Gentiles also: (continued)
John Calvin 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.
Romans 3:29-30
Romans 3:29-30
29. Is he the God of the Jews only? Is he not also of the Gentiles? Yes, of the Gentiles also:
29. Num Iudæorum Deus tantum? an non et Gentium? certe et Gentium. 30. Seeing it is one God 126 which shall justify the circumcision by faith, and uncircumcision through faith.
30. Quandoquidem unus Deus, qui justificabit circumcisionem ex fide, et Præputium per fidem.
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,
125The 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.
126{Εἷς} {ὁ} {Θεος} — unus Deus {Εἷς} here means the same, see 1 Corinthians 3:8; or if it be rendered one, it refers to God as being one in his purpose, and as to the way of salvation. See Zechariah 14:9. — Ed.