Romans 3:27–31

All boasting on our part is shut out. Our blessing depends entirely on the work of another, and we have received the report of that work by faith. If that is so, we clearly have nothing to boast in, as if our own works had secured the blessing. So the Apostle says we reach the conclusion that a man is justified by faith, apart from works of law.

All boasting on man's part is shut out. God's work and God's grace justify man. This is clearly not by a law of works, for then man would have his boasting. It is by the law of faith, which simply receives, through grace, the effect of another's work. We may see here that law is used for a regularly acting principle: the law of faith, the law of works. We shall find this again. There are two principles here: gaining a thing by working, and receiving a thing by faith. What faith receives is indeed another thing — God's righteousness, not man's. We cannot mix the two, so one of them excludes the other.

The Jews boasted a great deal over the Gentiles. Self-righteousness always boasts. It is not a law of works that can shut it out. A man justifying himself by his works would have something to boast in. It is this law of faith, this divine principle on which we are placed, that shuts it out.

The law of faith excludes boasting. If a man is justified by faith, he has nothing to boast of over his neighbour. The greatest sinner in the world may be justified on the same principle. If a man were justified by works he would have much to boast of, for it would be seen that he was so much better than others. But justification on the principle of faith puts boasting out of court.

There is, then, no room for man to boast, not even for the Jew, despite all his privileges. Man, whoever he may be, occupies the place of a sinner. Grace, and grace only, avails for all in the same way.

But the Christian has a just ground of boasting. There is One in whom we may and ought to boast — not self, but the Lord... To boast in the Lord is due to Him and good for us; to boast elsewhere is a danger as well as a delusion. It connects more or less directly with self. The approved man is not the one who commends himself, but the one whom the Lord commends.

Justification, then, must be on another principle. "For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from works of the law." What else could Scripture conclude? All are guilty. And justification is not what we are to God, but what He is to us, set forth in Christ. Do not mix these two things together. Let your salvation rest entirely on the principle of faith — what God is to you.

To justify a man is to reckon him righteous. No one can ever bring a charge against such a person. Before the throne of judgement he stands acquitted for ever. To justify someone who has done no wrong is simple. Every court in the world can do it. But to justify a sinner is another matter altogether. Only God can solve that problem. Long ago Job and his friend Bildad both asked how a man can be just with God, and both knew that man is fallen and guilty.

All boasting on man's part is shut out. God justifies man by His own work and His own grace. It is not by a law of works, for then man would have something to boast of. It is by the law of faith, which simply receives, through grace, the effect of another's work. Here "law" means a principle that acts in a regular way — the law of faith, the law of works. So we cannot mix the two principles: gaining a thing by working, and receiving a thing by faith (and, indeed, receiving another thing — God's righteousness, not man's). One of them excludes the other. And we conclude not only that a man is justified by faith through Christ's blood by grace, but that it is without works of law — wholly apart from them, to the exclusion of them.

Works of the law are not only works aimed at keeping the law of Moses. They are works aiming at keeping any law at all (literally: "works of law"). The people of Israel proved this in the case of the law of Moses. But it is a general principle. There are no works, there is nothing that man can do, which would make him just or righteous before God.

The law of faith excludes boasting. If a man is justified by faith he has nothing to boast of over his neighbour, since the greatest sinner in the world may be justified on the same principle. If a man were justified by works he would have much to boast of, for it would be seen that he was so much better than others. But justification on the principle of faith puts boasting out of court.

By no means. The three expressions convey different thoughts, but they all refer to the same act. The grace of God is the source of our every blessing, the blood of Christ is the channel by which it reaches us, while faith is simply how we take it all for ourselves.

There is really no difficulty to get out of. In James the whole point is what is valid before man, as verse 18 of that chapter shows. A man has the right to ask that we display our faith in our works, so justifying ourselves and our faith before him. In Romans the whole point is what is valid before God. Our faith is quite plain to His all-seeing eye. He does not have to wait for works, the fruit of faith, to be sure that the faith is real.

The summing up is therefore in verse 28. A person is justified by faith, without works of law. And the moment we think who God is, this is plain. If the law justified, it could justify only Jews, and only if they kept the whole law. Is He the God of the Jews alone? Thanks be to His name, He is the God of the Gentiles also. So the blessing of justification must rest on some other ground than keeping the law, which was, strictly speaking, given to the Jew alone.

Once we admit that this is God's approved way, He is clearly not God of Jews more than of Gentiles. He is one and the same to both. He will justify circumcised people not by law, as they expect, but by faith. And if uncircumcised people have faith, He will justify them through it too.

And is God a limited God — the God of the Jews only? No, He is also the God of the Gentiles. And how? In grace. One God justifies the Jews, who seek after righteousness, on the principle of faith. And since justification is on the principle of faith, He justifies believing Gentiles by faith too.

He created all men. Will He deny some of them the possibility of being justified from their sins, while granting this blessing to others? Impossible! "God shows no partiality." If "all have sinned," the gospel is for all. If some do not receive it, that is another matter; they will die in their sins. But God's offer is to all, without partiality.

If we give up the principle of law, and grace is shown by the pure goodness of God, then the apostle's question has only one answer: "Is He the God of Jews only? Is He not the God of Gentiles also?" Will such goodness keep itself inside the limits of a weak and scattered people? Or will it go out to meet the need of the whole world?

If God is the justifier, and justifies on the principle of faith, there can be no boasting. The principle of faith excludes it absolutely. No one can claim a better right to be justified than another. The privilege of faith cannot be offered to any without offering it to all. It is free in every case. No one has a claim upon God for His grace.

And then the joyful question arises: "Is He the God of Jews only? Is He not the God of Gentiles also?" Our need of salvation, and our dependence on the sovereignty and grace of God, put us all on the same level. God is one, "who will justify the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith." The Jew must come in on the very same mercy that saves the Gentile.

If a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law, this would favour Gentiles as much as Jews. This very fact has been a great stumbling block to the Jews ever since Christianity has been preached. But "Or is God the God of Jews only? Is He not the God of Gentiles also?" He created all men. Would He deny some of them the possibility of being justified from their sins, while granting this blessing to others? Impossible! God shows no partiality. If "all have sinned," the gospel is for all. If some do not receive it, that is another matter; they will die in their sins. But God's offer is to all, without partiality.

That is what He must be, and that is what He was even in the Old Testament. It is true that when every race on earth had sunk into idolatry, He chose Israel out from among them, in Abraham, to keep the knowledge of the one God alive on the earth. But now in grace He has taken His place as God over all men, according to the truth of His unchanging right. For it is one and the same God who justifies the circumcised by faith and the uncircumcised through faith.

"By" means on the principle of faith; "through" means by means of the faith a person actually has. The Jew sought righteousness on a wrong principle. The gospel revealed the true one — faith. If the Gentile had the faith, he had the justification which was given on that principle.

Justifying the circumcised "out of faith," or on that principle, matters greatly. It shuts out works of law, which most Jews expected. It was just as important to say that God will justify the uncircumcised through their faith, if any of them have it. But is it not strange that a scholar should claim the two phrases mean the same thing, even though the end result is much the same? … Scripture is not loose; scholars sometimes are.

The law was for one nation only. That was the boast of the Jew, and it was itself the witness that the law was not, after all, the way of blessing. Could God have forgotten the Gentile like that? … God is drawing near to men — would it be a greater and better thing to say that He is drawing near to the Jew? One might as well claim an exclusive right to sun and rain. The more necessary such blessings are, the more widely they are spread.

Our need of salvation, and our dependence on the sovereignty and grace of God, put us all on the same level. The Jew must come in on the very same mercy that saves the Gentile.

Justification is not limited to the Jew. There is "one God" who justifies the circumcised Jew on the principle of faith, and the uncircumcised Gentile by faith. So it is evident that God is acting towards all in righteousness and grace.

The last verse of our chapter answers an objection that a zealous Jew might raise. He might say this Gospel message cannot be true, because it makes the law false — and God undeniably gave that law at an earlier time. "No," says Paul, "far from making the law null and void, we establish it by putting it in the place God always intended it to occupy."

This is an unhappy expression, bringing in the name of God where it does not occur. In the Old Testament it is chalilah, "far be it." In the New Testament it is "let it not be."

Do we then make void the law, or more properly, law? No; we establish law, not Moses' law, but the principle of law. If a thief is hanging on a tree, is that making void the law? No; so far from making it void, hanging establishes it. But if after the punishment he rose, the law would have inflicted its penalty, and he would be beyond its reach. So then Christ died, and He established the law... But that does not put me under it. If I am under it, I am lost — not just as a sinner, but by the law itself. Nothing establishes the law like the death of Christ.

Law was never established so solemnly and so gloriously as when the divine Saviour bore its curse on the cross. The very thing that delivered from its penalty upheld its authority.

Justifying by faith seems to set the law aside and make it void. It does the opposite: it establishes the law. Its claims are fully recognised, and it stands in all its holiness, justness, and goodness. Justification by faith assumes what this letter has already shown. The sinner takes the place of one condemned under law, proved guilty, his mouth stopped, owning the just sentence the law pronounced on him. That establishes the law in all its force. Indeed, before we could be freed from its condemnation, the Son of God had to die. This is what faith owns.

Note that the establishing of law in Romans 3:31 has no connection at all with Christ's obeying the law, as some say, to give us active righteousness. The whole passage speaks only of Christ set forth as a mercy seat through faith in His blood. It shows God's righteousness apart from law. The only establishing of law set before our faith here is Christ's death. It says nothing about His making out righteousness for us by obeying the law in His life.

Suppose a substitute had kept the law for the offender — though that was impossible. Then no one would ever have paid the penalty the law demands for breaking it. The law would have been broken without consequence, and no sacrifice would have been needed. As Galatians 2:21 says, "if righteousness were through the law, then Christ died for no purpose." Had that been possible, His life, not His death, would have met the need.

Justification by faith shuts out the law as a means of blessing. Does that make the law of no effect? On the contrary, justifying the believer on the ground of the precious blood establishes the law. God gave the law to convict men of sin, and for that purpose the law still works.

But the establishment of the law, of which the apostle speaks in Romans 3, has no reference whatever to the question of a rule by which the Christian has to walk. The chapter treats of man's ruin and God's righteousness, not of practice, and shows that faith upholds the authority of the law in the cross of Christ.

The person who pretends to stand under law without being condemned is the one who makes law void.