Where is boasting then?
It is excluded.
Boastfulness--Jewish and Christian
I. Boastfulness was a Jewish national characteristic of a peculiar species, for it took the form of religious conceit.
1. They could not boast of being rich or strong; but when their fortunes were at the lowest they had one source of national pride left to them to buoy up their self-importance. In being the selected favourites of heaven, they found a consolation so flattering, that they looked down upon their conquerors as outcast aliens from God. Now, there was just sufficient foundation for this pride to make it very excusable in them, although in the case of many it took a shape which proved fatal to religious life.
2. Having reached the natural termination of his own argument, namely, that God, through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ, is able to justify all who trust in Him, Paul suddenly halts, as though he were looking for something that had vanished, and abruptly asks, “Where, then, is the boasting of the Jews?” Answer--There is no more room left for it. But what shuts it out? Not the law of works, which is understood to prescribe obedience as a means of reward; for if a man earned reward, then, of course, he has some ground for boasting. No; boasting is really excluded only under the new and better way of being just before God. That new principle of acceptance with God cuts self-righteousness down to the roots as nothing else does. That leaves him a debtor to sovereign grace alone.
II. This vicious boastfulness is not a thing essentially Jewish. At bottom, it is the child of human pride. No man likes to own that he has literally not an inch of ground to stand on before the judgment seat of God, nor a scruple’s weight of merit to plead there. There is nothing a man dislikes more than that. However ragged our righteousness may be, or however filthy, we cannot let it go to stand in utter shame, unscreened to the light, or defenceless before the judgment that we have deserved. Can we not? Then there is no salvation for us. Salvation is for men who trust in God’s way of finding mercy, and that principle shuts boasting out. Alone, naked, excuseless, condemned, a sinner simply you must feel and confess yourself to be.
III. This self-justifying boastfulness feeds upon every point of advantage which is supposed to lift one sinner a little above his fellow sinner. It lives by making invidious comparisons. There are diversities among men in the degree of their moral depravity, and God’s providence gives to some an immense advantage over others in respect of religious privilege. But when God singles out one race from other races, or one class in society before another class, or one individual from among others, for exceptional religious advantages, He certainly does not mean to puff up the favoured one with spiritual conceit. It is nothing but the abnormal working of man’s own evil nature that perverts what God thus meant for a blessing. Therefore we can afford to throw no stones at ancient Israel. Do we Christians never boast of being far above the benighted Jew or heathen? Your Israelite long ago conceived himself safe for eternity, because he had been duly circumcised and observed the festivals. Does your Christian never build any hope of heaven upon his good churchmanship or his unchallenged Christian profession? The Jews toiled hard to deserve paradise by a great zeal for orthodoxy, and by leading a scrupulous life. Does no one ever hear of any Christian doing the like? For you, as well as the Jew, it is fatally easy to miss the humble road that leads to life through a lowly trust in Christ. For you, too, it is perilously easy to build your religious confidence upon a righteousness of your own.
IV. Against this assumption see what mighty engines Paul brings to bear.
1. The argument is one to this effect.
“If I am wrong in saying that every man is to be justified apart from the law--and if you are right in thinking that the observance of Mosaic rites is the ground of your acceptance, then in that case God is only the God of the Jews, since it is only to Jews that He has given this Mosaic law. But is not this dead against the very prime point of your confession as against polytheism, that there is one living true God of all men alike? The foundation of this reasoning lies in monotheism, the doctrine of the unity of God, and His Common relation to all. The cleft which cuts the human race into Jews and Gentiles cuts far down; but it cannot cut so far as the fundamental question of the sinner’s acceptance with his Maker. How shall man have peace with God? is a problem which can only have one answer--not two. The same one God, just and merciful to all His children, must justly justify every sinner in the same way.
2. But the levelling argument of the apostle is good for more than Jews. Just look at our own position in the light of this argument. We are privileged men--as Christians, as Englishmen, as the children of devout parents who saw to our being early baptized in the faith and nurture of the saints. Shall we then rest with boastful confidence in this, and deem that the gate of life is less straight for us than for idolaters or outcasts? Is not that to repeat the blunder of the Jew, to postulate, as it were, a two-faced God?--one God who apportions to ignorant and wicked people their own share of grace, as a thing that they have no claim on, out of pure regard to the work of Jesus Christ, but who receives respectable Christian people on another and easier footing altogether. I have no fear that any of you will say such things. But what I fear is that some of you may gradually harbour a self-righteous confidence in your position and character, which would substantially mean the same thing. Against such a self-confident temper, therefore, I fight with the weapon of St. Paul. God has not two ways of saving men. (J. Oswald Dykes, D. D.)
Boasting excluded
1. The term “law” may mean more than an authoritative rule; it may signify the method of succession by which one event follows another; and it is thus that we speak of a law of nature, or of mind. Both the law of works and the law of faith may be understood here in this latter sense. The one is that by which a man’s justification follows upon his having performed the works; the other is that by which a man’s justification follows upon his faith--just as the law of gravitation is that upon which everybody above the surface of the earth, when its support is taken away, will fall toward its centre.
2. Now the aim of the apostle is to prove that by the law of works none is justified, and I want you to notice how those who dislike the utter excluding of works endeavour to evade this.
I. They hold that the affirmation of Paul is of the ceremonial and not of the moral law. They are willing enough to discard obedience to the former, but not to the latter. All rites, be they Jewish or Christian, have a greatly inferior place in their estimation to the virtues of social life, or to the affections of an inward and enlightened piety in a man, even though a stranger to the puritanical rigours of the Sabbath and of the sacrament.
1. We are far from disputing the justness of their preference; but we would direct them to the use that they should make of it when applying to it the statement that from justification all boasting is excluded. Does not the statement point the more to that of which men are inclined to boast the more? To set aside the law of works is not to exclude boasting, if only those works are set aside which beget no reverence when done by others, and no complacency when done by themselves. The exclusion of boasting might appear to an old Pharisee as that which swept away the whole ceremonial in which he gloried. But for the same reason should it appear to the tasteful admirer of virtue to sweep away the moral accomplishments in which he glories. In a word, this verse has the same force now that it had then. It then reduced the boastful Jew to the same ground of nothingness before God with the Gentile whom he despised. And it now reduces the boastful moralist to the same ground with the slave of rites, whom he so thoroughly despises.
2. But that Paul means the moral law is plain, because in the theft and adultery and sacrilege of chap. 2, and in the impiety and deceit and slander and cruelty of chap. 3, we see that it was the offence of a guilty world against it which the apostle chiefly had in his eye; and when he says that by the law is the knowledge of sin, how could he mean the ceremonial law, when they were moral sins that he had all along been specifying?
3. This distinction between the moral and ceremonial is, in fact, a mere device for warding off a doctrine by which alienated nature feels herself to be humbled. It is an opiate by which she would fain regale the lingering sense that she so fondly retains of her own sufficiency. It is laying hold of a twig by which she may bear herself up, in her own favourite attitude of independence of God. But this is a propensity to which the apostle grants no quarter whenever it appears; and never will your mind and his be at one till reduced to a sense of your own nothingness, and leaning your whole weight on the sufficiency of another, you receive justification as wholly of grace, and feel on this ground that every plea of boasting is overthrown.
II. They at times allow justification to be of faith wholly, but make a virtue of faith. All the glorifying to the law associated with obedience they would now transfer to acquiescence in the gospel. The docility, attention, love of truth, and preference of light to darkness confer a merit upon believing; and here would they make a last and a desperate stand for the credit of a share in their own salvation.
1. Now if this verse be true, there must be an error in this also. It eaves the sinner nothing to boast of at all; and should he continue to associate any glorying with his faith, then is he turning this faith to a purpose directly the reverse of that which the apostle intends by it. There is no glory, you will allow, in seeing the sun with your eyes open, whatever glory may accrue to Him who arrayed this luminary in his brightness and endowed you with that wondrous mechanism which conveys the perception of it. And be assured that in every way there is just as little to boast of on the part of him who sees the truth of the gospel, or who relies on its promises after he perceives them to be true. His faith, which has been aptly termed the hand of the mind, may apprehend the offered gift and may appropriate it; but there is just as little of moral praise to be rendered on that account, as to the beggar for laying hold of the offered alms.
2. And to cut away all pretensions to glorying, the faith itself is a gift. The gospel is like an offer made to one who has a withered hand; and power must go forth with the offer ere the hand can be extended to take hold of it. It is not enough for God to present an object, He must also awaken the eye to the perception of it. (T. Chalmers, D. D.)
Grace exalted--boasting excluded
Pride is most obnoxious to God. As a sin, His holiness hates it; as a treason, His sovereignty detests it, and the whole of His attributes stand leagued to put it down. The first transgression had in its essence pride. The ambitious heart of Eve desired to be as God, and Adam followed; and we know the rest. Remember Babel, Pharaoh, Nebuchadnezzar, Sennacherib, and Herod. God loves His servants, but pride even in them He abhors. Think of David and Hezekiah. And God has uttered the most solemn words as well as issued the most awful judgment against pride. But to put an everlasting stigma upon it He has ordained that the only way in which He will save men shall be a way by which man’s pride shall be humbled in the dust. Note here--
I. The rejected plan. There are two ways by which a man might have been forever blessed. The one was by works--“This do and thou shalt live; be obedient and receive the reward”; the other plan was--“Receive grace and blessedness as the free gift of God.”
1. Now God has not chosen the system of works, because it is impossible for us.
(1) For the law requires of us--
(2) Perfect obedience. One single flaw, one offence, and the law condemns without mercy. And if it were possible to keep the law in its perfection outwardly, it is required to keep it in the heart as well.
(3) Because if up to this moment your heart and life have been altogether without offence, yet it is required that it should be so even to your dying day. But think of the temptations to which you will be subject!
(4) Remember, too, that we are not sure that even this life would end that probation, for long as thou shouldst live duty would still be due, and the law still thine insatiable creditor. Now in the face of all this, will any of you prefer to be saved by your works? Or, rather, will you prefer to be damned by your works? for that will certainly be the issue, let you hope what you may.
2. Now I suppose that very few indulge a hope of being saved by the law in itself; but there is a delusion abroad that perhaps God will modify the law.
(1) That He will accept a sincere obedience even if it be imperfect. Now against this Paul declares, “By the works of the law shall no flesh living be justified,” so that that is answered at once. But more than this, God’s law cannot alter, it can never be content to take less than it demands. God, therefore, cannot accept anything but a perfect obedience.
(2) But some say, “could it not be partly by grace and partly by works?” No. The apostle says that boasting is excluded; but if we let in the law of works, then man has an opportunity for self-gratification as having saved himself.
(3) “Well,” says another, “I don’t expect to be saved by my morality; but then, I have been baptized; I receive the Lord’s Supper; I go to church.” These ordinances are blessed means of grace to saved souls; but to the unsaved they can have no avail for good, but may increase their sin, because they touch unworthily the holy things of God.
(4) Others suppose that at least their feelings, which are only their works in another shape, may help to save them; but if you rely upon what you feel, you shall as certainly perish as if you trust to what you do.
(5) There are others who rely upon their knowledge. They have a sound creed, and hold the theory of justification by faith and exult over their fellow professors because they hold the truth. Now this is nothing but salvation by works, only they are works performed by the head instead of by the hand.
II. Boasting is excluded--God has accepted the second plan, namely, the way of salvation by faith through grace. The first man that entered heaven entered by faith. “By faith Abel,” etc. Over the tombs of all the godly who were accepted of God you may read the epitaph--“These all died by faith.” By faith they received the promise; and among all yonder bright and shining throng, there is not one who does not confess, “We have washed our robes and made them white in the blood of the Lamb.” As Calvin says, “Not a particle of boasting can be admitted, because not a particle of work is admitted into the covenant of grace”; it is not of man nor by man, not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that showeth mercy, and, therefore, boasting is excluded by the law of faith.
III. Have no merits of their own. The very gate which shuts out boasting shuts in hope for the worst of sinners. You say, “I never attend the house of God, and up to this time I have been a thief and a drunkard.” Well, you stand today on the same level as the most moral sinner and the most honest unbeliever in the matter of salvation. They are lost, since they believe not, and so are you. When we come to God the best can bring nothing, and the worst can bring no less. I know some will say, “Then what is the good of morality?” I will tell you. Two men are overboard there; one man has a dirty face, and the other a clean one. There is a rope thrown over from the stern of the vessel, and only that rope will save the sinking men, whether their faces be fair or foul. Do I therefore underrate cleanliness. Certainly not; but it will not save a drowning man, nor will morality save a dying man. Or take this case. Here we have two persons, each with a deadly cancer. One of them is rich and clothed in purple, the other is poor and wrapped about with a few rags; and I say to them, “You are both on a par now, here comes the physician, his touch can heal you both; there is no difference between you whatever.” Do I therefore say that the one man’s robes are not better than the other’s rags? Of course they are better in some respects, but they have nothing to do with the matter of curing disease. So morality is a neat cover for foul venom, but it does not alter the fact that the heart is vile and the man himself under condemnation. Suppose I were an army surgeon. There is one man there--he is a captain, and a brave man--and he is bleeding out his life from a terrible gash. By his side there lies a private, and a great coward too, wounded in the same way. I say to them, “You are both in the same condition, and I can heal you both.” But if the captain should say, “I do not want you; I am a captain, go and see to that poor dog yonder.” Would his courage and rank save his life? No; they are good things, but not saving things. So it is with good works.
IV. The same plan which shuts out boasting leads us to a gracious gratitude to Christ. (C. H. Spurgeon.)
By what law?…the law of faith.
Boasting excluded by the law of faith
I. Faith a law.
1. As God’s appointed way of acceptance.
2. As an economy according to which God deals with men.
3. As a binding rule to which we owe subjection.
4. As having justification connected with it as a sure result.
II. This law excludes boasting.
1. From the nature of faith. Faith simply trusts, accepts a proffered gift. There can be no boasting in believing that God speaks the truth; nor in a helpless sinner leaning on omnipotence; nor in a beggar receiving alms. Faith looks entirely away from itself to another, viz., Christ. Eyes only Christ’s righteousness, not its own; comes empty-handed and receives out of Christ’s fulness (John 1:16); is the window through which the light passes, not the light; glories in Christ’s obedience, but not in its own. Therefore faith is a humble, depending, self-renouncing grace.
2. From God’s procedure in justifying by it. All are regarded on the same footing as guilty sinners, for men are justified as ungodly (Romans 4:5), the greatest sinner as freely and fully as the least (1 Timothy 1:15). Crimson, double-dyed sins are no hindrance to acceptance (Isaiah 1:18; 1 Corinthians 6:9-11); nor nature’s highest attainments a furtherance of it (Mark 10:17-22). All equally need salvation and all are welcome to it. The one ground of acceptance for all is Christ’s righteousness, for the wedding garment was for the poorest as well as for the richest (Matthew 22:11-12).
3. From the origin of faith itself. Faith to receive is Christ’s gift (Hebrews 12:2; Ephesians 2:8; Philippians 1:20). The withered hand restored to accept the proffered bounty. (J. Robinson, D. D.)