but its chief glory must ever be that it served to usher in the gospel (2 Cor. iii. 9-11), and to prove to humanity a παιδαγωγὸς εἰς Χριστόν (Gal. iii. 24).1

1 Ménégoz (op. cit., p. 123) sums up the various points of view in which Paul presents his special theory of the law, thus: The law was given (1) to increase transgressions (apaßáσewv xápiv); (2) to lead to faith (els wiσTiv); (3) to conduct to Christ (eis Xpɩσtóv), and (4) to give life (eis why). These are but different expressions of the same fundamental notion. Thus the formally contradictory assertions respecting the law, when seen in their true light, present the same conception of the law's character and end under different aspects.

On the whole subject I would also refer to the interesting monograph of Grafe, Die paulinische Lehre vom Gesetz nach den vier Hauptbriefen, 2te Aufl., 1893.

CHAPTER V

THE DIVINE PURPOSE

WE have seen that the law was but one and that a subordinate one-of the dispensations of God. It was one of the methods of the divine grace- one of the various means by which God sought to realize his purpose of salvation. Its aim and operation were really embraced within the scope of that primeval gospel, that gracious action of God by which, from the beginning of human sin, he had been seeking to reconcile the world to himself. Rom. iv. and Gal. iii. are the passages in which this thought is most fully developed. The principle of grace was operative in the days of Abraham, long before the law came into being. Faith and grace are the marks of that gospel which is contained in the promise to Abraham. Thus the gospel, in its essential elements, antedates the law. It has its basis in the mercy of God, and is as old as human sin and human needs. The law came in long afterwards, not to serve any ends of its own, but to serve the ends of the divine grace. It never changed the conditions of salvation which are involved in the very nature of the relation between the holy God and sinful man. It was only an incentive to man to fulfil the conditions of a gracious salvation. By making sin "exceeding sinful," and demonstrating to man his own helplessness, the law constrained him to fly to God's mercy as his only hope. Thus the law, rightly understood, is no rival of the gospel, but a method of God adapted to open men's eyes to their need of the gospel. The law does not make void the promise; faith does not destroy the law. Both contemplated essentially the same method of salvation. In its own way the law prepared men for Christ. By

such considerations the apostle proves the inner unity and harmony of the law and the gospel. The gospel was before the law, and underlies and embraces it. The law contemplates the ends of the gospel, and is a providential aid in promoting them.

Thus a consideration of the Pauline doctrine of the law leads us to the study of that divine purpose of grace which underlies the gospel, and is the motive of the whole history of redemption. This idea of the divine purpose received a strong emphasis from Paul. He shared that intense and living sense of God and of his causal efficiency which was characteristic of the Hebrew mind: God's action is the expression of his purpose. The work of salvation is the realization of a gracious plan which lay in the mind of God before the world was. Sometimes the divine purpose is conceived of as eternal; sometimes as historical. In either case the treatment of the subject is not speculative, but practical and religious. The references to God's purpose illustrate the effort to form a rational conception of God's historic action; to find an ideal principle underlying the course of the world, and to correlate the doctrines of the gospel with the character of God. For Paul the purposes of God are rooted in the nature of God.

The apostle has not directly discussed the nature of God or presented any analysis of his attributes. There are two qualities, however, which he attributes to God which combine to constitute his working conception of God's ethical nature. They are represented, on the one hand, by the words "love" and "grace," and on the other, by the words "righteousness" and "wrath." Paul lays

strong emphasis upon the love, the gracious favor, of God towards men. It was this love which prompted the gift of Christ for our salvation (Rom. v. 8). The love of God is the mightiest power in the universe (Rom. viii. 38, 39). God is "rich in mercy" (Eph. ii. 4), and the keynote of Paul's doctrine of his gracious purpose is, "that he might have mercy upon all" (iva TOÙS TÁVτAS ¿λeńoŋ, Rom. xi. 32). Grace (xápis, Rom. iii. 24; v. 2

et al.), mercy (eλeos, Rom. ix. 23; xi. 31), and compas. sion (oixтipuoi, Rom. xii. 1; 2 Cor. i. 3) are the watchwords of Paul's doctrine of God's nature and action.1 We may confidently add that in assigning to love the preeminence among virtues (1 Cor. xiii. 13), and in designating love as moral completeness (Tò Téλelov, 1 Cor. xiii. 10), the apostle implies that love is the essential glory of the divine perfection. As love is the crowning virtue for man, so must it be for God. But what, then, can be the meaning of those terms which seem to express a contrast or counterpart to love?

Paul emphasizes a principle, called the divine wrath (opyń), which stands in contrast to those expressions of love which are called mercy or grace: "The wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men" (Rom. i. 18). The riches of God's goodness-glory, honor, and peace are bestowed upon the good; while wrath and indignation, tribulation and anguish are the lot of the wicked (Rom. ii. 4, 5, 8). Sinners are exposed to God's wrath from which it is the purpose of redemption to deliver them (Rom. iv. 15; v. 9). They are described as objects of God's hostility (exopoí, Rom. v. 10; xi. 28)—a term which, in my judgment, is to be taken, as the context in both passages shows, in a passive, and not in an active, sense.2 What, now, is the relation of this opyǹ coû to the divine love? It seems clear to me that it is regarded as an aspect or activity of God's holy love. It is God's holy displeasure at sin—the reaction of his nature against it. It is the energy with which his love, being holy, repudiates its opposite. It is not, therefore, inconsistent with love; it does not stand

1 "L'amour (ȧyáπn) est l'attribut divin. Placé en présence du pécheur, l'amour donne naissance à la miséricorde (Xeos), et la grâce (xápis) est l'amour dans son application effective et personnelle au pécheur. Les trois termes expriment la même idée sous différentes faces, et Paul les emploie fréquemment l'un pour l'autre." Ménégoz, Le Péché, etc., pp. 130, 131.

2 So Meyer, Weiss, Pfleiderer, Lipsius, Ménégoz, von Soden, Holtzmann, Klöpper, Schmiedel, vs. Baur, Ritschl, Beyschlag. I think that exopós is probably active in Col. i. 21, and certainly so in Rom. viii. 7.

in opposition to it. The opposite of love is hate, and God is not described as hating men.1 Wrath stands in contrast to those activities of love which are called grace or compassion. They denote the aspect of the divine love according to which it pities the sinner and waits to forgive him. Wrath denotes the attitude of the divine love towards wilful sin. Both qualities or impulses that of grace, and that of wrath- -are embraced within the divine love. The conception of God's righteousness (Suxaiooúvn), where it expresses his attitude towards sin, is similar. Sometimes the word denotes God's faithfulness to his own nature and promises, as in Rom. iii. 5: "But if our unrighteousness commendeth the righteousness of God, what shall we say?" But in iii. 25, 26, Sikaιoσúvη expresses God's disapproval of sin in contrast to a seeming laxity in his estimate of it. Through Christ God has accomplished an "exhibition or demonstration of his righteousness” (ἔνδειξις τῆς δικαιοσύνης αὐτοῦ) which is adapted to prevent men from supposing that because he refrained from punishing the sins of men in past times, he is indifferent to sin or regards it lightly. Here dikaιoσúvŋ must mean the self-respecting attribute of holiness in God, the reaction of his nature against sin which must find expression in its condemnation.2 Holy love is the best definition of Paul's conception of the ethical nature of God.

What, now, is Paul's view of God's relation to the world? In this conception his doctrine of God's special purpose in Jewish history and in Christ must have its We find that Paul regards the world as the scene of a great redemptive process. Nature is now subject to

root.

1 The phrase: "Esau have I hated" (Rom. ix. 13) means, as the context shows, "a rejection of one in favor of another who is preferred" (Beyschlag). Paul explains this preference by the words: "The elder shall serve the younger."

2 The context of this passage is decisive against the view of Ritschl, Beyschlag, and others, who deny that dikaloσúvŋ here bears a judicial or penal sense. It does this, however, without being "placed in fundamental contradiction to the divine grace" (Beyschlag). Cf. my articles, "Holiness" and "Righteousness," in Hastings's Bible Dictionary.