잃을 수 없다고 대답한다. 비록 대부분이 하나님의 언약을 무효화하고 짓밟았지만, 그것은 여전히 그 효능을 유지하고 자신의 힘을 나타냈다. 비록 전부에게는 아니지만, 그 민족의 소수에게는. 그리고 주님의 은혜나 복이 영원한 구원에 유익할 때 그것은 효과적이다.

원주석

4절 카드 ↗

4. But let God be true, etc. Whatever may be the opinion of others, I regard this as an argument taken from the necessary consequence of what is opposed to it, by which Paul invalidates the preceding objection. For since these two things stand together, yea, necessarily accord, that God is true and that man is false, it follows that the truth of God is not nullified by the falsehood of men; for except he did now set those two things in opposition, the one to the other, he would afterwards have in vain labored to refute what was absurd, and show how God is just, though he manifests his justice by our unjustice. Hence the meaning is by no means ambiguous, — that the faithfulness of God is so far from being nullified by the perfidy and apostasy of men that it thereby becomes more evident. “ God , ” he says, “ is true, not only because he is prepared to stand faithfully to his promises, but because he also really fulfills whatever he declares; for he so speaks, that his command becomes a reality. On the other hand, man is false, not only because he often violates his pledged faith, but because he naturally seeks falsehood and shuns the truth.” The first clause contains the primary axiom of all Christian philosophy; the latter is taken from Psalms 116:11 , where David confesses that there is nothing certain from man or in man. Now this is a remarkable passage, and contains a consolation that is much needed; for such is the perversity of men in rejecting and despising God’s word, that its truth would be often doubted were not this to come to our minds, that God’s verity depends not on man’s verity. But how does this agree with what has been said previously — that in order to make the divine promise effectual, faith, which receives it, is on the part of men necessary? for faith stands opposed to falsehood. This seems, indeed, to be a difficult question; but it may with no great difficulty be answered, and in this way — the Lord, notwithstanding the lies of men, and though these are hinderances to his truth, does yet find a way for it through a pathless track, that he may come forth a conqueror, and that is, by correcting in his elect the inbred unbelief of our nature, and by subjecting to his service those who seem to be unconquerable. It must be added, that the discourse here is concerning the corruption of nature, and not the grace of God, which is the remedy for that corruption. That thou mightest be justified, etc. The sense is, So far is it that the truth of God is destroyed by our falsehood and unfaithfulness, that it thereby shines forth and appears more evident, according to the testimony of David, who says, that as he was sinner, God was a just and righteous Judge in whatever he determined respecting him, and that he would overcome all the calumnies of the ungodly who murmured against his righteousness. By the words of God, David means the judgments which he pronounces upon us; for the common application of these to promises is too strained: and so the particle that, is not so much final, nor refers to a far-fetched consequence, but implies an inference according to this purport, “Against thee have I sinned; justly then dost thou punish me.” And that Paul has quoted this passage according to the proper and real meaning of David, is clear from the objection that is immediately added, “How shall the righteousness of God remain perfect if our iniquity illustrates it?” For in vain, as I have already observed, and unseasonable has Paul arrested the attention of his readers with this difficulty, except David meant, that God, in his wonderful providence, elicited from the sins of men a praise to his own righteousness. The second clause in Hebrew is this, “And that thou mightest be pure in thy judgment;” which expression imports nothing else but that God in all his judgments is worthy of praise, how much soever the ungodly may clamor and strive by their complaints disgracefully to efface his glory. But Paul has followed the Greek version, which answered his purpose here even better. We indeed know that the Apostles in quoting Scripture often used a freer language than the original; for they counted it enough to quote what was suitable to their subject: hence they made no great account of words. The application then of this passage is the following: Since all the sins of mortals must serve to illustrate the glory of the Lord, and since he is especially glorified by his truth, it follows, that even the falsehood of men serves to confirm rather than to subvert his truth. Though the word κρίνεσθαι , may be taken actively as well as passively, yet the Greek translators, I have no doubt, rendered it passively, contrary to the meaning of the Prophet. (91) (91) Whenever there is a material agreement between the Greek and the Hebrew, we ought not to make it otherwise. If the verb κρίνεσθαι, as admitted by most critics, may be taken actively and be thus made to agree with the Hebrew, what reason can there be to take it in another sense? The only real difference is in one word, between νικήσης, “overcomest,” and תזכה , “art clear:” but the meaning is the same, though the words are different. To overcome in judgment, and to be clear in judgment, amounts to the same thing. The parallelism of the Hebrew requires κρίνεσθαι to be a verb in the middle voice, and to have an active meaning. The two lines in Hebrew, as it is often the case in Hebrew poetry, contain the same sentiment in different words, the last line expressing it more definitely; so that to be “justified,” and to be “cleared,” convey the same idea; and also “in thy word,” or saying — בדברך and “in thy judgment” בשפטך . In many copies both these last words are in the plural number, so that the first would be strictly what is here expressed, “in thy words,” that is, the words which thou hast declared; and “in thy judgments,” that is, those which thou hast announced, would be fully rendered by “when thou Judgest.” Commentators, both ancient and mod

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-3-4

Source

"그럴 수 없느니라. 사람은 다 거짓되되 하나님은 참되시다 할지어다." 내가 보기에 이것은 반대되는 것의 필연적 결과에서 취한 논거로, 바울은 앞서의 반론을 무효화한다. 하나님이 참되시고 사람이 거짓되다는 이 두 가지가 함께 서며, 아니 반드시 일치하므로, 사람의 거짓됨으로 하나님의 진리가 무효화되지 않는다는 것이 따른다. 그렇지 않으면 바울이 이후에 불합리한 것을 반박하고 하나님이 어떻게 우리의 불의로 자신의 의를 나타내면서도 의로우신가를 보여 주려 해도 헛수고가 되었을 것이기 때문이다.

"하나님은 참되시다"는 것은 그분이 자신의 약속에 충실하게 서실 준비가 되어 있기 때문만이 아니라, 선언하시는 것을 실제로 성취하시기 때문이다. 그분이 명하시면 그것이 현실이 된다. 반면에 "사람은 거짓되다"는 것은 종종 서약한 신의를 어기기 때문만이 아니라, 본성으로 거짓을 추구하고 진리를 피하기 때문이다. 첫 번째 절은 모든 기독교 철학의 근본 공리를 담고 있다. 두 번째는 시편 116:11에서 취한 것으로, 다윗은 거기서 사람으로부터 혹은 사람 안에서 확실한 것은 없다고 고백한다.

"기록된 바 주께서 주의 말씀에 의롭다 함을 얻으시고 판단 받으실 때에 이기려 하심이라." 바울이 이 구절을 다윗의 적절한 실제적 의미에 따라 인용했다는 것은, 즉시 추가된 반론에서 분명하다. "우리의 불의가 그것을 보여 준다면 하나님의 의는 어떻게 완전하게 남아 있는가?" 하나님이 자신의 놀라운 섭리로 사람들의 죄에서 자신의 의로움에 대한 찬양을 이끌어 내신다는 것을 다윗이 의미했다는 것이 분명하다.

원주석

5절 카드 ↗

5 But if our unrighteousness, etc. Though this is a digression from the main subject, it was yet necessary for the Apostle to introduce it, lest he should seem to give to the ill-disposed an occasion to speak evil, which he knew would be readily laid hold on by them. For since they were watching for every opportunity to defame the gospel, they had, in the testimony of David, what they might have taken for the purpose of founding a calumny, — “If God seeks nothing else, but to be glorified by men, why does he punish them, when they offend, since by offending they glorify him? Without cause then surely is he offended, if he derives the reason of his displeasure from that by which he is glorified.” There is, indeed, no doubt, but that this was an ordinary, and everywhere a common calumny, as it will presently appear. Hence Paul could not have covertly passed it by; but that no one should think that he expressed the sentiments of his own mind, he premises that he assumes the person of the ungodly; and at the same time, he sharply, touches, by a single expression, on human reason; whose work, as he intimates, is ever to bark against the wisdom of God; for he says not, “according to the ungodly,” but “according to man,” or as man. And thus indeed it is, for all the mysteries of God are paradoxes to the flesh: and at the same tine it possesses so much audacity, that it fears not to oppose them and insolently to assail what it cannot comprehend. We are hence reminded, that if we desire to become capable of understanding them, we must especially labor to become freed from our own reason, ( proprio sensu ) and to give up ourselves, and unreservedly to submit to his word. — The word wrath, taken here for judgment, refers to punishment; as though he said, “Is God unjust, who punishes those sins which set forth his righteousness?” return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-6" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-3-5

Source

"그러나 우리 불의가 하나님의 의를 드러나게 하면 무슨 말 하리요." 이것은 주요 주제에서 벗어난 것이지만, 사도는 악의 있는 자들에게 말 거리를 줄 것처럼 보이는 것을 피하기 위해 이것을 도입할 필요가 있었다. 그들이 다윗의 증언에서 비방을 세울 기회를 얻을 수 있었기 때문이다. "하나님이 사람들로 인해 영광을 받는 것 외에 아무것도 구하지 않으신다면, 왜 그들이 죄를 범할 때 벌하시는가? 죄를 범함으로써 그분을 영화롭게 하는데? 그렇다면 분명히 이유 없이 불쾌해하시는 것이다. 그분이 자신을 영화롭게 하는 것에서 불쾌함의 이유를 끌어내신다면."

이것이 어디서나 흔한 비방이었다는 것은 의심할 여지가 없다. 그러므로 바울은 그것을 몰래 지나칠 수 없었다. 다만 아무도 그가 자신의 마음의 감정을 표현한다고 생각하지 않도록, 그는 경건치 않은 자의 역할을 한다고 미리 말한다. 동시에 한마디 표현으로 사람의 이성을 날카롭게 찌른다. 하나님의 지혜에 반하여 짖는 것이 그 이성의 일이기 때문이다. 그는 "경건치 않은 자에 따라서"라고 말하지 않고 "사람에 따라서"라고 말한다. 그리고 실제로 그렇다. 하나님의 모든 신비는 육신에게는 역설이다. 동시에 육신은 너무 많은 대담함을 가지고 있어 그것들에 반하여 두려움 없이 맞서며 이해할 수 없는 것을 거만하게 공격한다.

원주석

6절 카드 ↗

6. By no means, etc. In checking this blasphemy he gives not a direct reply to the objection, but begins with expressing his abhorrence of it, lest the Christian religion should even appear to include absurdities so great. And this is more weighty than if he adopted a simple denial; for he implies, that this impious expression deserved to be regarded with horror, and not to be heard. He presently subjoins what may be called an indirect refutation; for he does not distinctly refute the calumny, but gives only this reply, — that the objection was absurd. Moreover, he takes an argument from an office which belongs to God, by which he proves it to be impossible, — God shall judge the world; he cannot then be unjust. This argument is not derived, so to speak, from the mere power of God, but from his exercised power, which shines forth in the whole arrangement and order of his works; as though he said, — “It is God’s work to judge the world, that is, to rectify it by his own righteousness, and to reduce to the best order whatever there is in it out of order: he cannot then determine any thing unjustly.” And he seems to allude to a passage recorded by Moses, in Genesis 18:25 , where it is said, that when Abraham prayed God not to deliver Sodom wholly to destruction, he spoke to this purpose, — “It is not meet, that thou who art to judge the earth, shouldest destroy the just with the ungodly: for this is not thy work nor can it be done by thee.” A similar declaration is found in Job 34:17 , — “Should he who hates judgment exercise power?” For though there are found among men unjust judges, yet this happens, because they usurp authority contrary to law and right, or because they are inconsiderately raised to that eminence, or because they degenerate from themselves. But there is nothing of this kind with regard to God. Since, then, he is by nature judge, it must be that he is just, for he cannot deny himself. Paul then proves from what is impossible, that God is absurdly accused of unrighteousness; for to him peculiarly and naturally belongs the work of justly governing the world. And though what Paul teaches extends to the constant government of God, yet I allow that it has a special reference to the last judgment; for then only a real restoration of just order will take place. But if you wish for a direct refutation, by which profane things of this kind may be checked, take this, and say, “That it comes not through what unrighteousness is, that God’s righteousness becomes more illustrious, but that our wickedness is so surpassed by God’s goodness, that it is turned to serve an end different from that to which it tends.” return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-7" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-3-6

Source

"그럴 수 없느니라. 만일 그러하면 하나님께서 어떻게 세상을 심판하시리요." 이 신성모독을 저지하면서 그는 반론에 직접 답하지 않고, 그것에 대한 혐오감을 먼저 표현하기 시작한다. 기독교 종교가 그토록 큰 불합리를 포함하는 것처럼 보이는 것을 막기 위해서다. 이것은 단순한 부정을 채택했을 때보다 더 비중이 있다. 그는 이 불경건한 표현이 혐오로 여겨져야 하고 들려져서는 안 된다는 것을 암시하기 때문이다.

그는 즉시 간접적인 반박을 덧붙인다. 비방을 명확하게 반박하는 것이 아니라 단지 이것만 답한다. 반론이 불합리하다는 것이다. 더욱이 그는 하나님께 속한 직분에서 논거를 취해 그것이 불가능함을 증명한다. 하나님이 세상을 심판하실 것이므로, 그분은 불의하실 수 없다. 이 논거는 말하자면 하나님의 단순한 능력에서가 아니라, 그분의 전체 역사와 질서의 배열 안에서 빛나는 그분의 역사된 능력에서 나온 것이다. 마치 이렇게 말하는 것과 같다. "세상을 심판하는 것, 즉 자신의 의로 그것을 교정하고 안에서 질서를 벗어난 것을 가장 좋은 상태로 회복하는 것이 하나님의 일이다. 그러므로 그분은 불의하게 어떤 것도 결정하실 수 없다."

원주석

7절 카드 ↗

7. If indeed (92) the truth of God, etc. This objection, I have no doubt, is adduced in the person of the ungodly; for it is a sort of an explanation of the former verse, and would have been connected with it, had not the Apostle, moved with indignation, broken off the sentence in the middle. The meaning of the objection is — “If by our unfaithfulness the truth of God becomes more conspicuous, and in a manner confirmed, and hence more glory redounds to him, it is by no means just, that he, who serves to display God’s glory, should be punished as a sinner.” (93) (92) Or, “For if” — Si enim — εἰ γὰρ. The particle γὰρ here gives no reason, but is to be viewed as meaning then , or indeed, verily; see Luke 12:58 ; John 9:30 ; Acts 16:37 ; Philippians 2:27 [ Stuart ] renders it, still, and says, that it “points to a connection with verse. 5, and denotes a continuance of the same theme.” [ Macknight ] often renders it by further, besides, and no doubt rightly. — Ed. (93) It is remarkable how the Apostle changes his words from the third verse to the end of this, while the same things are essentially meant. His style is throughout Hebraistic. [ Stuart ] makes these just remarks , “Αδικία is here [ Romans 3:5 ] the generic appellation of sin, for which a specific name , ἀπιστία, was employed in Romans 3:3 , and ψεῦσμα, in Romans 3:7 . In like manner the δικαιοσύνη, in Romans 3:5 , which is a generic appellation, is expressed by a specific one , πίστιν, in Romans 3:3 , and by ἀλήθεια, in Romans 3:7 . The idea is substantially the same, which is designated by these respectively corresponding appellations. Fidelity, uprightness, integrity, are designated by πίστιν, δικαιοσύνην, and ἀλήθεια; while ἀλήθεια, and ἀπιστία ἀδικία, designate unfaithfulness, want of uprightness and false dealing. All of these terms have more or less reference to the ברית , covenant or compact (so to speak) which existed between God and his ancient people.” — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-8" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-3-7

Source

"그러나 나의 거짓말로 하나님의 참되심이 더 풍성하여 그의 영광이 되었으면 어찌 나도 죄인처럼 심판을 받으리요." 이 반론은 경건치 않은 자의 역할로 제시된 것이다. 의미는 이것이다. "우리의 불성실로 하나님의 진리가 더 명백해지고 말하자면 확인되어, 따라서 더 많은 영광이 그분께 돌아간다면, 하나님의 영광을 드러내는 데 이바지하는 자를 죄인으로 처벌하는 것은 결코 의롭지 않다."

원주석

8절 카드 ↗

8. And not, etc. This is an elliptical sentence, in which a word is to be understood. It will be complete, if you read it thus, — “and why is it not rather said, (as we are reproached, etc.) that we are to do evils, that good things may come?” But the Apostle deigns not to answer the slander; which yet we may check by the most solid reason. The pretense, indeed, is this, — “If God is by our iniquity glorified, and if nothing can be done by man in this life more befitting than to promote the glory of God, then let us sin to advance his glory!” Now the answer to this is evident, — “That evil cannot of itself produce anything but evil; and that God’s glory is through our sin illustrated, is not the work of man, but the work of God; who, as a wonderful worker, knows how to overcome our wickedness, and to convert it to another end, so as to turn it contrary to what we intend, to the promotion of his own glory.” God has prescribed to us the way, by which he would have himself to be glorified by us, even by true piety, which consists in obedience to his word. He who leaps over this boundary, strives not to honor God, but to dishonor him. That it turns out otherwise, is to be ascribed to the Providence of God, and not to the wickedness of man; through which it comes not, that the majesty of God is not injured, nay, wholly overthrown (94) (As we are reproached,) etc. Since Paul speaks so reverently of the secret judgments of God, it is a wonder that his enemies should have fallen into such wantonness as to calumniate him: but there has never been so much reverence and seriousness displayed by God’s servants as to be sufficient to check impure and virulent tongues. It is not then a new thing, that adversaries at this day load with so many false accusations, and render odious our doctrine, which we ourselves know to be the pure gospel of Christ, and all the angels, as well as the faithful, are our witnesses. Nothing can be imagined more monstrous than what we read here was laid to the charge of Paul, to the end, that his preaching might be rendered hateful to the inexperienced. Let us then bear this evil, when the ungodly abuse the truth which we preach by their calumnies: nor let us cease, on this account, constantly to defend the genuine confession of it, inasmuch as it has sufficient power to crush and to dissipate their falsehoods. Let us, at the same time, according to the Apostle’s example, oppose, as much as we can, all malicious subtilties, ( technis — crafts, wiles,) that the base and the abandoned may not, without some check, speak evil of our Creator. Whose judgment is just. Some take this in an active sense, as signifying that Paul so far assents to them, that what they objected was absurd, in order that the doctrine of the gospel might not be thought to be connected with such paradoxes: but I approve more of the passive meaning; for it would not have been suitable simply to express an approval of such a wickedness, which, on the contrary, deserved to be severely condemned; and this is what Paul seems to me to have done. And their perverseness was, on two accounts, to be condemned, — first, because this impiety had gained the assent of their minds; and secondly, because, in traducing the gospel, they dared to draw from it their calumny. (94) [ Grotius ] thinks, that in the beginning of this verse there is a transposition, and that ὅτι, after the parenthesis, ought to be construed before μὴ which precedes it, and that ὅτι is for cur , why, — as in Mark 9:11 . The version would then be, “and why not, (as we are reproached, and as some declare that we say,) Let us do evil that good may come?” This is the rendering of [ Luther ] But [ Limborch ] and [ Stuart ] consider λεγωμεν to be understood after μὴ; and the latter takes μὴ not as a negative but an interrogative, “and shall we say,” etc.? Amidst these varieties, the main drift of the passage remains the same. — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-9" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-3-8

Source

"또는 선을 이루기 위하여 악을 행하자 하지 않겠느냐." 이것은 생략 구문으로, 단어를 보충해야 한다. 완전하게 하면 이렇게 읽을 수 있다. "어찌 우리가 악을 행하여 선이 오게 하지 않겠느냐고 말하지 않겠느냐?" 그러나 사도는 비방에 답하는 것을 마다한다. 그럼에도 우리는 가장 견고한 이유로 그것을 제압할 수 있다.

핑계는 이것이다. "하나님이 우리의 불의로 영화롭게 되신다면, 그리고 이 생에서 사람이 행할 수 있는 것 중 하나님의 영광을 증진하는 것보다 더 합당한 것이 없다면, 그분의 영광을 위해 죄를 짓자!" 이에 대한 답은 분명하다. "악은 그 자체로 악 외에 아무것도 만들어 낼 수 없다. 우리의 죄를 통해 하나님의 영광이 드러나는 것은 사람의 일이 아니라 하나님의 일이다. 그분은 놀라운 역사자로서, 우리의 악함을 이기고 그것을 다른 목적으로 바꾸어 우리의 의도와 반대로 자신의 영광의 증진으로 돌리는 법을 아신다." 하나님은 우리가 그분을 영화롭게 할 길을 규정하셨다. 그것은 자신의 말씀에 순종하는 참된 경건이다.

원주석

9절 카드 ↗

9. What then? He returns from his digression to his subject. For lest the Jews should object that they were deprived of their right, as he had mentioned those distinctions of honor, for which they thought themselves superior to the Gentiles, he now at length replies to the question — in what respect they excelled the Gentiles. And though his answer seems in appearance to militate against what he had said before, (for he now strips those of all dignity to whom he had attributed so much,) there is yet no discord; for those privileges in which he allowed them to be eminent, were separate from themselves, and dependent on God’s goodness, and not on their own merit: but here he makes inquiry as to their own worthiness, whether they could glory in any respect in themselves. Hence the two answers he gives so agree together, that the one follows from the other; for while he extols their privileges, by including them among the free benefits of God, he shows that they had nothing of their own. Hence, what he now answers might have been easily inferred; for since it was their chief superiority, that God’s oracles were deposited with them, and they had it not through their own merit, there was nothing left for them, on account of which they could glory before God. Now mark the holy contrivance ( sanctum artificium ) which he adopts; for when he ascribes pre-eminency to them, he speaks in the third person; but when he strips them of all things, he puts himself among them, that he might avoid giving offense. For we have before brought a charge, etc. The Greek verb which Paul adopts, αἰτιάσθαι is properly a forensic term; and I have therefore preferred to render it, “We have brought a charge;” (96) for an accuser in an action is said to charge a crime, which he is prepared to substantiate by testimonies and other proofs. Now the Apostle had summoned all mankind universally before the tribunal of God, that he might include all under the same condemnation: and it is to no purpose for any one to object, and say that the Apostle here not only brings a charge, but more especially proves it; for a charge is not true except it depends on solid and strong evidences, according to what Cicero says, who, in a certain place, distinguishes between a charge and a slander. We must add, that to be under sin means that we are justly condemned as sinners before God, or that we are held under the curse which is due to sin; for as righteousness brings with it absolution, so sin is followed by condemnation. (96) So do [ Grotius ] , [ Beza ] , and [ Stuart ] render the verb. [ Doddridge ] and [ Macknight ] have preserved our common version. “We have before charged,” [ Chalmers ] “ Antea idoneis argumentis demonstravimus — we have before proved by sufficient arguments .” [ Schleusner ] It is charge rather than conviction that the verb imports, though the latter idea is also considered to be included. — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-10" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-3-9

Source

"그러면 어떠하냐? 우리는 나으냐 결코 아니라." 그는 여담에서 주제로 돌아온다. 유대인들이 자신들이 이방인들보다 우월하다고 생각했던 명예의 구분들을 언급했으므로, 자신들의 권리를 빼앗긴다고 반론할 수 있었다. 이제 마침내 그들이 이방인들을 얼마나 능가하는지에 대한 질문에 답한다.

그의 대답이 표면상 앞서 말한 것과 상충하는 것처럼 보이지만(그토록 많이 귀속시켰던 자들에게서 이제 모든 존엄을 빼앗으므로), 사실은 불일치가 없다. 그들이 탁월하다고 허용한 특권들은 그들 자신과 분리되어 하나님의 선하심에 달려 있었고 자신들의 공로에 달려 있지 않았기 때문이다. 그러나 여기서는 그들 자신의 가치에 대해 탐구한다. 그들이 어떤 점에서 하나님 앞에서 자랑할 수 있는지를.

"우리가 이미 유대인이나 헬라인이나 다 죄 아래 있다고 선언하였노라." 바울이 채택하는 그리스어 동사는 본래 법적 용어다. "고발을 제기하였다"는 뜻이다. 사도는 모든 인류를 보편적으로 하나님의 심판대 앞에 소환하여 같은 정죄 아래 포함시켰다. "죄 아래 있다"는 것은 우리가 하나님 앞에서 죄인으로 정당하게 정죄를 받거나, 죄에 마땅한 저주 아래 붙들려 있음을 의미한다. 의로움이 무죄 판결을 가져오는 것처럼, 죄에는 정죄가 따른다.

원주석

10절 카드 ↗

10. As it is written, etc. He has hitherto used proofs or arguments to convince men of their iniquity; he now begins to reason from authority; and it is to Christians the strongest kind of proof, when authority is derived from the only true God. And hence let ecclesiastical teachers learn what their office is; for since Paul asserts here no truth but what he confirms by the sure testimony of Scripture, much less ought such a thing to be attempted by those, who have no other commission but to preach the gospel, which they have received through Paul and others. There is none righteous, etc. The Apostle, who gives the meaning rather than the entire words, seems, in the first place, before he comes to particulars, to state generally the substance of what the Prophet declares to be in man, and that is — that none is righteous; (98) he afterwards particularly enumerates the effects or fruits of this unrighteousness. (98) Psalms 14:1 . The Hebrew is, “There is none that doeth good;” and the Septuagint, “There is none doing kindness, ( χρηστότητα ), there is not even one, ( ὀυκ ἔστιν ἕως ἑνός. )” So that the Apostle quotes the meaning, not the words. The eleventh verse ( Romans 3:11 ) is from the same Psalm; the Hebrew, with which the Septuagint agree, except that there is the disjunctive ἢ between the participles, is the following, — “Whether there is any one who understands, who seeks after God.” — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-11" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-3-10

Source

"기록된 바 의인은 없나니 하나도 없으며." 이때까지 그는 사람들의 불의를 확신시키기 위한 증거들이나 논거들을 사용했다. 이제 권위에서 추론하기 시작한다. 권위가 유일한 참 하나님으로부터 나올 때, 이것이 기독교인들에게는 가장 강한 증명 방식이다. 따라서 교회 교사들이 자신들의 직분이 무엇인지 배우게 하자. 바울이 성경의 확실한 증언으로 확인하지 않는 진리는 하나도 주장하지 않으므로, 그로부터와 다른 이들을 통해 받은 복음을 전파하는 것 외에 다른 사명이 없는 자들은 더더욱 그런 것을 시도해서는 안 된다.

"의인은 없나니 하나도 없으며." 사도는 말씀 전체보다 의미를 제공하면서, 먼저 특수한 것들로 나아가기 전에 일반적으로 선지자가 사람 안에 있다고 선언하는 것의 실질을 진술한다. 즉 의인이 없다는 것이다. 그는 이후에 이 불의의 결과들이나 열매들을 특별히 열거한다.

원주석

11절 카드 ↗

11. The first effect is, that there is none that understands: and then this ignorance is immediately proved, for they seek not God; for empty is the man in whom there is not the knowledge of God, whatever other learning he may possess; yea, the sciences and the arts, which in themselves are good, are empty things, when they are without this groundwork. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-12" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-3-11

Source

"깨닫는 자도 없고 하나님을 찾는 자도 없고." 첫 번째 결과는 깨닫는 자가 없다는 것이다. 그리고 이 무지가 즉시 증명된다. 그들이 하나님을 구하지 않기 때문이다. 하나님에 대한 지식이 없는 사람은 다른 어떤 학문을 가지고 있더라도 공허하다. 아니, 그 자체로는 좋은 학문과 기술도 이 기반 없이는 공허한 것이다.

원주석

12절 카드 ↗

12. It is added, (99) There is no one who doeth kindness By this we are to understand, that they had put off every feeling of humanity. For as the best bond of mutual concord among us is the knowledge of God, (as he is the common Father of all, he wonderfully unites us, and without him there is nothing but disunion,) so inhumanity commonly follows where there is ignorance of God, as every one, when he despises others, loves and seeks his own good. (99) This verse is literally the Septuagint, and as to meaning, a correct version of the Hebrew. “All have gone out of the way — πάντες ἐξέκλιναν” “is in Hebrew הכל סר , “the whole (or every one) has turned aside,” or revolted, or apostatized. Then, “they have become unprofitable” or useless, is נאלחו , “they are become putrid,” or Corrupted, like putrified fruit or meat, therefore useless, not fit for what they were designed — to serve God and to promote their own and the good of others. Idolatry was evidently this putrescence. — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-13" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-3-12

Source

"다 치우쳐 함께 무익하게 되고 선을 행하는 자는 없나니 하나도 없도다." 여기에 추가된 것은, "선을 행하는 자가 없다"는 것이다. 이로써 우리는 그들이 인류의 모든 감정을 벗어 버렸다는 것을 이해해야 한다. 우리 사이의 상호 화합의 최선의 유대는 하나님에 대한 지식이다(그분은 모든 이의 공통 아버지이시므로 놀랍게 우리를 하나로 묶으시며, 그분 없이는 분열만 있다). 따라서 하나님에 대한 무지가 있는 곳에는 비인간성이 흔히 따른다. 각 사람이 다른 이들을 경멸하면서 자신의 선만을 사랑하고 추구하기 때문이다.

원주석

13절 카드 ↗

13. It is further added, Their throat is an open grave; (100) that is, a gulf to swallow up men. It is more than if he had said, that they were devourers ( ἀνθρωποφάγους — men-eaters;) for it is an intimation of extreme barbarity, when the throat is said to be so great a gulf, that it is sufficient to swallow down and devour men whole and entire. Their tongues are deceitful, and, the poison of asps is under their lips, import the same thing, (100) This is from Psalms 5:9 , that is, the first part, and is literally the Septuagint, which correctly represents the Hebrew. The last clause is from Psalms 140:3 , and is according to the Septuagint, and the Hebrew, too, except that “asps,” or adders, is in the singular number. [ Stuart ] gives the import of this figurative language different from [ Calvin ] : “As from the sepulchre,” he says, “issues forth an offensive and pestilential vapor; so from the mouths of slanderous persons issue noisome and pestilential words. Their words are like poison, they utter the poisonous breath of slander.” — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-14" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-3-13

Source

"그들의 목구멍은 열린 무덤이요 그 혀로는 속임을 일삼으며 그 입술에는 독사의 독이 있고." "그들의 목구멍은 열린 무덤이다"라고 더 추가된다. 즉 사람들을 삼키는 구덩이라는 뜻이다. 그들이 사람을 잡아먹는 자들(ἀνθρωποφάγους)이라고 말하는 것보다 더하다. 목구멍이 그토록 큰 구덩이여서 사람들을 온전히 통째로 삼키고 집어삼키기에 충분하다고 할 때, 이것은 극도의 야만성을 암시하기 때문이다. "그 혀로는 속임을 일삼으며 그 입술에는 독사의 독이 있다"는 같은 의미를 전한다.

원주석

14절 카드 ↗

14. Then he says, that their mouth is full of cursing and bitterness (101) — a vice of an opposite character to the former; but the meaning is, that they are in every way full of wickedness; for if they speak fair, they deceive and blend poison with their flatteries; but if they draw forth what they have in their hearts, bitterness and cursing stream out. (101) Psalms 10:7 . Paul corrects the order of the words as found in the Septuagint, and gives the Hebrew more exactly, but retains the word “bitterness,” by which the Septuagint have rendered מרמות , which means deceit, or rather, mischievous deceit. Some think that it ought to be מררות , “bitterness;” but there is no copy in its favor. — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-16" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-3-14

Source

"그 입에는 저주와 악독이 가득하고." 이것은 앞의 것과 반대 성격의 악이다. 그러나 의미는 그들이 모든 면에서 악으로 가득하다는 것이다. 부드럽게 말하면 그들은 속이고 아첨에 독을 섞는다. 그러나 마음에 있는 것을 끌어내면 쓴 맛과 저주가 흘러나온다.

원주석

16절 카드 ↗

16. Very striking is the sentence that is added from Isaiah, Ruin and misery are in all their ways; (102) for it is a representation of ferociousness above measure barbarous, which produces solitude and waste by destroying every thing wherever it prevails: it is the same as the description which Pliny gives of Domitian. (102) Romans 3:15 are taken from Isaiah 59:7 . Both the Hebrew and the Septuagint are alike, but Paul has abbreviated them, and changed two words in the Greek version, having put οξει᾿ for ταχινοι, and ἔγνωσαν for ὀίδασι, and has followed that version in leaving out “innocent” before “blood.” — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-17" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-3-16

Source

"그 발은 피 흘리는 데 빠른지라 파멸과 고생이 그 길에 있어." 이사야에서 추가된 것은 매우 인상적이다. "파멸과 고생이 그들의 모든 길에 있다." 이는 지나는 곳마다 모든 것을 파괴하여 황폐와 폐허를 만드는 측량 불가한 야만성의 묘사다.

원주석

17절 카드 ↗

17. It follows, The way of peace they have not known: they are so habituated to plunders, acts of violence and wrong, to savageness and cruelty, that they know not how to act kindly and courteously. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-18" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-3-17

Source

"평화의 길을 알지 못하였고." 그들은 약탈과 폭력과 불의에, 야만성과 잔인함에 너무 익숙해져 친절하고 정중하게 행동하는 법을 모른다는 것이 따른다.

원주석

18절 카드 ↗

18. In the last clause (103) he repeats again, in other words, what we have noticed at the beginning — that every wickedness flows from a disregard of God: for as the principal part of wisdom is the fear of God, when we depart from that, there remains in us nothing right or pure. In short, as it is a bridle to restrain our wickedness, so when it is wanting, we feel at liberty to indulge every kind of licentiousness. And that these testimonies may not seem to any one to have been unfitly produced, let us consider each of them in connection with the passages from which they have been taken. David says in Psalms 14:1 , that there was such perverseness in men, that God, when looking on them all in their different conditions, could not find a righteous man, no, not one. It then follows, that this evil pervaded mankind universally; for nothing is hid from the sight of God. He speaks indeed at the end of the Psalm of the redemption of Israel: but we shall presently show how men become holy, and how far they are exempt from this condition. In the other Psalms he speaks of the treachery of his enemies, while he was exhibiting in himself and in his descendants a type of the kingdom of Christ: hence we have in his adversaries the representatives of all those, who being alienated from Christ, are not led by his Spirit. Isaiah expressly mentions Israel; and therefore his charge applies with still greater force against the Gentiles. What, then? There is no doubt but that the character of men is described in those words, in order that we may see what man is when left to himself; for Scripture testifies that all men are in this state, who are not regenerated by the grace of God. The condition of the saints would be nothing better, were not this depravity corrected in them: and that they may still remember that they differ nothing from others by nature, they do find in the relics of their flesh (by which they are always encompassed) the seeds of those evils, which would constantly produce fruits, were they not prevented by being mortified; and for this mortification they are indebted to God’s mercy and not to their own nature. We may add, that though all the vices here enumerated are not found conspicuously in every individual, yet they may be justly and truly ascribed to human nature, as we have already observed on Romans 1:26 . (103) It is taken from Psalms 36:1 , and verbatim from the Greek version, and strictly in accordance with the Hebrew. It is evident from several of these quotations, that Paul’s object, as [ Calvin ] says, was to represent the general meaning, and not to keep strictly to the expressions. There is a difference of opinion as to the precise object of the Apostle; whether in these quotations he had regard to the Jews only, or to both Jews and Gentiles. In the introduction, Romans 3:9 , he mentions both, and in the conclusion, Romans 3:19 , he evidently refers to both, in these words, “that every, mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.” The most consistent view seems to be, that the passages quoted refer both to Jews and Gentiles; the last, more especially, to the Jews, while some of the preceding have a special reference to the Gentile world, particularly Psalms 14:0 , as it describes the character of the enemies of God and his people, to whose liberation the Psalmist refers in the last verse. — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-19" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-3-18

Source

"그들의 눈앞에 하나님을 두려워함이 없느니라 함과 같으니라." 마지막 절에서 바울은 처음에 언급한 것을 다른 말로 다시 반복한다. 모든 악함은 하나님에 대한 무시에서 흘러나온다는 것이다. 지혜의 주된 부분이 하나님을 두려워하는 것이므로, 우리가 그것에서 떠날 때 우리 안에 옳거나 순수한 것은 남지 않는다. 요약하면, 그것이 우리의 악함을 억제하는 재갈인 것처럼, 그것이 없으면 우리는 모든 종류의 방종에 자유롭게 탐닉한다고 느낀다.

이 증언들이 부적절하게 인용된 것처럼 보이지 않도록 하기 위해, 각각을 취한 구절들과 연관하여 살펴보자. 다윗은 시편 14편에서 사람들 안에 그런 패역함이 있어, 하나님이 모든 이들을 다양한 상황에서 살펴보실 때 의로운 자를 찾을 수 없으셨다고 말한다. 단 한 사람도. 따라서 이 악이 인류 전체에 만연했다는 것이 따른다. 하나님의 시야에서 숨겨진 것은 없기 때문이다. 그는 시편 끝에서 이스라엘의 구속에 대해 말한다. 그러나 사람들이 어떻게 거룩해지는지, 이 상태에서 얼마나 면제되는지는 곧 보여 줄 것이다. 다른 시편들에서 그는 자신이 그리스도의 왕국의 예표를 자신과 후손들 안에 나타내면서 자신의 원수들의 배신에 대해 말한다. 따라서 그의 대적들 안에서 우리는 그리스도에게서 멀어져 그분의 영으로 인도받지 않는 모든 자들의 대표자들을 본다.

이사야는 이스라엘을 명시적으로 언급하므로, 그의 고발은 이방인들에게 더욱 강하게 적용된다. 그렇다면? 사람의 성격이 그 말들 안에서 묘사되고 있다는 것은 의심할 여지가 없다. 우리가 하나님의 은혜로 거듭나지 않을 때 모든 사람이 이 상태에 있다는 것을 성경이 증언한다. 이 타락이 성도들 안에서 교정되지 않는다면 그들의 상태도 조금도 나을 것이 없다. 그리고 그들이 본성으로는 다른 이들과 다를 바 없다는 것을 여전히 기억하도록, 그들은 육신의 잔재(항상 그들을 둘러싸고 있는) 안에서 그 악들의 씨앗들을 발견한다. 그것들이 죽임을 당하지 않으면 계속해서 열매를 맺을 것들이다. 그리고 그 죽임을 위해 그들은 자신들의 본성이 아니라 하나님의 자비에 빚지고 있다.

원주석

19절 카드 ↗

19. Now we know, etc. Leaving the Gentiles, he distinctly addresses his words to the Jews; for he had a much more difficult work in subduing them, because they, though no less destitute of true righteousness than the Gentiles, yet covered themselves with the cloak of God’s covenant, as though it was a sufficient holiness to them to have been separated from the rest of the world by the election of God. And he indeed mentions those evasions which he well understood the Jews were ready to bring forward; for whatever was said in the law unfavorably of mankind, they usually applied to the Gentiles, as though they were exempt from the common condition of men, and no doubt they would have been so, had they not fallen from their own dignity. Hence, that no false conceit as to their own worthiness should be a hinderance to them, and that they might not confine to the Gentiles alone what applied to them in common with others, Paul here anticipates them, and shows, from what Scripture declares, that they were not only blended with the multitude, but that condemnation was peculiarly denounced on them. And we indeed see the discretion of the Apostle in undertaking to refute these objections; for to whom but to the Jews had the law been given, and to whose instruction but theirs ought it to have served? What then it states respecting others is as it were accidental; or as they say, παρεργον , an appendage; but it applies its teaching mainly to its own disciples. Under the law He says that the Jews were those to whom the law was destined, it hence follows, that it especially regards them; and under the word law he includes also the Prophets, and so the whole of the Old Testament — That every mouth may be stopped, etc. ; that is, that every evasion may be cut off, and every occasion for excuse. It is a metaphor taken from courts of law, where the accused, if he has anything to plead as a lawful defense, demands leave to speak, that he might clear himself from the things laid to his charge; but if he is convicted by his own conscience, he is silent, and without saying a word waits for his condemnation, being even already by his own silence condemned. Of the same meaning is this saying in Job 40:4 , “I will lay my hand on my mouth.” He indeed says, that though he was not altogether without some kind of excuse, he would yet cease to justify himself, and submit to the sentence of God. The next clause contains the explanation; for his mouth is stopped, who is so fast held by the sentence of condemnation, that he can by no means escape. According to another sense, to be silent before the Lord is to tremble at his majesty, and to stand mute, being astonished at his brightness. (105) (105) To see the force and meaning of this verse, we must bear in mind that the former part was said to prevent the Jews from evading the application of the preceding testimonies; and then the words “that every mouth,” etc., and “that all the world,” etc., were added, not so much to include the Gentiles, as to include the Jews, who thought themselves exempted. No doubt the Gentiles are included, but the special object of the Apostle evidently seems to prevent the Jews from supposing that they were not included. In no other way can the connection between the two parts of the verse be understood. — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-20" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-3-19

Source

"우리가 알거니와 무릇 율법이 말하는 바는 율법 아래에 있는 자들에게 말하는 것이니 이는 모든 입을 막고 온 세상으로 하나님의 심판 아래에 있게 하려 함이라." 바울은 이방인들을 떠나 유대인들을 향해 분명하게 말씀을 전한다. 그들을 굴복시키는 것이 훨씬 더 어려운 일이었기 때문이다. 비록 이방인들과 마찬가지로 참된 의로움이 결여되어 있었지만, 그들은 하나님의 언약의 외투로 자신들을 가렸다. 마치 하나님의 선택으로 나머지 세상에서 분리된 것이 그들에게 충분한 거룩함인 것처럼.

바울은 유대인들이 제기할 준비가 되어 있다는 것을 잘 알았던 회피들을 언급한다. 율법 안에서 인류에 대해 불리하게 말한 것이 무엇이든 그들은 보통 이방인들에게 적용했다. 마치 그들이 사람들의 공통적인 상태에서 면제된 것처럼. 따라서 자신들의 가치에 대한 어떤 거짓된 생각이 그들을 방해하지 않도록, 바울은 그들을 미리 막는다. 성경이 선언하는 것에서, 그들이 군중과 뒤섞였을 뿐만 아니라 정죄가 특별히 그들을 향해 선포되었음을 보여 준다.

"모든 입을 막고." 즉 모든 회피가 차단되고 모든 핑계의 기회가 없어진다는 뜻이다. 이는 법정에서 취한 은유다. 고발된 자가 법적인 변명으로 내세울 것이 있으면 말하도록 허락을 구하여 자신에게 제기된 것들에서 스스로를 벗어나게 한다. 그러나 자신의 양심에 의해 유죄가 되면 침묵하고 한마디도 없이 자신의 정죄를 기다린다. 자신의 침묵으로 이미 정죄를 받은 것이다.

원주석

20절 카드 ↗

20. Therefore by the works of the law, etc. It is a matter of doubt, even among the learned, what the works of the law mean. Some extend them to the observance of the whole law, while others confine them to the ceremonies alone. The addition of the word law induced [ Chrysostom ] , [ Origen ], and [ Jerome ] to assent to the latter opinion; (106) for they thought that there is a peculiar intimation in this appendage, that the expression should not be understood as including all works. But this difficulty may be very easily removed: for seeing works are so far just before God as we seek by them to render to him worship and obedience, in order expressly to take away the power of justifying from all works, he has mentioned those, if there be any, which can possibly justify; for the law hath promises, without which there would be no value in our works before God. You hence see the reason why Paul expressly mentioned the works of the law; for it is by the law that a reward is apportioned to works. Nor was this unknown to the schoolmen, who held it as an approved and common maxim, that works have no intrinsic worthiness, but become meritorious by covenant. And though they were mistaken, inasmuch as they saw not that works are ever polluted with vices, which deprive them of any merit, yet this principle is still true, that the reward for works depends on the free promise of the law. Wisely then and rightly does Paul speak here; for he speaks not of mere works, but distinctly and expressly refers to the keeping of the law, the subject which he is discussing. (107) As to those things which have been adduced by learned men in defense of this opinion, they are weaker than they might have been. They think that by mentioning circumcision, an example is propounded, which belonged to ceremonies only: but why Paul mentioned circumcision, we have already explained; for none swell more with confidence in works than hypocrites, and we know that they glory only in external masks; and then circumcision, according to their view, was a sort of initiation into the righteousness of the law; and hence it seemed to them a work of primary excellence, and indeed the basis as it were of the righteousness of works. — They also allege what is said in the Epistle to the Galatians, where Paul handles the same subject, and refers to ceremonies only; but that also is not sufficiently strong to support what they wish to defend. It is certain that Paul had a controversy with those who inspired the people with a false confidence in ceremonies; that he might cut of this confidence, he did not confine himself to ceremonies, nor did he speak specifically of what value they were; but he included the whole law, as it is evident from those passages which are derived from that source. Such also was the character of the disputation held at Jerusalem by the disciples. But we contend, not without reason, that Paul speaks here of the whole law; for we are abundantly supported by the thread of reasoning which he has hitherto followed and continues to follow, and there are many other passages which will not allow us to think otherwise. It is therefore a truth, which deserves to be remembered as the first in importance, — that by keeping the law no one can attain righteousness. He had before assigned the reason, and he will repeat it presently again, and that is, that all, being to a man guilty of transgression, are condemned for unrighteousness by the law. And these two things — to be justified by works — and to be guilty of transgressions, (as we shall show more at large as we proceed,) are wholly inconsistent the one with the other. — The word flesh, without some particular specification, signifies men; (108) though it seems to convey a meaning somewhat more general, as it is more expressive to say, “All mortals,” than to say, “All men,” as you may see in Gallius. For by the law, etc. He reasons from what is of an opposite character, — that righteousness is not brought to us by the law, because it convinces us of sin and condemns us; for life and death proceed not from the same fountain. And as he reasons from the contrary effect of the law, that it cannot confer righteousness on us, let us know, that the argument does not otherwise hold good, except we hold this as an inseparable and unvarying circumstance, — that by showing to man his sin, it cuts off the hope of salvation. It is indeed by itself, as it teaches us what righteousness is, the way to salvation: but our depravity and corruption prevent it from being in this respect of any advantage to us. It is also necessary in the second place to add this, — that whosoever is found to be a sinner, is deprived of righteousness; for to devise with the sophisters a half kind of righteousness, so that works in part justify, is frivolous: but nothing is in this respect gained, on account of man’s corruption. (106) The original is “ ut in priorem opinionem concederent :” but the context shows clearly that “ priorem “ is a misprint for “ posteriorem . In addition to the authors mentioned here may be added [ Ambrose ] , [ Theodoret ] , [ Pelagius ] , [ Erasmus ] , and [ Grotius ] And yet, notwithstanding all those authorities, the opinion referred to is wholly inconsistent with the reasoning of the Apostle here and throughout the whole Epistle. It has indeed been given up as untenable by modern authors of the same school, such as [ Locke ] , [ Whitby ] , and [ Macknight ] To disprove this notion it is sufficient to notice the sins which the Apostle had referred to; they are not those against the ceremonial but the moral law, and it is because the moral law is transgressed that it cannot justify. “If there be any law which man has perfectly kept, he may doubtless be justified by it; and surely no man can be justified by a law which condemns him for breaking it. But there is no law of God which any man has kept; therefore no law by the deeds of which a man can be justified. The Gentile broke the

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-3-20

Source

"그러므로 율법의 행위로 그의 앞에 의롭다 하심을 얻을 육체가 없나니 율법으로는 죄를 깨달음이니라." "율법의 행위"가 무엇을 의미하는지는 학자들 사이에서도 의문의 여지가 있다. 어떤 이들은 그것을 율법 전체의 준수로 확장하고, 다른 이들은 예식들만으로 제한한다. '율법'이라는 단어의 추가가 크리소스톰·오리게네스·예로니무스로 하여금 후자의 견해에 동의하도록 유도했다. 이 표현이 모든 행위를 포함하는 것으로 이해되어서는 안 된다는 특별한 암시가 이 부가어에 있다고 생각했기 때문이다.

그러나 이 어려움은 매우 쉽게 해결될 수 있다. 행위들이 우리가 예배와 순종을 드리는 것을 추구하는 한에서만 하나님 앞에서 의롭기 때문에, 가능하다면 의롭게 할 수 있는 것들, 즉 율법으로 보상이 배정된 것들을 가장 완전하게 배제하기 위해 그는 율법의 행위들을 명시적으로 언급했다. 율법에 의해 행위들에 보상이 배정된다. 따라서 바울은 이곳에서 지혜롭고 바르게 말한다. 단순한 행위들이 아니라 율법 준수를 분명하고 명시적으로 언급하기 때문이다.

"율법으로는 죄를 깨달음이니라." 그는 반대 성격의 것에서 추론한다. 율법이 우리에게 의로움을 가져다 주지 않는 것은, 그것이 우리를 죄 안에서 확신시키고 우리를 정죄하기 때문이다. 생명과 사망은 같은 샘에서 나오지 않기 때문이다. 그리고 그가 율법의 반대되는 효과에서 추론하여 율법이 우리에게 의를 줄 수 없다고 말할 때, 이 논거가 타당하게 성립하는 것은 오직 한 가지 불가분하고 변하지 않는 상황을 굳게 붙잡을 때뿐임을 알아야 한다. 즉 율법이 사람에게 자신의 죄를 보여 줌으로써 구원의 소망을 차단한다는 것이다.

원주석

21절 카드 ↗

21. But now without the law, etc. It is not certain for what distinct reason he calls that the righteousness of God, which we obtain by faith; whether it be, because it can alone stand before God, or because the Lord in his mercy confers it on us. As both interpretations are suitable, we contend for neither. This righteousness then, which God communicates to man, and accepts alone, and owns as righteousness, has been revealed, he says, without the law, that is without the aid of the law; and the law is to be understood as meaning works; for it is not proper to refer this to its teaching, which he immediately adduces as bearing witness to the gratuitous righteousness of faith. Some confine it to ceremonies; but this view I shall presently show to be unsound and frigid. We ought then to know, that the merits of works are excluded. We also see that he blends not works with the mercy of God; but having taken away and wholly removed all confidence in works, he sets up mercy alone. It is not unknown to me, that [ Augustine ] gives a different explanation; for he thinks that the righteousness of God is the grace of regeneration; and this grace he allows to be free, because God renews us, when unworthy, by his Spirit; and from this he excludes the works of the law, that is, those works, by which men of themselves endeavor, without renovation, to render God indebted to them. ( Deum promereri — to oblige God.) I also well know, that some new speculators proudly adduce this sentiment, as though it were at this day revealed to them. But that the Apostle includes all works without exception, even those which the Lord produces in his own people, is evident from the context. For no doubt Abraham was regenerated and led by the Spirit of God at the time when he denied that he was justified by works. Hence he excluded from man’s justification not only works morally good, as they commonly call them, and such as are done by the impulse of nature, but also all those which even the faithful can perform. (110) Again, since this is a definition of the righteousness of faith, “Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven,” there is no question to be made about this or that kind of work; but the merit of works being abolished, the remission of sins alone is set down as the cause of righteousness. They think that these two things well agree, — that man is justified by faith through the grace of Christ, — and that he is yet justified by the works, which proceed from spiritual regeneration; for God gratuitously renews us, and we also receive his gift by faith. But Paul takes up a very different principle, — that the consciences of men will never be tranquillized until they recumb on the mercy of God alone. (111) Hence, in another place, after having taught us that God is in Christ justifying men, he expresses the manner, — “by not imputing to them their sins.” In like manner, in his Epistle to the Galatians, he puts the law in opposition to faith with regard to justification; for the law promises life to those who do what it commands, ( Galatians 3:12 ;) and it requires not only the outward performance of works, but also sincere love to God. It hence follows, that in the righteousness of faith, no merit of works is allowed. It then appears evident, that it is but a frivolous sophistry to say, that we are justified in Christ, because we are renewed by the Spirit, inasmuch as we are the members of Christ, — that we are justified by faith, because we are united by faith to the body of Christ, — that we are justified freely, because God finds nothing in us but sin. But we are in Christ because we are out of ourselves; and justified by faith, because we must recumb on the mercy of God alone, and on his gratuitous promises; and freely, because God reconciles us to himself by burying our sins. Nor can this indeed be confined to the commencement of justification, as they dream; for this definition — “Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven” — was applicable to David, after he had long exercised himself in the service of God; and Abraham, thirty years after his call, though a remarkable example of holiness, had yet no works for which he could glory before God, and hence his faith in the promise was imputed to him for righteousness; and when Paul teaches us that God justifies men by not imputing their sins, he quotes a passage, which is daily repeated in the Church. Still more, the conscience, by which we are disturbed on the score of works, performs its office, not for one day only, but continues to do so through life. It hence follows that we cannot remain, even to death, in a justified state, except we look to Christ only, in whom God has adopted us, and regards us now as accepted. Hence also is their sophistry confuted, who falsely accuse us of asserting, that according to Scripture we are justified by faith only, while the exclusive word only, is nowhere to be found in Scripture. But if justification depends not either on the law, or on ourselves, why should it not be ascribed to mercy alone? and if it be from mercy only, it is then by faith only. The particle now may be taken adversatively, and not with reference to time; as we often use now for but. (112) But if you prefer to regard it as an adverb of time, I willingly admit it, so that there may be no room to suspect an evasion; yet the abrogation of ceremonies alone is not to be understood; for it was only the design of the Apostle to illustrate by a comparison the grace by which we excel the fathers. Then the meaning is, that by the preaching of the gospel, after the appearance of Christ in the flesh, the righteousness of faith was revealed. It does not, however, hence follow, that it was hid before the coming of Christ; for a twofold manifestation is to be here noticed: the first in the Old Testament, which was by the word and sacraments; the other in the New, which contains the completion of ceremonies and promises, as exhibited in Christ himself: and we

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-3-21

Source

"이제는 율법 외에 하나님의 한 의가 나타났으니 율법과 선지자들에게 증거를 받은 것이라." 믿음으로 얻는 의로움을 하나님의 의로움이라고 부르는 것은 무엇 때문인지 확실하지 않다. 그것이 오직 하나님 앞에서 설 수 있기 때문인지, 아니면 주님이 자비로 그것을 우리에게 주시기 때문인지. 두 해석 모두 적합하므로 어느 쪽도 주장하지 않는다. 그렇다면 하나님이 사람에게 전하시고, 유일하게 받아들이시며 의로움으로 인정하시는 이 의로움이 "율법 없이" 즉 율법의 도움 없이 나타났다고 말한다. 율법은 행위를 의미하는 것으로 이해해야 한다. 그것의 가르침을 가리키는 것으로 해석하는 것은 적절하지 않다. 바울이 즉시 그 가르침을 믿음의 은혜로운 의로움에 대한 증인으로 제시하기 때문이다.

행위의 공로는 배제된다. 그는 행위들을 하나님의 자비와 혼합하지 않는다. 행위들에 대한 모든 신뢰를 완전히 제거한 후, 오직 자비만을 세운다.

원주석

22절 카드 ↗

22. Even the righteousness of God, etc. (115) He shows in few words what this justification is, even that which is found in Christ and is apprehended by faith. At the same time, by introducing again the name of God, he seems to make God the founder, ( autorem , the author,) and not only the approver of the righteousness of which he speaks; as though he had said, that it flows from him alone, or that its origin is from heaven, but that it is made manifest to us in Christ. When therefore we discuss this subject, we ought to proceed in this way: First, the question respecting our justification is to be referred, not to the judgment of men, but to the judgment of God, before whom nothing is counted righteousness, but perfect and absolute obedience to the law; which appears clear from its promises and threatenings: if no one is found who has attained to such a perfect measure of holiness, it follows that all are in themselves destitute of righteousness. Secondly, it is necessary that Christ should come to our aid; who, being alone just, can render us just by transferring to us his own righteousness. You now see how the righteousness of faith is the righteousness of Christ. When therefore we are justified, the efficient cause is the mercy of God, the meritorious is Christ, the instrumental is the word in connection with faith. (116) Hence faith is said to justify, because it is the instrument by which we receive Christ, in whom righteousness is conveyed to us. Having been made partakers of Christ, we ourselves are not only just, but our works also are counted just before God, and for this reason, because whatever imperfections there may be in them, are obliterated by the blood of Christ; the promises, which are conditional, are also by the same grace fulfilled to us; for God rewards our works as perfect, inasmuch as their defects are covered by free pardon. Unto all and upon all, (117) etc. For the sake of amplifying, he repeats the same thing in different forms; it was, that he might more fully express what we have already heard, that faith alone is required, that the faithful are not distinguished by external marks, and that hence it matters not whether they be Gentiles or Jews. (115) The words which follow , διὰ πίστεως Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ “by or through the faith of Jesus Christ,” mean not the faith which is his, but the faith of which he is the object. They ought to be rendered “through faith in Jesus Christ.” The genitive case has often this meaning : “Εχετε πίστιν Θεοῦ — Have faith in (of) God,” Mark 11:22 ; “Εν πίστει ζῶ τὟ τοῦ υἱοῦ τοῦ Θεοῦ — I live by the faith of the Son of God;” [ Galatians 2:20 ;] it should be in our language, “I live by faith in the Son of God.” This genitive case of the object is an Hebraism, and is of frequent occurrence. — Ed. (116) The original is this, “ Ut ergo justificemur, causa efficiens est misericordia Dei, Christus materia, verbum cum fide instrumentum — When therefore we are justified, the efficient cause is God’s mercy, Christ is the material, the word with faith is the instrument.” — Ed. (117) Εἰς πάντας και ἐπι πάντας. He makes a similar difference in his expressions in Romans 3:30 . This righteousness, as some say, came to the Jews, as it had been promised to them, and upon the Gentiles, as a gift with which they were not acquainted, and it was conferred on them. But the possession was equal and belonged to all who believed, and to none else, whether Jews or Gentiles. [ Stuart ] connects these words with “manifested,” or revealed, in Romans 3:21 . It is manifested to all, and manifested for all; that is, for the real benefit of all who believe; in other words, it is offered to all, but becomes of real advantage only to those who believe. But the simpler mode is to consider the words, which is, as in our version, to be understood . ‘Ερχομένη is the word which [ Luther ] adopts. — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-23" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-3-22

Source

"곧 예수 그리스도를 믿음으로 말미암아 모든 믿는 자에게 미치는 하나님의 의니 차별이 없느니라." 이 칭의가 무엇인지를 몇 마디로 보여 준다. 그리스도 안에서 발견되고 믿음으로 포착되는 것이다. 동시에 하나님의 이름을 다시 도입함으로써 그가 말하는 의로움의 창시자일 뿐만 아니라 승인자이신 하나님을 만드는 것처럼 보인다. 마치 그것이 그분으로부터만 흘러나오거나, 그 기원이 하늘에 있지만, 그리스도 안에서 우리에게 나타났다고 말하는 것과 같다.

그러므로 이 주제를 논할 때 우리는 이렇게 나아가야 한다. 첫째로, 우리의 칭의에 관한 문제는 사람들의 판단이 아니라 하나님의 판단에 돌려야 한다. 하나님 앞에서 율법에 대한 완전하고 절대적인 순종만이 의로움으로 여겨진다. 이것은 율법의 약속들과 위협들에서 명백하다. 그러한 완전한 수준의 거룩함에 이른 자가 없다면, 모두가 본질적으로 의로움이 결여되어 있다는 것이 따른다. 둘째로, 그리스도가 우리를 도우러 오셔야 한다. 오직 의로우신 그분만이 자신의 의로움을 우리에게 전달함으로써 우리를 의롭게 하실 수 있다.

믿음의 의로움은 그리스도의 의로움이다. 우리가 의롭게 될 때 효율 원인은 하나님의 자비, 공적 원인은 그리스도, 도구적 원인은 믿음과 연결된 말씀이다. 따라서 믿음이 의롭게 한다고 말하는데, 그것이 우리가 의로움이 전달되는 그리스도를 받는 도구이기 때문이다. 그리스도의 참여자가 된 후에 우리 자신만이 의롭게 될 뿐만 아니라 우리의 행위들도 하나님 앞에서 의롭게 여겨진다.

원주석

23절 카드 ↗

23. There is indeed no difference, etc. He urges on all, without exception, the necessity of seeking righteousness in Christ; as though he had said, “There is no other way of attaining righteousness; for some cannot be justified in this and others in that way; but all must alike be justified by faith, because all are sinners, and therefore have nothing for which they can glory before God.” But he takes as granted that every one, conscious of his sin, when he comes before the tribunal of God, is confounded and lost under a sense of his own shame; so that no sinner can bear the presence of God, as we see an example in the case of Adam. He again brings forward a reason taken from the opposite side; and hence we must notice what follows. Since we are all sinners, Paul concludes, that we are deficient in, or destitute of, the praise due to righteousness. There is then, according to what he teaches, no righteousness but what is perfect and absolute. Were there indeed such a thing as half righteousness, it would yet be necessary to deprive the sinner entirely of all glory: and hereby the figment of partial righteousness, as they call it, is sufficiently confuted; for if it were true that we are justified in part by works, and in part by grace, this argument of Paul would be of no force — that all are deprived of the glory of God because they are sinners. It is then certain, there is no righteousness where there is sin, until Christ removes the curse; and this very thing is what is said in Galatians 3:10 , that all who are under the law are exposed to the curse, and that we are delivered from it through the kindness of Christ. The glory of God I take to mean the approbation of God, as in John 12:43 , where it is said, that “they loved the glory of men more than the glory of God.” And thus he summons us from the applause of a human court to the tribunal of heaven. (118) (118) [ Beza ] gives another view, that the verb ὑστεροῦνται, refers to those who run a race, and reach not the goal, and lose the prize. The “glory of God” is the happiness which he bestows; (see Romans 5:2 ;) of this all mankind come short, however much some seemed to labor for it; and it can only be attained by faith. [ Pareus ] , [ Locke ] , and [ Whitby ] give the same view. Others consider it to be “the glory” due to God, — that all come short of rendering him the service and honor which he justly demands and requires. So [ Doddridge ] , [ Scott ] , and [ Chalmers ] But [ Melancthon ] , [ Grotius ] and [ Macknight ] seemed to have agreed with [ Calvin ] in regarding “glory” here as the praise or approbation that comes from God. The second view seems the most appropriate, according to what is said in Romans 1:21 , “they glorified him not as God.” — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-24" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-3-23

Source

"모든 사람이 죄를 범하였으매 하나님의 영광에 이르지 못하더니." 그는 예외 없이 모든 사람에게 그리스도 안에서 의로움을 구할 필요성을 강요한다. 마치 이렇게 말하는 것과 같다. "의로움을 얻는 다른 방법이 없다. 어떤 이들은 이런 방식으로, 다른 이들은 저런 방식으로 의롭게 될 수 없다. 모두가 믿음으로 의롭게 되어야 한다. 모두가 죄인이기 때문이다. 따라서 하나님 앞에서 자랑할 것이 아무것도 없다."

바울은 자신의 죄를 의식한 모든 사람이 하나님의 심판대 앞에 올 때 자신의 수치감으로 혼란스러워하고 잃어버린다는 것을 기정사실로 취한다. 어떤 죄인도 하나님의 임재를 감당할 수 없다. 아담의 경우에서 그 예를 볼 수 있다. 반대 편에서 취한 이유를 다시 제시한다. 모두가 죄인이므로 바울은 모두가 의로움에 마땅한 칭찬이 결핍되어 있거나 부족하다고 결론짓는다.

원주석

24절 카드 ↗

24. Being justified freely, etc. A participle is here put for a verb according to the usage of the Greek language. The meaning is, — that since there remains nothing for men, as to themselves, but to perish, being smitten by the just judgment of God, they are to be justified freely through his mercy; for Christ comes to the aid of this misery, and communicates himself to believers, so that they find in him alone all those things in which they are wanting. There is, perhaps, no passage in the whole Scripture which illustrates in a more striking manner the efficacy of his righteousness; for it shows that God’s mercy is the efficient cause, that Christ with his blood is the meritorious cause, that the formal or the instumental cause is faith in the word, and that moreover, the final cause is the glory of the divine justice and goodness. With regard to the efficient cause, he says, that we are justified freely, and further, by his grace; and he thus repeats the word to show that the whole is from God, and nothing from us. It might have been enough to oppose grace to merits; but lest we should imagine a half kind of grace, he affirms more strongly what he means by a repetition, and claims for God’s mercy alone the whole glory of our righteousness, which the sophists divide into parts and mutilate, that they may not be constrained to confess their own poverty. — Through the redemption, etc. This is the material, — Christ by his obedience satisfied the Father’s justice, ( judicium — judgment,) and by undertaking our cause he liberated us from the tyranny of death, by which we were held captive; as on account of the sacrifice which he offered is our guilt removed. Here again is fully confuted the gloss of those who make righteousness a quality; for if we are counted righteous before God, because we are redeemed by a price, we certainly derive from another what is not in us. And Paul immediately explains more clearly what this redemption is, and what is its object, which is to reconcile us to God; for he calls Christ a propitiation, (or, if we prefer an allusion to an ancient type,) a propitiatory. But what he means is, that we are not otherwise just than through Christ propitiating the Father for us. But it is necessary for us to examine the words. (119) (119) On this word ἱλαστήριον, both [ Venema ] , in his Notes on the Comment of [ Stephanus de Brais ] on this Epistle, and Professor [ Stuart ] , have long remarks. They both agree as to the meaning of the word as found in the Septuagint and in Greek authors, but they disagree as to its import here. It means uniformly in the Septuagint, the mercy-seat, כפרת , and, as it is in the form of an adjective, it has at least once, ( Exodus 25:17 ,) ἐπίθεμα, cover, added to it. But in the classics it means a propitiatory sacrifice, the word θῦμα, a sacrifice, being understood; but it is used by itself as other words of similar termination are. It is found also in [ Josephus ] and in Maccabees in this sense. It appears that [ Origen ] , [ Theodoret ] , and other Fathers, and also [ Erasmus ] , [ Luther ] and [ Locke ] , take the first meaning — mercy-seat; and that [ Grotius ] , [ Elsner ] , [ Turrettin ] , [ Bos ] , and [ Tholuck ] , take the second meaning — a propitiatory sacrifice. Now as both meanings are legitimate, which of them are we to take? [ Venema ] , and [ Stuart ] allude to one thing which much favors the latter view, that is, the phrase ἐν τω αἵματι αὐτου; and the latter says, that it would be incongruous to represent Christ himself as the mercy-seat, and to represent him also as sprinkled by his own blood; but that it is appropriate to say that a propitiatory sacrifice was made by his blood. The verb προέθετο, set forth, it is added, seems to support the same view. To exhibit a mercy-seat is certainly not suitable language in this connection. [ Pareus ] renders it “ placamentum — atonement,” hoc est , “ placatorem ,” that is, “atoner, or expiator.” [ Beza ] ’s version is the same — “ placamentum ;” [ Doddridge ] has “propitiation,” and [ Macknight ], “a propitiatory,” and [ Schleusner ] , “ expiatorem — expiator.” The word occurs in one other place with the neuter article , τὸ ἱλαστήριον, Hebrews 9:5 , where it clearly means the mercy-seat. It is ever accompanied with the article in the Septuagint, when by itself, see Leviticus 16:2 ; but here it is without the article, and may be viewed as an adjective dependent on on, “whom,” and rendered propitiator. Had the mercy-seat been intended, it would have been τὸ ἱλαστήριον. — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-25" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-3-24

Source

"그리스도 예수 안에 있는 속량으로 말미암아 하나님의 은혜로 값없이 의롭다 하심을 얻은 자 되었느니라." 분사가 그리스어 용법에 따라 동사로 대신 사용되었다. 의미는 이것이다. 사람들에게 자신들의 것으로는 하나님의 의로운 심판으로 맞아 멸망하는 것 외에 아무것도 남아 있지 않으므로, 그들은 하나님의 자비를 통해 은혜로 의롭게 된다. 그리스도가 이 비참함을 도우러 오시고 자신을 믿는 자들에게 자신을 전달하셔서, 그들이 자신들이 결여하고 있는 모든 것을 그분 안에서 발견하도록 하신다.

아마도 성경 전체에서 그분의 의로움의 효능을 더 놀라운 방식으로 설명하는 구절은 없을 것이다. 이것은 하나님의 자비가 효율 원인이고, 피로 계약을 맺으신 그리스도가 공적 원인이며, 말씀 안의 믿음이 형식적 혹은 도구적 원인이며, 더 나아가 하나님의 의와 선하심의 영광이 최종 원인임을 보여 준다.

효율 원인에 대해 그는 우리가 값없이, 더 나아가 그분의 은혜로 의롭게 된다고 말한다. 이 단어를 반복하는 것은 전부가 하나님으로부터이고 우리로부터는 아무것도 없음을 보여 주기 위함이다. 은혜를 공로들에 대립시키는 것만으로 충분했을 수 있다. 그러나 반쯤의 은혜를 상상하지 않도록 그는 반복으로 자신이 의미하는 것을 더 강하게 주장하고, 우리의 의로움에 대한 전체 영광을 오직 하나님의 자비에만 돌린다.

"속량으로 말미암아." 이것이 질료이다. 그리스도는 순종으로 아버지의 의로운 심판을 만족시키고, 우리의 경우를 떠맡음으로써 우리를 사로잡고 있던 사망의 폭압에서 해방시키셨다. 자신이 드린 제물 때문에 우리의 죄책이 제거된 것처럼. 여기서 또한 의로움을 어떤 성질로 만드는 자들의 주해가 완전히 논박된다. 우리가 대가로 구속되었기 때문에 하나님 앞에서 의롭다고 여겨진다면, 우리는 분명히 우리 안에 없는 것을 다른 이에게서 얻는 것이다.

원주석

25절 카드 ↗

25. Whom God hath set forth, etc. The Greek verb, προτίθεναι , means sometimes to determine beforehand, and sometimes to set forth. If the first meaning be taken, Paul refers to the gratuitous mercy of God, in having appointed Christ as our Mediator, that he might appease the Father by the sacrifice of his death: nor is it a small commendation of God’s grace that he, of his own good will, sought out a way by which he might remove our curse. According to this view, the passage fully harmonizes with that in John 3:16 , “God so loved the world, that he gave his only-begotten Son.” Yet if we embrace this meaning, it will remain still true, that God hath set him forth in due time, whom he had appointed as a Mediator. There seems to be an allusion in the word , ἱλαστήριον, as I have said, to the ancient propitiatory; for he teaches us that the same thing was really exhibited in Christ, which had been previously typified. As, however, the other view cannot be disproved, should any prefer it, I shall not undertake to decide the question. What Paul especially meant here is no doubt evident from his words; and it was this, — that God, without having regard to Christ, is always angry with us, — and that we are reconciled to him when we are accepted through his righteousness. God does not indeed hate in us his own workmanship, that is, as we are formed men; but he hates our uncleanness, which has extinguished the light of his image. When the washing of Christ cleanses this away, he then loves and embraces us as his own pure workmanship. A propitiatory through faith in his blood, etc. I prefer thus literally to retain the language of Paul; for it seems indeed to me that he intended, by one single sentence, to declare that God is propitious to us as soon as we have our trust resting on the blood of Christ; for by faith we come to the possession of this benefit. But by mentioning blood only, he did not mean to exclude other 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. 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. (120) The words are , διὰ τὴν πάρεσιν. They seem connected, not with the first clause, but with the one immediately preceding; and διὰ 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 Romans 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 me

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-3-25

Source

"이 예수를 하나님이 그의 피로써 믿음으로 말미암는 화목 제물로 세우셨으니." 그리스어 동사 προτίθεναι는 때로 미리 정하다를, 때로 앞에 세우다를 의미한다. 첫 번째 의미를 취한다면, 바울은 하나님의 은혜로운 자비를 가리킨다. 그분이 자신의 선하신 뜻으로 그리스도를 우리의 중보자로 임명하시어 자신의 죽음의 제물로 아버지를 달래게 하셨다는 것이다. 하나님이 자신의 뜻으로 우리의 저주를 제거할 길을 찾으셨다는 것은 결코 작은 하나님의 은혜의 칭찬이 아니다.

무엇보다 바울이 여기서 특별히 의미한 것은 그의 말에서 분명하다. 그것은 이것이다. 하나님은 그리스도를 고려하지 않으시면 항상 우리에게 진노하시며, 우리가 그분의 의로움을 통해 받아들여질 때 그분과 화해된다는 것이다. 하나님은 사실 우리 안에 있는 자신의 공예품, 즉 사람으로 지음 받은 우리를 미워하시지 않는다. 그러나 자신의 형상의 빛을 꺼 버린 우리의 불결함을 미워하신다. 그리스도의 씻으심이 이것을 씻어 낼 때, 그분은 우리를 자신의 순수한 공예품으로 사랑하시고 받아들이신다.

원주석

26절 카드 ↗

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 , πρὸς, while εἰς 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 εἰς and ἐπὶ, and in Romans 3:30 , as to ἐκ and διὰ. “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 εἰς intimates the proximate end — the forgiveness of sins; and πρὸς, 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 ἐις, and the former to πρὸς; 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 , 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 as that of a martyr or as an example of constancy, how then could its efficacy be referred to “sins that are past?” In no other way than as a vicarious death could it possibly have any effect on past sins, not punished through God’s forbearance. — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-27" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-3-26

Source

"곧 이 때에 자기의 의로우심을 나타내사 자기도 의로우시며 또한 예수를 믿는 자를 의롭다 하려 하심이라." 이 절의 반복은 강조적이다. 바울이 그것을 꼭 필요하게 여겨 의도적으로 한 것이다. 사람들에게 자신의 모든 것을 부인하고 그것들 모두를 하나님께 돌려야 한다고 설득하는 것보다 더 어려운 것은 없기 때문이다.

"이 때에"라는 표현에서 그는 모든 시대에서 항상 그러했던 것을 그리스도가 계시된 때에 적용한다. 이전에 그림자들 안에서 희미하게 알려졌던 것을 하나님이 자신의 아들 안에서 공개적으로 나타내셨기 때문이다. 그러므로 그리스도의 오심은 그분의 기쁘신 때이자 구원의 날이었다.

"그가 의로우시며 또한 예수를 믿는 자를 의롭다 하려 하심이라." 이것은 그가 그리스도가 주어졌을 때 계시된다고 선언한 의로움의 정의다. 그것이 복음 안에서 나타났다는 것이다. 그것은 두 부분으로 이루어진다. 첫째는 하나님이 의로우시다는 것이다. 많은 자들 중 한 분이 아니라, 의로움의 모든 충만을 자신 안에 담으신 분으로서. 그분이 혼자 의롭다는 이름과 명예를 얻으시고 온 인류가 불의로 정죄를 받을 때, 그분께 완전하고 충분한 찬양이 드려진다. 그 다음 다른 부분은 의로움의 전달에 관한 것이다. 하나님은 자신의 부요함을 자신 안에 묻어 두시는 것이 아니라 사람들에게 부어 주신다.

원주석

27절 카드 ↗

27. Where then is glorying? The Apostle, after having, with reasons abundantly strong, cast down men from their confidence in works, now triumphs over their folly: and this exulting conclusion was necessary; for on this subject, to teach us would not have been enough; it was necessary that the Holy Spirit should loudly thunder, in order to lay prostrate our loftiness. But he says that glorying is beyond all doubt excluded, for we cannot adduce anything of our own, which is worthy of being approved or commended by God. If the material of glorying be merit, whether you name that of congruity or of condignity, by which man would conciliate God, you see that both are here annihilated; for he treats not of the lessening or the modifying of merit, but Paul leaves not a particle behind. Besides, since by faith glorying in works is so taken away, that faith cannot be truly preached, without wholly depriving man of all praise by ascribing all to God’s mercy — it follows, that we are assisted by no works in obtaining righteousness. Of works? In what sense does the Apostle deny here, that our merits are excluded by the law, since he has before proved that we are condemned by the law? For if the law delivers us over to death, what glorying can we obtain from it? Does it not on the contrary deprive us of all glorying and cover us with shame? He then indeed showed, that our sin is laid open by what the law declares, for the keeping of it is what we have all neglected: but he means here, that were righteousness to be had by the law of works, our glorying would not be excluded; but as it is by faith alone, there is nothing that we can claim for ourselves; for faith receives all from God, and brings nothing except an humble confession of want. This contrast between faith and works ought to be carefully noticed: works are here mentioned without any limitation, even works universally. Then he neither speaks of ceremonies only, nor specifically of any external work, but includes all the merits of works which can possibly be imagined. The name of law is here, with no strict correctness, given to faith: but this by no means obscures the meaning of the Apostle; for what he understands is, that when we come to the rule of faith, the whole glorying in works is laid prostrate; as though he said — “The righteousness of works is indeed commended by the law, but that of faith has its own law, which leaves to works, whatever they may be, no righteousness.” (124) (124) [ Grotius ] explains “law” here by “ vivendi regula “ — rule of living;” [ Beza ] , by “ doctrina — doctrine or teaching,” according to the import of the word תורה in Hebrew; and [ Pareus ] takes “the law of works,” metonymically, for works themselves, and “the law of faith,” for faith itself; and he quotes these words of [ Theophylact ] , “The Apostle calls faith a law because the word, law, was in high veneration among the Jews.” He uses the term, law, in a similar manner in Romans 8:2 , “The law of the spirit of life,” etc. “He calls here the gospel; ‘the law of faith,’ because faith is the condition of the gospel covenant, as perfect obedience was the condition of the covenant of nature and of that of Moses, ( conditio fœderis naturalis et fœderis Mosaici .)” — [ Turrettin ] return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-28" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-3-27

Source

"그런즉 자랑할 데가 어디 있느냐 있을 수가 없느니라." 사도는 사람들을 행위들에 대한 신뢰에서 충분히 강한 이유들로 끌어내린 후, 이제 그들의 어리석음을 이기고 승리한다. 이 승리적 결론이 필요했다. 이 주제에 대해 가르치는 것만으로는 충분하지 않았다. 성령이 우리의 오만함을 넘어뜨리기 위해 크게 천둥을 칠 필요가 있었기 때문이다.

그는 자랑이 의심할 여지 없이 배제된다고 말한다. 우리가 하나님에 의해 인정받거나 칭찬받을 가치가 있는 우리 자신의 것은 아무것도 내세울 수 없기 때문이다. 자랑의 재료가 공로라면, 그것이 합당성이든 합치성이든, 사람이 하나님을 달래는 것이든, 여기서 둘 다 소멸된다는 것을 볼 수 있다. 공로를 줄이거나 조절하는 것에 대한 것이 아니라, 바울은 한 입자도 남기지 않기 때문이다.

"율법의 행위로 되느냐." 이 어구에서 사도는 율법에 의해 행위들에 할당된 보상을 의미한다. 그러므로 행위들을 의미하기 위해 율법의 이름이 정확하지 않게 사용된다. 그러나 이것이 결코 사도의 의미를 흐리지는 않는다. 그가 이해하는 것은, 믿음의 규범으로 나아갈 때 행위들 안에서의 모든 자랑이 무너진다는 것이다.

원주석

28절 카드 ↗

28. We then conclude, etc. He now draws the main proposition, as one that is incontrovertible, and adds an explanation. Justification by faith is indeed made very clear, while works are expressly excluded. Hence, in nothing do our adversaries labor more in the present day than in attempts to blend faith with the merits of works. They indeed allow that man is justified by faith; but not by faith alone; yea, they place the efficacy of justification in love, though in words they ascribe it to faith. But Paul affirms in this passage that justification is so gratuitous, that he makes it quite evident, that it can by no means be associated with the merit of works. Why he names the works of the law, I have already explained; and I have also proved that it is quite absurd to confine them to ceremonies. Frigid also is the gloss, that works are to be taken for those which are outward, and done without the Spirit of Christ. On the contrary, the word law that is added, means the same as though he called them meritorious; for what is referred to is the reward promised in the law. (125) What, James says, that man is not justified by faith alone, but also by works, does not at all militate against the preceding view. The reconciling of the two views depends chiefly on the drift of the argument pursued by James. For the question with him is not, how men attain righteousness before God, but how they prove to others that they are justified, for his object was to confute hypocrites, who vainly boasted that they had faith. Gross then is the sophistry, not to admit that the word, to justify, is taken in a different sense by James, from that in which it is used by Paul; for they handle different subjects. The word, faith, is also no doubt capable of various meanings. These two things must be taken to the account, before a correct judgment can be formed on the point. We may learn from the context, that James meant no more than that man is not made or proved to be just by a feigned or dead faith, and that he must prove his righteousness by his works. See on this subject my Institutes. (125) The phrase , χωρίς ἔργων νόμου, may be rendered, “without the works of law,” that is, either natural or revealed; for Gentiles as well as Jews are here contemplated. — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-29" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-3-28

Source

"그러므로 사람이 의롭다 하심을 얻는 것은 율법의 행위에 있지 않고 믿음으로 되는 줄 우리가 인정하노라." 이제 그는 논란의 여지가 없는 것으로서 주요 명제를 이끌어 내고 설명을 덧붙인다. 믿음으로의 칭의는 실로 매우 분명한데, 행위들이 명시적으로 배제되기 때문이다. 야고보가 사람이 믿음만으로가 아니라 행위들로도 의롭다 함을 받는다고 말하는 것은 이 견해와 전혀 상충하지 않는다. 두 견해의 화해는 주로 야고보가 따르는 논거의 방향에 달려 있다. 야고보에게 문제는 사람들이 하나님 앞에서 어떻게 의로움을 얻는가가 아니라, 어떻게 다른 이들에게 자신들이 의롭다 함을 받았다는 것을 증명하는가였다. 그의 목적은 믿음이 있다고 헛되이 자랑하는 위선자들을 논박하는 것이었다. '의롭다 하다'는 단어가 야고보에게는 바울이 사용하는 것과 다른 의미로 취해진다는 것을 인정하지 않는 것은 심각한 궤변이다. 그들은 다른 주제를 다루기 때문이다.

원주석

29절 카드 ↗

29. Is he the God of the Jews only? The second proposition is, that this righteousness belongs no more to the Jews than to the Gentiles: and it was a great matter that this point should be urged, in order that a free passage might be made for the kingdom of Christ through the whole world. He does not then ask simply or expressly, whether God was the Creator of the Gentiles, which was admitted without any dispute; but whether he designed to manifest himself as a Savior also to them. As he had put all mankind on a level, and brought them to the same condition, if there be any difference between them, it is from God, not from themselves, who have all things alike: but if it be true that God designs to make all the nations of the earth partakers of his mercy, then salvation, and righteousness, which is necessary for salvation, must be extended to all. Hence under the name, God, is conveyed an intimation of a mutual relationship, which is often mentioned in Scripture, — “I shall be to you a God, and you shall be to me a people.” ( Jeremiah 30:22 .) For the circumstance, that God, for a time, chose for himself a peculiar people, did not make void the origin of mankind, who were all formed after the image of God, and were to be brought up in the world in the hope of a blessed eternity. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-30" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-3-29

Source

"하나님은 다만 유대인의 하나님이시냐 또한 이방인의 하나님이시냐 진실로 이방인의 하나님이시니라." 두 번째 명제는 이 의로움이 이방인들보다 유대인들에게 더 많이 속하지 않는다는 것이다. 이 점을 강조하는 것은 그리스도의 왕국이 온 세상을 통해 자유로운 통로를 가질 수 있도록 하는 데 큰 의미가 있었다. 그는 하나님이 이방인들의 창조자이신가 하는 것을 단순히 명시적으로 묻지 않는다. 그것은 논란 없이 인정되었기 때문이다. 그보다는 그분이 또한 그들에게도 구원자로 자신을 나타내기로 작정하셨는가를 묻는다.

원주석

30절 카드 ↗

30. Who shall justify, (127) etc. In saying that some are justified by faith, and some through faith, he seems to have indulged himself in varying his language, while he expresses the same thing, and for this end, — that he might, by the way, touch on the folly of the Jews, who imagined a difference between themselves and the Gentiles, though on the subject of justification there was no difference whatever; for since men became partakers of this grace by faith only, and since faith in all is the same, it is absurd to make a distinction in what is so much alike. I am hence led to think that there is something ironical in the words, as though be said, — “If any wishes to have a difference made between the Gentile and the Jew, let him take this, — that the one obtains righteousness by faith, and the other through faith.” But it may be, that some will prefer this distinction, — that the Jews were justified by faith, because they were born the heirs of grace, as the right of adoption was transmitted to them from the Fathers, — and that the Gentiles were justified through faith, because the covenant to them was adventitious. (127) The future is used for the present — “who justifies,” after the manner of the Hebrew language, though some consider that the day of judgment is referred to; but he seems to speak of a present act, or as [ Grotius ] says, of a continued act, which the Hebrews expressed by the future tense. — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' <a name="verse-31" class="com-number"

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-3-30

Source

"할례자도 믿음으로 말미암아 또한 무할례자도 믿음으로 말미암아 의롭다 하실 하나님은 한 분이시니라." 어떤 이들은 믿음으로 의롭게 되고 어떤 이들은 믿음을 통해 의롭게 된다고 말함으로써, 그는 같은 것을 다른 형식으로 표현하면서 언어를 변형하는 것을 즐긴 것 같다. 동시에 유대인들의 어리석음을 지나치듯 언급하기 위한 것이다. 그들은 자신들과 이방인들 사이에 차이를 상상했지만, 칭의의 주제에서는 어떤 차이도 없었다. 사람들이 오직 믿음으로만 이 은혜에 참여자가 되고, 믿음이 모든 사람에게서 동일하므로, 그토록 닮은 것에서 구분을 짓는 것은 불합리하다.

원주석

31절 카드 ↗

31. Do we then make, etc. When the law is opposed to faith, the flesh immediately suspects that there is some contrariety, as though the one were adverse to the other: and this false notion prevails, especially among those who are imbued with wrong ideas as to the law, and leaving the promises, seek nothing else through it but the righteousness of works. And on this account, not only Paul, but our Lord himself, was evil spoken of by the Jews, as though in all his preaching he aimed at the abrogation of the law. Hence it was that he made this protest, — “I came not to undo, but to fulfill the law.” ( Matthew 5:17 .) And this suspicion regards the moral as well as the ceremonial law; for as the gospel has put an end to the Mosaic ceremonies, it is supposed to have a tendency to destroy the whole dispensation of Moses. And further, as it sweeps away all the righteousness of works, it is believed to be opposed to all those testimonies of the law, by which the Lord has declared, that he has thereby prescribed the way of righteousness and salvation. I therefore take this defense of Paul, not only as to ceremonies, nor as to the commandments which are called moral, but with regard to the whole law universally. (128) For the moral law is in reality confirmed and established through faith in Christ, inasmuch as it was given for this end — to lead man to Christ by showing him his iniquity; and without this it cannot be fulfilled, and in vain will it require what ought to be done; nor can it do anything but irritate lust more and more, and thus finally increase man’s condemnation; but where there is a coming to Christ, there is first found in him the perfect righteousness of the law, which becomes ours by imputation, and then there is sanctification, by which our hearts are prepared to keep the law; it is indeed imperfectly done, but there is an aiming at the work. Similar is the case with ceremonies, which indeed cease and vanish away when Christ comes, but they are in reality confirmed by him; for when they are viewed in themselves they are vain and shadowy images, and then only do they attain anything real and solid, when their end is regarded. In this then consists their chief confirmation, when they have obtained their accomplishment in Christ. Let us then also bear in mind, so to dispense the gospel that by our mode of teaching the law may be confirmed; but let it be sustained by no other strength than that of faith in Christ. (128) The law here, no doubt means, the law of which mention is made in the preceding verses — the law by the works of which we cannot be justified — the law that is in this respect opposed to faith. To refer us for its meanng to Romans 3:20 and 21, as is done by [ Stuart ] , “is wholly unwarrantable,” and to say that it means the Old Testament; for this is to separate it from it’s immediate connection without any satisfactory reason. Besides, such an interpretation obliterates an important doctrine, that faith does not render void, or nullify the authority, the use and sanctions of the moral law but on the contrary, sustains and confirms them. Though it does what the law does not, and cannot do, inasmuch as it saves the sinner whom the law condemns; it yet effects this without relaxing or dishonoring the law, but in a way that renders it, if possible, more binding, and more honorable, and more illustrious. It only renders the passage more intricate to include the ceremonial law, (for that has more of faith than of law in it,) to which no reference is made in the context: but there seems to be no objection to include the law of conscience, as well as the written law; for faith confirms both, and the word “law,” is here without the article, though this indeed of itself is not decisive. The moral law, then, as well as the law of conscience, is what is here intended: for the authority of both is confirmed and strengthened by faith. — Ed. return to ' Top of Page ' Romans Rom 2 Romans Rom Romans Rom 4 Footnotes: Copyright Statement These files are public domain. Bibliographical Information Calvin, John. "Commentary on Romans 3". "Calvin's Commentary on the Bible". https://www.studylight.org/ commentaries/ eng/ cal/ romans-3.html. 1840-57. terms of use • privacy policy • • rights and permissions • contact sl • about sl • link to sl To report dead links, typos, or html errors or suggestions about making these resources more useful use the convenient contact form StudyLight.org © 2001-2026 Powered by Light speed Technology Ads Free Profile .sub-menu{font-size:12px;padding:10px 0;max-width:1260px;width:100%;background-color:#f7f7f7;color:#6b6b6b;border-bottom:5px solid #6b6b6b;display:flex;flex-direction:column;flex-wrap:nowrap;position:absolute;z-index:9998} .sub-menu .menu-group{width:100%;margin:0 5px 0;padding:0 5px 0;border-right:1px solid #6b6b6b} .sub-menu .menu-group-spacer{display:none} .sub-menu .menu-name{font-size:15px;font-weight:bold;color:#deac27} .sub-menu .menu-name a{color:#deac27} .sub-menu .menu-ul li a{color:#6b6b6b;} .sub-menu .menu-ul li:hover{color:#DD8000} .search-button{background-color:#6b6b6b;color:#fff;border:1px solid #6b6b6b;-webkit-appearance:square-button;padding:0 5px;font-size:13px} .int-search-div{display:flex;flex-direction:row;margin-top:10px;flex-wrap:nowrap;width:100%} .int-search-div .int-s-query{border:1px solid #dadada;font-size:13px;padding:0 5px 0;margin-right:5px;width:30%;height:30px;flex:1 1 100%} .int-search-div .int-s-button{width:50px;margin-right:10px;height:30px;flex:0 0 50px} .int-selections-div{display:flex;flex-direction:row;flex-wrap:nowrap;width:100%;margin-bottom:20px} .int-selections-div .int-s-section{border:1px solid #dadada;color:#6b6b6b;font-size:13px;margin:5px 5px 0 0;width:70px;height:30px;flex:1 1 50%} .int-selections-div .int-s-translation{border:1px solid #dadada;color:#6b6b6b;font-size:13px;margin-top:5px;padding:2px;width:40%;height:30px;flex:1 1 40%} .lex-search-div{display:flex;flex-direction:row;flex-wrap

Pericope (part_of)

절 (explains)

bible-text/rom-3-31

Source

"그런즉 우리가 믿음으로 말미암아 율법을 파기하느냐 그럴 수 없느니라 도리어 율법을 굳게 세우느니라." 율법이 믿음에 대립될 때, 육신은 즉시 어떤 모순이 있는 것처럼 의심한다. 마치 하나가 다른 것에 적대적인 것처럼. 이 거짓된 생각은 율법에 대해 잘못된 관념을 가지고, 약속들을 떠나 행위들의 의로움 외에 율법을 통해 아무것도 구하지 않는 사람들 사이에서 특히 만연한다. 이 의심은 도덕법뿐만 아니라 예식법에도 관련된다.

따라서 나는 바울의 이 변호를 예식들에만, 또는 도덕적이라고 불리는 계명들에만 적용하는 것이 아니라, 율법 전체에 보편적으로 적용한다. 왜냐하면 도덕법은 실제로 그리스도를 향한 믿음을 통해 확증되고 굳게 세워지기 때문이다. 그것은 이 목적을 위해 주어졌다. 사람에게 자신의 불의를 보여 줌으로써 그를 그리스도께로 인도하는 것이다. 그리스도 없이는 율법이 성취될 수 없고, 마땅한 것을 요구해도 헛수고이며, 욕망을 더욱 자극하고 사람의 정죄를 증가시킬 수 있을 뿐이다. 그러나 그리스도께 나아오는 곳에서는 먼저 그분 안에서 율법의 완전한 의로움이 발견된다. 그것이 전가를 통해 우리의 것이 된다. 그러고 나서 우리의 마음이 율법을 지키도록 준비하게 되는 성화가 있다. 불완전하게 이루어지지만, 그 일을 향해 나아가는 것이다. 예식들도 마찬가지다. 그것들이 사실 그리스도가 오실 때 그치고 소멸하지만, 그분에 의해 실제로 확증된다.

원주석

← 2장4장 →
바이블위키 biblewiki.net · PD/CC0 · status:draft (verified 승격은 사람만) · 요약은 구조 정보만 제공하며 본문 원문을 왜곡하지 않습니다 · Karpathy LLM Wiki 패턴