An Answer to Those Arguments Which the Adversaries Allege Against the Doctrine and Righteousness of Faith

Seeing this place offers to us occasion, we must say something as touching the arguments which our adversaries do object against the doctrine of Faith, which is: That we are made righteous by Faith alone. There are many places both in the Old Testament and in the New as concerning works and rewards of works, which our adversaries do allege, and think themselves able thereby utterly to overthrow the doctrine of Faith which we teach and maintain. Therefore we must be well furnished and armed, that we may be able not only to instruct our brethren, but also to answer the objections of our adversaries.

The Schoolmen and all such as do not understand the article of Justification, know no other righteousness than the civil righteousness and the righteousness of the law, which after a sort the Gentiles also do know. Therefore they borrow certain words out of the law and moral philosophy, as [to Do, to Work], and such like, and they apply the same to spiritual matters: wherein they deal most perversely and wickedly. We must take good heed that we make a difference between Christian Divinity and human philosophy. The Schoolmen themselves grant and teach, that in the order of nature, Being goes before Working, for naturally the tree is before the fruit. Again, they grant that a work morally wrought is not good except there be first a right judgment of reason, and a good will or a good intent. So then they will have a right judgment of reason, and a good intent to go before the work, that is to say, they make the person morally righteous before the work. Contrariwise in Divinity and in spiritual matters, where they ought most of all so to do, such dull and senseless asses they are that they pervert and turn all quite contrary, placing the work before right reason and the good intent.

Therefore, this word Doing is one thing in nature, another in moral philosophy, and another in Divinity. In nature the tree must be first, and then the fruit. In moral philosophy, Doing requires a good intent and sound reason to work well, to go before: and here all the philosophers stop and go no further. Therefore the divines say, that moral philosophy has not God for the object and final cause. For Aristotle, a Sadducee, or a man of any civil honesty, calls this a right reason and a good intent, if he seeks the public commodity of the commonwealth, and the quietness and honesty thereof. A philosopher or law-worker ascends no higher. He thinks not through right reason and a good intent to obtain remission of sins and everlasting life, as the sophist or the monk does. Therefore the heathen philosopher is much better than such a hypocrite. For he abides within his limits, having only consideration of the honesty and tranquility of the commonwealth, not mingling heavenly and earthly things together. Contrariwise that sophist imagines that God regards his good intent and works. Therefore he mingles earthly and heavenly things together, and pollutes the name of God. And this imagination he learns out of moral philosophy, saving that he abuses it much worse than the heathen man does.

We therefore that are Christians must rise up higher than nature and philosophy with this word Doing, so that now it must be made altogether new, joined with a right judgment of reason, and a good will or good intent, not morally, but divinely: which is, that I know and believe by the word of the gospel, that God has sent his Son into the world to redeem us from sin and death. Here Doing is a new thing unknown to reason, to philosophers, to law-workers, and to all men: for it is a wisdom hidden in a mystery. Therefore in Divinity the work necessarily requires faith going before.

Therefore, when our adversaries do allege against us the sentences of the Scripture touching the law and works, where mention is made of Working and Doing, you must answer them, that they are terms pertaining to Divinity, and not to natural or moral things. If they be applied to natural or moral things, they must be taken in their own signification. But if they be applied to matters of Divinity, they must include such a right reason and good will, as is incomprehensible to man's reason. Therefore Doing in Divinity must always be understood of a faithful Doing. So that this faithful Doing is altogether as it were a new kingdom, separate from the natural or moral Doing. Therefore, when we that are divines speak of Doing, we must needs speak of that faithful Doing: for in Divinity we have no other right reason, and good will or intent, besides Faith.

This rule is well observed in chapter 11 of Hebrews. There are recited diverse and many works of the Saints out of the holy Scripture. As of David who killed a lion and a bear, and slew Goliath. There the sophist or Schoolman, that foolish ass, looks upon nothing else but the outward appearance of the work, as does the ox upon a new gate. But this work of David must be so looked into, that first you do consider what manner of person David was, before he did this work: Then you shall see that he was such a person, whose heart trusted in the Lord God of Israel, as the text has plainly. The Lord that delivered me out of the paw of the lion, and out of the paw of the bear, he will deliver me out of the hand of this Philistine. Moreover: You come to me with a sword, and with a spear, and with a shield: but I come to you in the name of the Lord of hosts, the God of the host of Israel, upon whom you have railed this day. This day shall the Lord close you in my hand, and I shall smite you, and take your head from you, etc.: Because the Lord saves not with sword nor spear (for the battle is the Lord's) and he will give you into our hands. You see then that he was a righteous man, accepted of God, strong and constant in Faith before he did this work. This Doing of David therefore, is not a natural or moral Doing, but a faithful Doing.

So it is said of Abel in the same Epistle: that through faith he offered up a better sacrifice to God than Cain. If the Schoolmen fall into this place as it is read in Genesis (where it is simply set out, how that both Cain and Abel offered up their gifts, and that the Lord had respect to Abel and his offerings) by and by they take hold of these words. They offered their oblations to the Lord. The Lord had respect to the offerings of Abel, and cry out, saying: Here you see that God had respect to offerings: therefore works do justify. So that these filthy swine do think that righteousness is but a moral thing, only beholding the outward show of the work, and not the heart of him that does the work: whereas notwithstanding even in philosophy they are constrained, not to look upon the bare work, but the good will of the worker. But here they stand altogether upon these words: They offered up gifts: The Lord had respect to Abel and to his offerings, and see not that the text says plainly in Genesis, that the Lord had respect first to the person of Abel, which pleased the Lord because of his faith, and afterwards to his offerings. Therefore in divinity we speak of faithful works, sacrifices, oblations and gifts, that is to say, which are offered up and done in faith, as the Epistle to the Hebrews declares, saying: Through faith Abel offered up a better sacrifice: Through faith Enoch was taken away: Through faith Abraham obeyed God, etc. We have here then a rule set forth in the 11th chapter of Hebrews, how we should simply answer to the arguments objected by the adversaries as touching the law and works, that is to say: this or that man did this or that work in faith. And by this means you give a solution to all their arguments, and so stop their mouths, that they can have nothing to reply again.

Hereby it appears manifestly that in divinity and divine matters, the work is nothing worth without faith, but you must needs have faith before you begin to work. For without faith it is impossible to please God: but he that will come to God, must believe. Therefore in the Epistle to the Hebrews it is said that the sacrifice of Abel was better than the sacrifice of Cain, because he believed: therefore the work or the sacrifice of Abel was faithful. Contrariwise in Cain, because he was wicked and a hypocrite, there was no faith or trust of God's grace and favor, but mere presumption of his own righteousness, and therefore his work, by which he went about to please God, was hypocritical and unfaithful. Therefore the adversaries themselves are compelled to grant that in all the works of the saints, faith is presupposed, for which their works do please God, and are accepted of him. Therefore in divinity there is a new doing, clean contrary to the moral doing.

Moreover, we are accustomed also to distinguish faith after this sort, that faith is sometimes taken without the work, sometimes with the work. For like as an artificer speaks diversely of the matter on which he works, and likewise a gardener of the tree being either barren or fruitful: even so the Holy Spirit speaks diversely of faith in the Scripture: sometimes of an absolute faith: sometimes of a compound, or (as a man would say) an incarnate faith. Now, an absolute faith is this, when the Scripture speaks absolutely of justification or of the justified, as is to be seen in the Epistles to the Romans and to the Galatians. But when the Scripture speaks of rewards and works, then it speaks of the compound or incarnate faith. We will rehearse some examples of this faith: As, faith which works by love (Galatians 5:6). Do this, and you shall live. If you will enter into life, keep the commandments. He that shall do these, shall live in them. Decline from evil, and do that which is good. In these and such like places (as there are many like in the holy Scriptures) where mention is made of doing, the Scripture always speaks of faithful doing. As when it says: Do this and you shall live, it means thus: See first that you be faithful, that you have a right reason and a good will, that is to say, faith in Christ: when you have this faith, work on a God's blessing.

What marvel is it then, if rewards be promised to this incarnate faith: that is to say, to the working faith, as was the faith of Abel, or to faithful works? And why should not the holy Scripture thus speak diversely of faith, when it speaks in diverse ways of Christ as he is God and man: that is to say, sometimes of his whole person, sometimes of his two natures apart, either of his divine or of his human nature? If it speak of the natures apart, it speaks of Christ absolutely: but if it speak of the divine nature united in one person to the human nature, then it speaks of Christ compound and incarnate. There is a common rule among the Schoolmen of the communication of the properties, when the properties belonging to the divinity of Christ, are attributed to the humanity: which we may see everywhere in the Scriptures. As in Luke 2, the Angel calls the infant born of the virgin Mary, the Savior of men, and the universal Lord both of the Angels and men. And in chapter 1, the Son of God. Hereupon I may truly say, that that infant which lay in the manger, and in the lap of the virgin, created heaven and earth, and that he is Lord of the Angels. Here I speak indeed of a man: but man in this proposition is a new word, and (as the Schoolmen themselves do grant) it is referred to the divinity, that is to say: This God which is made man, has created all things. Creation is attributed only to the divinity of Christ: for the humanity does not create, and yet notwithstanding it is very well said, man created, because the divinity, which only creates, is incarnate with the humanity, and therefore the humanity together with the divinity, is partaker of the same properties. Therefore it is well and godly said: This man Jesus Christ brought Israel out of Egypt, struck Pharaoh, and wrought all the wonders from the beginning of the world.

Therefore when the Scripture says: If you will enter into life, keep the commandments of God: Do this and you shall live, etc. First we must see of what manner of keeping and doing he speaks. For in these and such like places (as I have said) he speaks of a compound faith, and not of a naked and simple faith. And the meaning of this place: Do this and you shall live, is this. You shall live because of this faithful doing, or this doing shall give to you life, because of your faith alone. After this manner justification is attributed to faith alone, as creation is to the divinity. And yet notwithstanding as it is truly said: Jesus the son of Mary created all things, so also justification is attributed to the incarnate faith, or to the faithful doing. Therefore we must in no way think with the sophisters and hypocrites, that works do absolutely justify, and that rewards are promised to moral works, but to faithful works only.

Let us therefore suffer the Holy Spirit to speak as he does in the Scriptures, either of naked, simple, and absolute faith, or of compound and incarnate faith. All things which are attributed to works do properly belong to faith. For works must not be looked upon morally, but faithfully and with a spiritual eye. Faith is the divinity of works, and is so spread throughout the works of the faithful, as is the divinity throughout the humanity of Christ. Faith therefore (if I may so say) is Fac totum in faithful works. Abraham is called faithful, because faith is spread throughout the whole person of Abraham, so that beholding him working, I see nothing of the carnal Abraham or of the working Abraham, but of the believing Abraham.

Therefore when you read in the Scriptures, of the fathers, prophets and kings, how they wrought righteousness, raised up the dead, overcame kingdoms, you must remember that these and such like sayings are to be expounded as the Epistle to the Hebrews expounds them, that is: By faith they wrought righteousness, by faith they raised up the dead, by faith they subdued kings and kingdoms. So that faith incorporates the work and gives it its perfection. And this the adversaries, if they be well in their wits, cannot deny, neither have they anything to say or object against it. Indeed they can cry out that the Scripture speaks oftentimes of doing and walking. And we always answer them again, that it speaks also of faithful doing. For first reason must be enlightened by faith, before it can work. Now, when it has a true opinion and knowledge of God, then is the work incarnate and incorporated into it: so that whatever is attributed to faith, is afterward attributed to works also, but yet because of faith only and alone.

Therefore in reading of the Scriptures we must learn to put a difference between the true and the hypocritical, the moral and the spiritual doing of the law. So shall we be able to declare the true meaning of all those places which seem to maintain the righteousness of works. Now, the true doing of the law is a faithful and a spiritual doing, which he does not have that seeks righteousness by works. Therefore every doer of the law and every holy moral worker is accursed. For he walks in the presumption of his own righteousness against God, while he will be justified by man's free will and reason, and so in doing of the law he does it not. And this, according to Paul, is to be under the works of the law, that is to say, that hypocrites do the law, and yet in doing it, they do it not: for they understand this word doing according to the literal sense of the law, which in true Christian divinity is nothing worth. Indeed they work many things, but in the presumption of their own righteousness, and without the knowledge of God and faith, as the Pharisee did (Luke 18), and as Paul did before his conversion: therefore they are blind and miserably err, and so remain under the curse.

Therefore again I admonish you, that such sentences as the adversaries do allege out of the Scriptures concerning works and rewards thereof, must be spiritually expounded. As if they allege this sentence out of (Daniel 4): Redeem your sins by alms deeds, you must not here expound these words after the moral sense, but after the meaning of the Gospel. So shall you see that this word Redeem signifies no moral but a spiritual doing, that is to say, it comprehends faith. For in the Scriptures the work (as I have said) requires also a good will and right judgment of reason to go before, not moral as they would have it, but divine and spiritual, which is faith. By this means you shall be able to stop the mouths of these peevish sophisters. For they themselves are compelled to grant, and so they teach also out of Aristotle, that every good work proceeds out of man's choice or free will. If this be true in philosophy, much more must this good will and right judgment of reason guided by faith, go before the work in divinity and divine matters. And this do all words of the imperative mode, that is, all such words as are commanding, signify in the Scriptures: and all such words also as teach the law, as the Epistle to the Hebrews does plainly declare: By faith Abel offered, etc.

Now, admit the case that this solution is not sufficient (although it be indeed most sure and certain): yet notwithstanding let this be the argument of all arguments, and the principal mirror of Christians to behold, against all the temptations and objections, not only of the adversaries, but also of the Devil himself: namely to apprehend and to hold fast the head, which is Christ. Moreover, admit that the sophisters being more crafty and subtle than I, should so snare and entangle me with their arguments, which they bring for the maintenance of works against faith, that I should know no way how to wind myself out (which notwithstanding is impossible for them to do), yet will I rather give reverence and credit to Christ alone, than be persuaded with all the places they are able to allege for the establishing of the righteousness of works against the doctrine of faith.

Therefore, they must be simply and plainly answered after this manner: Here is Christ, there are the testimonies of the Scripture touching the law and works. Now, Christ is the Lord of the Scripture and of all works. He also is Lord of heaven, the earth, the Sabbath, the temple, righteousness, life, wrath, sin, death, and generally of all things whatever. And Paul his Apostle shows that he was made sin and became accursed for me. I hear then that I could by no other means be delivered from my sin, my death and my malediction, but by his death and bloodshedding. Therefore I conclude that it properly appertained to Christ himself to overcome my sin, death, and malediction in his own body, and not to the works of the law or my own works. And hereto reason is constrained to agree, and say: that Christ is not the work of the law, or my work: that his blood and death is not circumcision, the observation of the ceremonies of the law, and much less a Monk's cowl, a shaven crown, abstinence, vows, and such like. Therefore if he be the price of my redemption, if he be made sin and malediction that he might justify me and bless me: I care not if you bring a thousand places of the Scripture for the righteousness of works against the righteousness of faith, and cry out never so much that the Scripture is against me. I have the author and Lord of the Scripture with me, on whose side I will rather stand, than believe all the rablement of law-workers and merit-mongers. Albeit it is impossible that the Scripture should be against this doctrine, unless it be among the senseless and indurate hypocrites: but among the godly and such as have understanding, it gives witness for Jesus Christ his Lord. See therefore how you can reconcile the Scripture which you say is against my doctrine. As for me, I will stick to the author of the Scripture.

Therefore if any man thinks himself not well able to reconcile such places of the Scripture or answer to the same sufficiently, and yet notwithstanding is constrained to hear the objections and cavillations of the adversaries, let him answer simply and plainly after this sort: You set against me the servant, that is to say, the Scripture, and that not wholly, neither yet the principal part thereof, but only certain places as touching works. This servant I leave to you. But I come with the Lord himself, who is above the Scripture, and is made to me the merit and price of righteousness and everlasting life. On him I lay hold, him I stick to, and leave works to you: which notwithstanding you never did. This solution neither the Devil nor any Justiciary can ever wrest from you or overthrow. Moreover you are in safety before God: For your heart abides fixed in the object, which is called Christ: who being nailed to the cross and accursed, not for himself but for us (as the text says) was made a curse for us. Hold fast this, and lay it against all the sentences of the law and works whatever, and say: do you hear this Satan? Here must he needs give place, for he knows that Christ is his Lord and master.

Verse. 11. And that no man is justified by the law in the sight of God, it is evident: For the just shall live by faith.

This is another argument grounded upon the testimony of the Prophet Habakkuk. And it is a sentence of great weight and authority, which Paul sets against all the sentences that speak of the law and works. As if he should say: what need we any long disputation? Here I bring forth a most plain testimony of the Prophet, against which no man can cavil: The just man shall live by faith. If he live by faith, then he lives not by the law: For the law is not of faith. And here Paul excludes works and the law, as things contrary to faith.

The Sophisters (as they are always ready to corrupt the Scriptures) do wrest and pervert this place after this manner. The just man does live by faith: that is to write (say they) by a faith which is effectual or working, or formed and made perfect with charity: but if it be a faith not formed with charity, then does it not justify. This gloss they themselves have forged, and by the same they do injury to the words of the Prophet. If they did call this formed or furnished faith, the true faith which the Gospel teaches, this their gloss should nothing at all offend me, for then faith should not be separated from charity, but from the vain opinion of faith: As we also put a difference between a counterfeit faith and a true faith. The counterfeit faith is that which hears of God, of Christ and of all the mysteries of his incarnation and our redemption: which also apprehends and bears away those things which it hears, yes and can talk well thereof, and yet there remains nothing else in the heart but a naked opinion and a sound of the Gospel: which how far off it is from true faith, hereby it may appear, in that it neither renews nor changes the heart: it makes not a new man, but leaves him in the vanity of his former opinion and conversation: and this is a very pernicious faith. The moral philosopher is much better, than the hypocrite having such a faith.

Therefore, if they would make a distinction between their formed faith and a false or counterfeit faith (as I have said) their distinction should not offend me. But they speak of faith in such sort, that they make charity the form and perfection of faith. This is to prefer charity before faith, and to attribute righteousness, not to faith, but to charity: therefore when they do not attribute righteousness to faith, but only for charity's sake, they attribute to faith nothing at all.

But the Holy Spirit, which gives to all men both mouth and tongue, knows how to speak. He could have said (as the Sophists do wickedly imagine): The righteous man shall live by faith formed and beautified or made perfect by charity. But this he omits on purpose, and says plainly: The righteous man lives by faith. Let these doltish Sophists go therefore, with this their wicked and pestilent gloss. We will still hold and extol this faith, which God himself has called faith, that is to say, a true and certain faith which doubts not of God, nor of the divine promises, nor of the forgiveness of sins through Christ, that we may dwell sure and safe in this our object Christ: and may keep still before our eyes the passion and blood of the Mediator and all his benefits. Now, faith alone which [reconstructed: lays] hold upon Christ, is the only means that we suffer not these benefits to be taken out of our sight or wrested from us by any means. Therefore, rejecting this pestilent gloss, we must understand this place of faith only. And this Paul himself declares when he disputes against faith formed with charity after this sort.

Verse 12: And the law is not of faith.

The Scholemen say: The righteous man does live if his faith be formed and adorned with charity. But contrariwise, Paul says: The law is not of faith. But what is the law? Is it not also a commandment touching charity? Indeed the law commands nothing else but charity, as we may see by the text itself: You shall love the Lord your God with all your soul, etc. Again: showing mercy to thousands that love him and keep his commandments. Also: In these two commandments consist the law and the Prophets. If the law then that commands charity be contrary to faith, it must needs follow, that charity is not of faith. So Paul plainly confutes that gloss which the Sophists have forged touching their formed faith, and speaks only of faith as it is separate from the law. Now the law being separate and set apart, charity is also set apart, with all that belongs to the law, and faith only is left which justifies and quickens to everlasting life.

Paul therefore reasons here out of a plain testimony of the Prophet: that there is none which obtains justification and life before God, but the believing man, who obtains righteousness and everlasting life without the law and without charity, by faith alone. The reason is, because the law is not of faith: that is, the law is not faith, or anything belonging to faith, for it believes not: neither are the works of the law faith, nor yet of faith: therefore faith is a thing much differing from the law, just as the promise is a thing much differing from the law. For the promise is not apprehended by working, but by believing. Indeed there is as great a difference between the promise and the law, and consequently between faith and works, as there is distance between heaven and earth.

It is impossible therefore that faith should be of the law. For faith only rests in the promise, it only apprehends and knows God, and stands only in receiving good things of God. Contrariwise the law and works consist in exacting, in doing, and in giving to God. As Abel offering his sacrifice, gives to God, but he believing, receives of God. Paul therefore concludes mightily out of that place of Habakkuk, that the righteous man lives by faith alone. For the law in no wise belongs to faith, because the law is not the promise. But faith rests only upon the promise. Therefore as there is a difference between the law and the promise: so is there also between works and faith. And therefore that gloss of the Scholemen is wicked and false, which joins the law with faith, yea rather it quenches faith and sets the law in the place of faith. And here note that Paul always speaks of such as would do the law morally, and not according to the Gospel. But whatever is said of good works according to the meaning of the Gospel, the same is attributed to faith alone.

Verse 12. But the man that shall do those things shall live in them.

I take this clause to be spoken by way of derision. And yet I deny not but that it may be also expounded morally: to wit, that they which do the law civilly and externally, that is, without faith, shall live in it: that is to wit, they shall not be punished, but shall have corporal rewards through it. But I understand this place generally, as I do that saying of Christ: Do this and you shall live: so that a man may take it to be spoken in manner of a taunt or derision. Now, Paul here goes about to show what is the very true righteousness of the law and of the Gospel. The righteousness of the law is to fulfill the law according to that saying: He that shall do those things shall live in them. The righteousness of faith is to believe according to that saying: The righteous man does live by faith. The law therefore requires that we should yield somewhat to God. But faith requires no works of us, or that we should give anything to God, but that we believing the promise of God, should receive of him. Therefore the office of the law in its highest perfection is to work, as the office of faith is to assent to the promises. For faith is the faith of the promise, and the work is the work of the law. Paul therefore stands upon this word Doing: and that he may plainly show what is the confidence of the law and what is the confidence of works, he compares the one with the other, the promise with the law, and faith with works. He says that of the law there comes nothing else but only Doing: but faith is a clean contrary thing, namely that which receives and holds the promise.

Fie upon these Sophists therefore with their cursed gloss, and with their blind distinction of faith formed and unformed. For these new forged terms, faith formed, faith unformed, faith gotten by man's industry, and such like, are very monsters of the Devil, invented to no other end but to deface and destroy the true Christian doctrine and faith, to blaspheme and to tread down Christ, and to establish the righteousness of works. Indeed works must follow faith, but faith must not be works, or works faith, but the limits and kingdoms both of the law or works, and of faith must be rightly distinguished the one from the other.

When we believe therefore, then do we live simply by faith in Christ, who is without sin, who is also our coverture, our propitiation and remission of sins. Contrariwise, when we do the law, we work indeed, but we have not righteousness nor life. For the office of the law is not to make righteous and to give life, but to show forth sin, and to destroy. Indeed the law says: He that shall do these things shall live in them. But where is he which does the law: that is, which loves God with all his heart, and his neighbor as himself? Therefore no man does the law, and although he goes about to do it never so much: yet in doing it he does it not: therefore he abides under the curse. But faith works not, but believes in Christ the Justifier. Therefore a man lives not because of his doing, but because of his believing. But a faithful man performs the law, and that which he does not, is forgiven him through the remission of sins for Christ's sake, and that which is remaining, is not imputed to him.

Paul therefore in this place and in the tenth chapter to the Romans compares the righteousness of the law and of faith together, where he says: He that shall do those things shall live in them. As though he would say: It were indeed a goodly matter if we could accomplish the law: but because no man does it, we must flee to Christ, who is the end of the law to righteousness to every one that believes. He was made under the law that he might redeem us that were under the law. Believing in him we receive the Holy Spirit, and we begin to do the law: and that which we do not, is not imputed to us because of our faith in Christ. But in the life to come we shall no more have need of faith. For then we shall not see darkly through a glass (as we now do) but we shall see face to face: that is to say, there shall be a most glorious brightness of the eternal Majesty, in which we shall see God even as he is. There shall be a true and a perfect knowledge and love of God, a perfect light of reason and a good will: not such a moral and philosophical will as the popish Schoolmen dream of, but a heavenly, divine and eternal will. Here in the meantime, in spirit by faith, we look for the hope of righteousness. Contrariwise they that seek forgiveness of sins by the law, and not by Christ, do never perform the law, but abide under the curse.

Paul therefore calls them only righteous, which are justified through the promise, or through faith in the promise, without the law. Therefore, they that are of the works of the law, and will seem to do the law, do it not. For the Apostle simply concludes that all they which are of the works of the law, are under the curse, under the which they should not be, if they fulfilled the law. Indeed it is true, that a man doing the works of the law, shall live in them: that is, shall be blessed: but such a one cannot be found. Now, seeing there is a double use of the law, the one political and the other spiritual, he that will understand this sentence civilly, may do it after this sort: He that shall do those things shall live in them: that is, if a man obeys the magistrate outwardly and in the political government, he shall avoid punishment and death: for the civil magistrate has no power over him. This is the political use of the law, which serves to bridle those that are rude and intractable. But Paul here speaks not of this use, but treats of this place like a Divine: therefore there is a condition necessarily included. As if he said: If men could keep the law, they should be happy. But where are they? They are not therefore doers of the law, except they be first made righteous before and without the law through faith.

Therefore, when Paul condemns those that are of the works of the law, he speaks not of such as are justified through faith, but of such as go about to be justified by works without faith in Christ. This I say lest any man should follow the foolish imagination of Jerome, who being deceived by Origen, understood nothing at all in Paul, but only considered of him as a mere civil Lawyer. Hereupon he reasons after this manner: The holy Patriarchs, Prophets, and Kings were circumcised and offered sacrifice: therefore they observed the law. But it were a wicked thing to say, that they are under the curse: therefore all they that are of the works of the law are not under the curse. Thus he fights against Paul without all judgment, making no difference between the true doers of the law justified by faith, and those workers which seek to be justified by the law without faith.

But Paul speaks here nothing at all against those that are justified by faith, and are true doers of the law indeed, for they are not of the works of the law: but against those which, not only do not keep the law, but also sin against the same. For the law commands that we should fear, love, and worship God with a true faith. This they do not, but choose out new kinds of worship and works which were never commanded of God, by which God is not pacified, but more provoked to anger, according to that saying: They worship me in vain with the commandments of men. Therefore they are full of impiety, rebels against God, and idolaters, sinning grievously against the first commandment above all the rest. Moreover, they have also wicked concupiscence and other great passions. Briefly there is no good thing in them, but that outwardly they would seem to be righteous, and would have men to think that they do the law.

So we also which are made righteous by faith, as were the Patriarchs, Prophets and all the Saints, are not of the works of the law as concerning the matter of justification. But in that we are in the flesh, and have as yet the remnants of sin in us, we are under the law, and yet not under the curse, because the remnants of sin are not imputed to us for Christ's sake in whom we believe. For the flesh is an enemy to God, and that concupiscence which yet remains in us, not only fulfills not the law, but also sins against the same, rebelling against us and leading us captive into bondage (Romans 7). Now, if the law be not fulfilled in the Saints, but that many things are done in them contrary to the law, if evil concupiscence and the remnants of sin are yet remaining in them, which do so hinder them that they cannot fear and love God, they cannot call upon God with assured trust, they cannot praise God and reverence his word as they should do: much more is this true in a man which is not yet justified by faith, but is an enemy to God, and with all his heart despises and hates the word and work of God. You see then that Paul speaks here of such as will fulfill the law and be justified thereby, although they have not yet received faith, and not of the fathers and Saints (as Jerome imagines) which are justified by faith already.

Verse 13. Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, when he was made a curse for us. (For it is written: Cursed is every one that hangs on a tree.)

Here again Jerome and the Schoolmen which follow him, are much troubled, and miserably rack this most comfortable place, seeking to remove this ignominy and reproach from Christ, that he should be called a curse or execration. They shift off this sentence after this manner: that Paul spoke not here in good earnest. And therefore they most wickedly affirm that the Scripture in Paul agrees not with itself. And this they prove after this manner: The sentence (say they) of Moses which Paul here alleges, speaks not of Christ. Moreover this general clause [whoever] which Paul has, is not added in Moses. Again Paul omits this word [of God] which is in Moses. To conclude, it is evident enough, that Moses speaks of a thief or a malefactor, which by his evil deeds has deserved the gallows, as the Scripture plainly witnesses in the 21st chapter of Deuteronomy. Therefore they ask this question how this sentence may be applied to Christ, that he is accursed of God and hanged upon a tree, seeing that he is no malefactor or thief, but righteous and holy? This may perhaps move the simple and ignorant, who think that the Sophists or Schoolmen speak these things not only wittily, but religiously also, and by this means do maintain the honor and glory of Christ, warning all Christians to beware that they think not so wickedly of Christ that he should be made a curse, etc. Therefore let us see what the meaning and purpose of Paul is.

Paul here did well fortify his words, and spoke very advisedly and to the purpose. But here again we must make a distinction, as the words of Paul do plainly show. For he says not, that Christ was made a curse for himself, but for us. Therefore all the weight of the matter stands in this word, For us. For Christ is innocent as concerning his own person, and therefore he ought not to have been hanged upon a tree: but because, according to the law of Moses, every thief and malefactor ought to be hanged, therefore Christ also according to the law ought to be hanged, for he sustained the person of a sinner and of a thief, not of one, but of all sinners and thieves. For we are sinners and thieves, and therefore guilty of death and everlasting damnation. But Christ took all our sins upon him, and for them died upon the cross: therefore it behooved that he should become a transgressor, and (as Isaiah the prophet says (Isaiah 53)) to be reckoned and accounted among transgressors and trespassers.

And this (no doubt) all the Prophets did foresee in spirit, that Christ should become the greatest transgressor, murderer, adulterer, thief, rebel and blasphemer that ever was or could be in all the world. For he being made a sacrifice for the sins of the whole world, is not now an innocent person and without sins, is not now the Son of God born of the virgin Mary: but a sinner, which has and carries the sin of Paul, which was a blasphemer, oppressor and persecutor: of Peter which denied Christ: of David which was an adulterer, a murderer, and caused the Gentiles to blaspheme the name of the Lord: and briefly, which has and bears all the sins of all men in his body, not that he himself committed them, but for that he received them being committed or done of us, and laid them upon his own body that he might make satisfaction for them with his own blood. Therefore this general sentence of Moses comprehends him also (albeit in his own person he was innocent) because it found him among sinners and transgressors: like as the magistrate takes him for a thief and punishes him whom he finds among other thieves and transgressors, though he never committed anything worthy of death. Now, Christ was not only found among sinners, but of his own accord and by the will of his father he would also be a companion of sinners, taking upon him the flesh and blood of those which were sinners, thieves, and plunged in all kinds of sin. When the law therefore found him among thieves, it condemned and killed him as a thief.

The Sophists and Schoolmen do spoil us of this knowledge of Christ and most heavenly comfort (namely that Christ was made a curse, to the end he might deliver us from the curse of the law) when they separate him from sins and sinners, and only set him out to us as an example to be followed. By this means they make Christ, not only unprofitable to us, but also a judge and a tyrant, which is angry with our sins and condemns sinners. But we must as well wrap Christ and know him to be wrapped in our sins, in our malediction, in our death, and in all our evils, as he is wrapped in our flesh and in our blood.

But some man will say: It is very absurd and slanderous, to call the Son of God a cursed sinner. I answer: If you will deny him to be a sinner and to be accursed, deny also that he was crucified and died. For it is no less absurd to say, that the Son of God (as our faith confesses and believes), was crucified and suffered the pains of sin and death, than to say that he is a sinner and accursed. But if it be not absurd to confess and believe, that Christ was crucified between two thieves, then is it not absurd to say also that he was accursed and of all sinners the greatest. These words of Paul are not spoken in vain: Christ was made a Curse for us. God made Christ, which knew no sin, to become sin for us, that we in him might be made the righteousness of God (2 Corinthians 5).

After the same manner John the Baptist calls him the Lamb of God which takes away the sins of the world. He verily is innocent, because he is the unspotted and undefiled Lamb of God. But because he bears the sins of the world, his innocence is charged with the sins and guilt of the whole world. Whatever sins I, you, and we all have done or shall do hereafter, they are Christ's own sins as verily as if he himself had done them. To be brief, our sin must needs become Christ's own sin, or else we shall perish forever. This true knowledge of Christ, which Paul and the Prophets have most plainly delivered to us, the wicked Schoolmen and Sophisters have darkened and defaced.

Isaiah in the fifty-third chapter speaks thus of Christ: God (says he) laid the iniquity of us all upon him. We must not make these words less than they are, but leave them in their own proper signification. For God dallies not in the words of the Prophet, but speaks earnestly, and of great love: to wit, that Christ this Lamb of God should bear the sins of us all. But what is it to bear? The Sophisters answer, to be punished. Very well. But why is Christ punished? Is it not because he has sin and bears sin? Now, that Christ has sin, the Holy Ghost witnesses in Psalm 40: My sins have taken such hold of me, that I am not able to look up, indeed they are more in number than the hairs of my head. In this psalm and certain others the Holy Ghost speaks in the person of Christ, and in plain words witnesses, that he had sins. For this testimony is not the voice of an innocent Christ, but of a suffering Christ, which took upon him to bear the person of all sinners, and therefore was made guilty of the sins of the whole world.

Therefore Christ was not only crucified and died, but sin also (through the divine love) was laid upon him. When sin was laid upon him, then comes the law and says: every sinner must die. Therefore, O Christ, if you will answer, become guilty, and suffer punishment for sinners, you must also bear sin and malediction. Paul therefore does very well allege this general sentence out of Moses as concerning Christ: Every one that hangs upon the tree is the accursed of God: but Christ has hung upon the tree, therefore Christ is the accursed of God.

And this is a singular consolation for all Christians, so to clothe Christ with our sins, and to wrap him in my sins, your sins, and in the sins of the whole world, and so to behold him bearing all our iniquities. For the beholding of him after this manner shall easily vanquish all the fantastical opinions of the Papists concerning the justification of works. For they do imagine (as I have said) a certain faith formed and adorned with charity. By this (say they) sins are taken away and men are justified before God. And what is this else (I pray you) but to unwrap Christ, and to strip him quite out of our sins, to make him innocent and to charge and overwhelm ourselves with our own sins, and to look upon them, not in Christ, but in ourselves. Indeed, what is this else but to take Christ clean away, and to make him utterly unprofitable to us? For if it be so that we put away sin by the works of the law and charity, then Christ takes them not away. For if he be the Lamb of God ordained from the beginning to take away the sins of the world: and moreover if he be so wrapped in our sins, that he became accursed for us, it must needs follow that we cannot be justified by works. For God has laid our sins, not upon us, but upon his Son Christ, that he bearing the punishment thereof, might be our peace, and that by his stripes we might be healed. Therefore they cannot be taken away by us. To this all the Scripture bears witness: and we also do confess the same in the Articles of the Christian belief, when we say: I believe in Jesus Christ the Son of God, which suffered, was crucified and died for us.

Hereby it appears that the doctrine of the Gospel, which of all other is most sweet and full of singular consolations, speaks nothing of our works or of the works of the law, but of the inestimable mercy and love of God toward us most wretched and miserable sinners: to wit, that our most merciful Father seeing us to be oppressed and overwhelmed with the curse of the law and so to be held under the same that we could never be delivered by our own strength out of it, he sent his only Son into the world and laid upon him all the sins of all men, saying: Be you Peter that denier: Paul that persecutor, blasphemer, and cruel oppressor: David that adulterer: that sinner which did eat the apple in Paradise: that thief hanging upon the cross: and briefly, be you the person which has committed the sins of all men: See therefore that you pay and satisfy for them. Here now comes the law and says: I find him a sinner, and that such a one as has taken upon himself the sins of all men, and I see no sins else but in him: therefore let him die upon the cross: and so he sets upon him and kills him. By this means the whole world is purged and cleansed from all sins, and so delivered from death and all evils. Now, sin being vanquished and death abolished by this one man, God would see nothing else in the whole world if it did believe, but a mere cleansing and righteousness. And if any remnants of sin should remain, yet for the great glory that is in Christ, God would wink at them and not behold them.

Thus we must magnify the article of Christian righteousness against the righteousness of the law and works: albeit no eloquence is able sufficiently to set forth the inestimable greatness of it. Therefore the argument that Paul handles in this place, of all others is most mighty against all the righteousness of the law. For it contains this invincible opposition which cannot be denied: that is, if the sins of the whole world be in that one man Jesus Christ, then they are not in the world. But if they be not in him, then they are yet in the world. Also, if Christ be made guilty of all the sins which we all have committed, then we are loosed from all sins, but not by ourselves, nor by our own works or merits, but by him. But if he be innocent and bears not our sins, then we bear them, and in them we shall die and be damned. But thanks be to God who has given us victory by our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.

But now let us see by what means these two things so contrary and so repugnant may be reconciled together in this one person Christ. Not only my sins and yours, but also the sins of the whole world, either past, present, or to come, take hold upon him, and go about to condemn him, as also they do indeed condemn him. But because in the self same person, which is the highest, the greatest and the only sinner, there is also an everlasting and invincible righteousness: therefore these two encounter together, the highest, the greatest and the only sin, and the highest, the greatest and the only righteousness. Here one of them must needs be overcome and give place to the other, seeing they fight together with so great force and power. The sin therefore of the whole world comes upon righteousness with all main and might. In this combat what is done? Righteousness is everlasting, immortal and invincible. Sin also is a most mighty and cruel Tyrant, ruling and reigning over the whole world, subduing and bringing all men into bondage. To conclude, sin is a strong and mighty God, which devours all mankind, learned, unlearned, holy, mighty and wise men. This Tyrant (I say) flies upon Christ, and will needs swallow him up, as he does all others. But he sees not that he is a person of invincible and everlasting righteousness. Therefore in this combat sin must needs be vanquished and killed, and righteousness must overcome, live, and reign. So in Christ all sin is vanquished, killed and buried, and righteousness remains a conqueror and reigns forever.

In like manner, death, which is an omnipotent Queen and Empress of the whole world, killing kings, princes, and generally all men, does mightily encounter with life, thinking utterly to overcome it and to swallow it up: and that it goes about, it brings to pass indeed. But because life was immortal, therefore when it was overcome, yet did it overcome and get the victory, vanquishing and killing death.

Death therefore through Christ is vanquished and abolished throughout the whole world, so that now it is but a painted death, which losing its sting, can no more hurt those that believe in Christ, who is become the death of death, as Hosea the prophet says: O death, I will be your death.

So the Curse, which is the wrath of God upon the whole world, has the like conflict with the Blessing: that is to say, with grace and the eternal mercy of God in Christ. The Curse therefore fights against the Blessing, and would condemn it and bring it to nothing: but it cannot do so. For the Blessing is divine and everlasting, and therefore the Curse must needs give place. For if the blessing in Christ could be overcome, then should God himself also be overcome. But this is impossible: therefore Christ the power of God, righteousness, Blessing, grace and life, overcomes and destroys these monsters, sin, death and the Curse, without war or weapons, in his own body, and in himself, as Paul delights to speak: 'Spoiling,' says he, 'all principalities and powers, and triumphing over them in himself,' so that they can no more hurt those that believe.

And this circumstance, 'In himself,' makes that combat much more wonderful and glorious. For it shows that it was necessary, that these inestimable things should be accomplished in that one only person Christ (to wit, that the Curse, sin and death should be destroyed and the Blessing, righteousness and life should succeed in their place), and that so the whole creature through this one person should be renewed. Therefore if you look upon this person Christ, you shall see sin, death, the wrath of God, hell, the Devil and all evils vanquished and mortified in him. Forasmuch then as Christ reigns by his grace in the hearts of the faithful, there is no sin, no death, no curse: but where Christ is not known, there all these things do still remain. Therefore all they which believe not, lack this inestimable benefit and glorious victory. For this (as Saint John says) is our victory that overcomes the world, even our faith.

This is the principal article of all Christian doctrine, which the popish Schoolmen have altogether darkened. And here you see how necessary a thing it is to believe and to confess the article of the Divinity of Christ: which when Arius denied, he must needs also deny the article of our redemption. For to overcome the sin of the world, death, the Curse and the wrath of God in himself, is not the work of any creature, but of the divine power. Therefore he which in himself should overcome these, must needs be truly and naturally God. For against this mighty power of sin, death and the curse (which of itself reigns throughout the world and in the whole creature) it was necessary to set a more high and mighty power. But besides the sovereign and divine power, no such power can be found. Therefore, to abolish sin, to destroy death, to take away the curse in himself: and again, to give righteousness, to bring life to light, and to give the Blessing, are the works of the divine power only and alone. Now because the Scripture does attribute all these to Christ, therefore he in himself is life, righteousness and Blessing, which is naturally and substantially God. Therefore they that deny the Divinity of Christ, lose all Christianity and become altogether Gentiles and Turks. We must learn therefore diligently the article of justification (as I often admonish you). For all the other articles of our faith are comprehended in it: and if that remains sound, then all the rest are sound. Therefore when we teach that men are justified by Christ, that Christ is the conqueror of sin, death and the everlasting Curse: we witness therewith that he is naturally and substantially God.

By this we may plainly see how horrible the wickedness and blindness of the Papists was, which taught that these cruel and mighty tyrants, sin, death and the curse (which swallow up all mankind) must be vanquished, not by the righteousness of the law of God (which, although it is just, good, and holy, can do nothing but bring men under the curse): but by the righteousness of man's own works, as by fasting, pilgrimages, masses, vows, and such other like paltry. But (I pray you) was there ever any found that being furnished with this armor, overcame sin, death and the Devil? Paul in the sixth chapter of Ephesians describes a far other manner of armor, which we must use against these most cruel and raging beasts. Therefore in that these blind buzzards and leaders of the blind have set us naked and without armor before these invincible and most mighty tyrants, they have not only delivered us to them to be devoured, but also have made us ten times greater and more wicked sinners than either thieves, whores or murderers. For it belongs only to the divine power to destroy sin and to abolish death, to create righteousness and to give life. They have attributed this divine power to our own works saying: If you shall do this work or that, you shall overcome sin, death and the wrath of God: and by this means they set us in God's place, making us in very deed (if I may so say) even naturally God himself. And in this the Papists, under the name of Christ, have showed themselves to be seven times more wicked idolaters than ever were the Gentiles. For it happens to them, as it does to the sow, which after she is washed, wallows herself again in the mire. And as Christ says: After they are fallen away from faith an evil spirit enters again into the house, out of which he was driven, and takes to him seven worse spirits than himself, and there dwells. And then the latter end of that man is worse than the beginning.

Let us therefore receive this most sweet doctrine and full of comfort with thanksgiving, and with an assured faith, which teaches that Christ being made a curse for us (that is, a sinner subject to the wrath of God) did put upon him our person, and laid our sins upon his own shoulders, saying: I have committed the sins which all men have committed. Therefore he was made a curse indeed according to the law, not for himself, but as Paul says, for us. For unless he had taken upon himself my sins and yours, and the sins of the whole world, the law had had no right over him, which condemns none but sinners only, and holds them under the curse. Therefore he could neither have been made a curse nor die, since the only cause of the curse and of death is sin, from which he was free. But because he had taken upon him our sins, not by constraint, but of his own good will, it behooved him to bear the punishment and wrath of God: not for his own person (which was just and invincible, and therefore could be found in no wise guilty) but for our person.

So making a happy change with us, he took upon him our sinful person, and gave to us his innocent and victorious person. With which we being now clothed, are freed from the curse of the law: for Christ was willingly made a curse for us, saying: As touching my own person, I am blessed, and need nothing. But I will put off my own person, and will put upon me your person and your apparel: that is, your human nature, and will walk in the same among you, and will suffer death to deliver you from death. Now, he thus bearing the sin of the whole world in our person, was taken, suffered, was crucified and put to death, and became a curse for us. But because he was a person divine and everlasting, it was impossible that death should hold him. Therefore he rose again the third day from death, and now lives forever: and there is neither sin, nor death, nor our shape found in him any more, but mere righteousness, life and everlasting blessedness.

This image and this mirror we must have continually before us, and behold the same with a steadfast eye of faith. He that does so, has this innocence and victory of Christ, although he be never so great a sinner. By faith only therefore we are made righteous, for faith lays hold upon this innocence and this victory of Christ. Look then how much you believe this, so much you do enjoy it. If you believe sin, death, and the curse to be abolished, they are abolished. For Christ has vanquished and taken away these in himself, and will have us believe, that just as in his own person there is now no appearance of a sinner nor token of death, even so is there none in ours, seeing he has performed all things for us.

Therefore, if sin vex you and death terrify you, think that it is (as it is indeed) but an imagination, and a false illusion of the Devil. For in very deed there is now no sin, no curse, no death, no Devil any more, for Christ has vanquished and abolished all these things. Therefore the victory of Christ is most certain, and there is no defect in the thing itself, since it is most true, but in our incredulity: for it is a hard matter for reason to believe these inestimable good things and unspeakable riches. Moreover, the Devil also with his vain spirits ceases not to assail us. The Devil with his fiery darts, his ministers with their wicked and false doctrine go about to wrest from us and utterly to deface this doctrine. And especially for this article, which we do so diligently teach, we sustain the hatred and cruel persecution of the Devil and of the world. For Satan feels the power and fruit of this article.

And that there is indeed no more sin, death, or malediction, since Christ now reigns: we confess daily in the Creed of the Apostles: I believe that there is a holy Church. Which is indeed nothing else, but as if we should say: I believe that there is no sin, no malediction, no death in the Church of God. For they which believe in Christ, are no sinners, are not guilty of death, but are holy and righteous, lords over sin and death, and living forever. But faith only sees this: for we say, I believe a holy Church. But if you believe reason and your own eyes, you will judge clean contrary. For you see many things in the godly which offend you. You see them sometimes to fall into sin, and to be weak in faith, to be subject to wrath, envy, and such other evil affections: therefore the Church is not holy. I deny the consequence. If I look upon my own person, or the person of my brother, it shall never be holy. But if I behold Christ, who has sanctified and cleansed his Church, then is it altogether holy: for he has taken away the sins of the whole world.

Therefore, where sins are seen and felt, there are they indeed no sins. For according to Paul's divinity, there is no sin, no death, no malediction any more in the world, but in Christ, who is the Lamb of God that has taken away the sins of the world: who is made a curse that he might deliver us from the curse. Contrariwise, according to philosophy and reason, sin, death, and the curse, are nowhere else but in the world, in the flesh, or in sinners. For, a sophistical divine can speak no otherwise of sin, than does the heathen philosopher. Like as (says he) the color sticks in the wall, even so does sin in the world, in the flesh, or in the conscience: therefore it is to be purged by contrary operations, namely, by charity. But true divinity teaches that there is no sin in the world any more: for Christ upon whom the Father has cast the sins of the whole world, has vanquished and killed the same in his own body. He once dying for sin and raised up again, dies now no more. Therefore wherever is a true faith in Christ, there sin is abolished, dead, and buried indeed. But where no faith in Christ is, there sin does still remain. And although the remnants of sin be as yet in the saints because they believe not perfectly, yet are they dead in that they are not imputed to them because of their faith in Christ.

This is therefore a strong and a mighty argument which Paul here prosecutes against the righteousness of works. It is not the law nor works that deliver us from the everlasting curse, but Christ alone. See therefore good Christian reader I beseech you, that you distinguish Christ from the law, and diligently mark how Paul speaks, and what he says. All (says he) which do not fulfill the law, are necessarily under the curse. But no man fulfills the law: therefore all men are under the curse. He adds moreover another proposition: Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: it follows then that the law and works do not redeem us from the curse, but do bring us rather under the curse. Charity therefore, (which, as the Schoolmen say, gives form and perfection to faith) has not only not redeemed us from the curse, but rather it wraps us more and more in the curse.

This text then is plain, that all men, indeed the Apostles, Prophets, and Patriarchs had remained under the curse, if Christ had not set himself against sin, death, the curse of the law, the wrath and judgment of God, and overcome them in his own body: for no power of flesh and blood could overcome these huge and hideous monsters. But now, Christ is not the law or the work of the law, but a divine and human person, which took upon him sin, the condemnation of the law and death, not for himself, but for us. Therefore all the weight and force hereof consists in this word, For us.

We must not then imagine Christ to be innocent and as a private person (as do the Schoolmen, and almost all the Fathers have done) which is holy and righteous for himself only. True it is indeed that Christ is a person most pure and unspotted: but you must not stay there: for you have not yet Christ, although you know him to be God and man: but then you have him indeed, when you believe that this most pure and innocent person is freely given to you of the Father to be your high Priest and Savior, indeed rather your servant, that he putting off his innocence and holiness, and taking your sinful person upon him, might bear your sin, your death, and your curse, and might be made a sacrifice and a curse for you, that by this means he might deliver you from the curse of the law.

You see then with what an apostolic spirit Paul handles this argument of the blessing and of the curse, while he not only makes Christ subject to the curse, but says also that he is made a curse. So in 2 Corinthians 5, he calls him sin, when he says: He has made him to be sin for us, which knew no sin, that we should be made the righteousness of God in him. And although these sentences may be well expounded after this manner: Christ is made a curse, that is to say, a sacrifice for the curse: and sin, that is, a sacrifice for sin, yet in my judgment it is better to keep the proper signification of the words, because there is a greater force and vehemence therein. For when a sinner comes to the knowledge of himself indeed, he feels not only that he is miserable, but misery itself: not only that he is a sinner and is accursed, but even sin and malediction itself. For it is indeed a great matter to bear sin, the wrath of God, malediction and death. Therefore that man which has a true feeling of these things (as Christ did truly and effectually feel them for all mankind) is made even sin, death, and malediction itself.

Paul therefore handles this place with a true Apostolic spirit. There is neither sophist, nor lawyer, nor Jew, nor Anabaptist, nor any other that speaks as he does. For who dared allege this place out of Moses: Accursed is every one that hangs on a tree, and apply it to Christ? Just as Paul then applied this sentence to Christ, even so may we apply to Christ, not only that whole chapter 27 of Deuteronomy, but also may gather all the curses of Moses' law together, and expound the same of Christ. For as Christ is innocent in this general law, touching his own person, so is he also in all the rest. And as he is guilty in this general law in that he is made a curse for us, and is hanged upon the cross as a wicked man, a blasphemer, a murderer and a traitor: even so is he also guilty in all others. For all the curses of the law are heaped together and laid upon him, and therefore he did bear and suffer them in his own body for us. He was therefore not only accursed, but was also made a curse for us.

This is rightly and after a true Apostolic manner to interpret the Scriptures. For a man is not able to speak after this manner without the Holy Spirit: that is to say, to comprehend the whole law in this one saying: Christ is made a curse for us, and lay the same altogether upon Christ: and contrariwise to comprehend all the promises of the Scripture, and say, that they are all at once fulfilled in Christ. Therefore this is indeed an Apostolic and invincible argument, not taken out of one place of the law, but out of the whole law: which Paul also uses as a sure ground.

Here we may see with what diligence Paul read the holy Scriptures, and how exactly he weighed every word of this place: In your seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed. First, out of this word Blessing, etc., he gathers this argument: If blessing shall be given to all nations, then are all nations under the curse, indeed the Jews also, who have the law. And he alleges a testimony of the Scripture, whereby he proves that all the Jews which are under the law, are under the curse: For Cursed is every one which abides not in all the things that are written in this book.

Moreover, he diligently weighs this clause: All nations. Out of which he gathers thus: that the blessing belongs not only to the Jews, but also to all the nations of the whole world. Seeing then it belongs to all nations, it is impossible that it should be obtained through the law of Moses, for as much as there was no nation that had the law, but only the Jews. And although they had the law, yet were they so far off from obtaining the blessing through it, that the more they endeavored to accomplish it, the more they were subject to the curse of the law. Therefore there must needs be another righteousness which must be far more excellent than the righteousness of the law, through which, not only the Jews, but also all nations throughout the whole world, must obtain the blessing.

Finally, these words: In your seed, he expounds after this manner, that a certain man should issue out of the seed of Abraham, that is to say, Christ, through whom the blessing should come afterwards upon all nations. Seeing therefore it was Christ that should bless all nations, it was he also that should take away the curse from them. But he could not take it away by the law, for by the law it is more and more increased. What did he then? He joined himself to the company of the accursed, taking to him their flesh and their blood, and so set himself for a mediator between God and men, saying: Although I be flesh and blood, and now dwell among the accursed, yet notwithstanding I am that blessed one through whom all men must be blessed. So in one person he joined God and man together, and being united to us which were accursed, he was made a curse for us, and hid his blessing in our sin, in our death, and in our curse, which condemned him and put him to death. But because he was the Son of God, he could not be held by them, but overcame them, led them captive and triumphed over them: and whatever did hang upon flesh, which for our sake he took upon him, he carried it with him. Therefore all they that cling to this flesh, are blessed and delivered from the curse, that is, from sin, and everlasting death.

They that understand not this benefit of Christ (whereof the gospel specially treats) and know not another righteousness besides the righteousness of the law, when they hear that the works of the law are not necessary to salvation, but that men obtain the same by only hearing and believing that Christ the Son of God has taken upon him our flesh and joined himself to the accursed, to the end that all nations might be blessed, they (I say) are offended: for of all this they understand nothing, or else they understand it carnally. For their minds are occupied with other cogitations and fantastical imaginations: therefore these things seem to them strange matters. Indeed even to us which have received the first fruits of the Spirit, it is impossible to understand these things perfectly: for they mightily fight against reason.

To conclude, all evils should have overwhelmed us, as they shall overwhelm the wicked forever. But Christ being made for us a transgressor of all laws, guilty of all our malediction, our sins, and all our evils, comes as mediator between, embracing us wicked and damnable sinners. He took upon him and bore all our evils, which should have oppressed and tormented us forever: and these cast him down for a while, and ran over his head like water, as the Prophet in the person of Christ complains when he says: Your indignation sore presses me, and you have vexed me with all your storms. Again: Your indignations have gone over me, and your terrors have troubled me. By this means we being delivered from these everlasting terrors and anguish through Christ, shall enjoy an everlasting and inestimable peace and felicity, so that we believe this.

These are the reverend mysteries and secrets, which Moses also somewhat [reconstructed: darkly] in some places did [reconstructed: foreshadow]: which also the Prophets and Apostles did know, and did deliver to their posterity. Of which thing to come, the Saints of the old Testament rejoiced more, than we do for the same already exhibited to us. Indeed we do acknowledge that this knowledge of Christ and of the righteousness of faith, is an inestimable treasure: but we conceive not thereby such a full joy of spirit, as the Prophets and Apostles did. Hereof it comes, that they (and specially Paul) so plentifully set forth and so diligently taught the Article of Justification. For this is the proper office of an Apostle, to set forth the glory and benefit of Christ, and thereby to raise up and to comfort troubled and afflicted consciences.

Verse 14. That the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles through Christ Jesus.

Paul has always this place before his eyes: In your seed, etc. For the blessing promised to Abraham, could not come upon the Gentiles, but only by Christ the seed of Abraham: and that by this means: to wit, that it behooved him to be made a curse, that this promise made to Abraham — In your seed shall all nations be blessed — might so be fulfilled. Therefore by no other means could this be done that is here promised, but that Jesus Christ must needs become a curse, and join himself to those that were accursed, that so he might take away the curse from them, and through his blessing might bring to them righteousness and life. And here mark (as I have also forewarned you) that this word blessing is not in vain, as the Jews dream, who expound it to be but a salutation by word of mouth or by writing. But Paul speaks here of sin and righteousness, of death and life before God. He speaks therefore of inestimable and incomprehensible things, when he says: that the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles through Jesus Christ.

You see moreover what merits we bring, and by what means we obtain this blessing. This is the merit of congruence and worthiness, these are the preparatory works whereby we obtain this righteousness, that Christ Jesus was made a curse for us. For we are ignorant of God, enemies of God, dead in sin, and accursed: and what is our desert then? What can he deserve that is accursed, ignorant of God, dead in sins, and subject to the wrath and judgment of God? When the Pope excommunicates a man, whatever he does, is counted accursed. How much more then may we say, that he is accursed before God (as all we are before we know Christ) which does nothing else but cursed things? Therefore there is no other way to avoid the curse, but to believe, and with assured confidence to say: You Christ are my sin and my curse, or rather I am your sin, your curse, your death, your wrath of God, your hell: and contrariwise, you are my righteousness, my blessing, my life, my grace of God, and my heaven. For the text says plainly: Christ is made a curse for us. Therefore we are the cause that he was made a curse: nay rather we are his curse.

This is an excellent place, and full of spiritual consolation, and albeit it satisfies not the blind and hard-hearted Jews, yet it satisfies us that are baptized, and have received this doctrine, and concludes most mightily, that we are blessed through the curse, the sin, and the death of Christ, that is to say, we are justified and quickened to life. So long as sin, death and the curse do abide in us, sin terrifies, death kills, and the curse condemns us. But when these are transferred and laid upon Christ's back, then are these evils made his own, and his good things are made ours. Let us therefore learn in all temptations to transfer sin, death, the curse and all evils which oppress us, from ourselves to Christ, and again, from him to ourselves, righteousness, mercy, life and blessing. For he bears all our evils upon him. God the father cast the iniquities of us all, as Isaiah the Prophet says, upon him: And he has taken them upon him willingly, for he was not guilty. But this he did, that he might fulfill the will of his father, by which we are made holy forever.

This is that infinite and immeasurable mercy of God, which Paul would gladly amplify with all eloquence and plenty of words, but the slender capacity of man's heart can not comprehend, and much less utter, that unsearchable depth and burning zeal of God's love towards us. And truly the inestimable greatness of God's mercy, not only engenders a hardness to believe, but also incredulity itself. For I do not only hear that almighty God the creator and maker of all things is good and merciful, but also that the same high sovereign Majesty was so careful for me a damnable sinner, a child of wrath and of everlasting death, that he spared not his own dear Son, but delivered him to a most opprobrious and shameful death, that he hanging between two thieves, might be made a curse and sin for me a cursed sinner, that I might be made blessed: that is to say, the child and heir of God. Who can sufficiently praise and magnify this exceeding great goodness of God? Not all the Angels in heaven. Therefore the doctrine of the Gospel, the book of God, speaks of far other matters than any book of policy or philosophy, yea or the book of Moses himself: namely, of the unspeakable and most divine gifts of God, which far pass the capacity and understanding both of men and Angels.

Verse 14. That we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.

This is a phrase of the Hebrews: The promise of the Spirit: that is to say, the Spirit promised. Now, the Spirit is freedom from the law, sin, death, the curse, hell, and from the wrath and judgment of God. Here is no merit or worthiness of ours, but a free promise and a gift given through the seed of Abraham, that we may be free from all evils, and obtain all good things whatever. And this liberty and gift of the Spirit, we receive not by any other merits than by faith alone. For that only takes hold of the promise of God, as Paul plainly says in this place: that we might receive the promise of the Spirit, not by works, but by faith.

This is indeed a sweet and a true Apostolic doctrine, which shows that those things are fulfilled for us, and now given to us, which many Prophets and Kings desired to see and to hear. And such like places as this one is, were gathered together out of divers sayings of the Prophets, which foresaw long before in spirit, that all things should be changed, repaired, and governed by this man Christ. Therefore the Jews having the law of God, did notwithstanding besides that law, look for Christ. None of the Prophets or governors of the people of God, did make any new law, but Elias, Samuel, David, and all the other Prophets did abide under the law of Moses: they did not appoint any new tables, or a new kingdom and priesthood: for that new change of the kingly priesthood of the law and the worship, was referred and kept to him only of whom Moses had prophesied long before: The Lord your God shall raise up a Prophet to you of your own nation, and from among your brethren: Him you shall hear. As if he should say: You shall hear him only, and none besides him.

This the Fathers well understood, for none could teach greater and higher points than Moses himself, who made excellent laws of high and great matters, as are the ten commandments, especially the first commandment: I am the Lord your God: You shall have no other Gods but me: You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, etc. This law concerning the love of God, does comprehend the very Angels also. Therefore it is the headspring of all divine wisdom. And yet was it necessary notwithstanding, that another teacher should come, that is to say, Christ, which should bring and teach another thing far passing these excellent laws: namely, grace and remission of sins. This is therefore a mighty text. For in this short sentence: That we might receive the promise of the spirit by faith, Paul pours out at once whatever he was able to say. Therefore when he can go no further (for he could not utter any greater or more excellent thing), he breaks off, and here he stays.

Verse 15. Brethren, I speak according to man: Though it be but a man's covenant when it is confirmed, yet no man does abrogate it, or adds anything to it.

After this principal and invincible argument Paul adds another grounded upon the similitude of a man's Testament: which seems to be very weak, and such as the Apostle ought not to use for the confirmation of a matter of so great importance. For in high and weighty matters, we ought to confirm earthly things by divine things, and not divine and heavenly things by earthly and worldly things. And indeed it is true that these arguments of all others are most weak, when we go about to prove and confirm heavenly matters with earthly and corruptible things as Scotus is wont to do. A man (says he) is able to love God above all things, for he loves himself above all things: therefore much more is he able to love God above all things. For a good thing the greater it is, the more it is to be loved. And hereof he infers that a man is able, ex puris naturalibus: that is to say, even of his own pure natural strength, easily to fulfill that high commandment: You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, etc. For (says he) a man is able to love the least good thing above all things: indeed he sets at nothing his life (of all other things most dear to him) for a little vile money: Therefore he can much more do it for God's cause.

You have often heard from me, that civil ordinances are of God: for God has ordained them and allows them, as he does the Sun, the Moon, and other creatures. Therefore an argument taken of the ordinance or of the creatures of God, is good, so that we use the same rightly. So the Prophets have very often used similitudes and comparisons taken of creatures, calling Christ the Sun, the Church the Moon, the preachers and teachers of the word the Stars. Also there are many similitudes in the Prophets, of trees, thorns, flowers, and fruits of the earth. The new Testament likewise is full of such similitudes. Therefore where God's ordinance is in the creature, there may an argument be well borrowed and applied to divine and heavenly things.

So our Savior Christ in Matthew 7 argues from earthly things to heavenly things, when he says: If you then which are evil can give to your children good gifts, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him? Likewise Paul: We must obey men: therefore much more must we obey God. Jeremiah also in [reconstructed: chapter 35]: The Rechabites obeyed their Father: how much more ought you to have obeyed me? Now these things are appointed of God, and are his ordinances, that Fathers should give to their children, and that children should obey their parents. Therefore such manner of arguments are good when they are grounded upon the ordinance of God. But if they be taken from men's corrupt affections, they are naught. Such is the argument of Scotus: I love the lesser good thing, therefore I love the greater more. I deny the consequence. For my loving is not God's ordinance, but a devilish corruption. Indeed it should be so, that I loving myself or another creature, should much more love God the creator: but it is not so. For the love with which I love myself, is corrupt and against God.

This I say lest any man should cavil that an argument taken of corruptible things, and applied to divine and spiritual matters, is nothing worth. For this argument (as I have said) is strong enough, so that we ground the same upon the ordinance of God, as we see in this argument which we have in hand. For the civil law which is an ordinance of God, says that it is not lawful to break or to change the testament of a man. Indeed it commands that the last will or testament of a man be strictly kept: for that it is one of the holiest and most laudable customs that are among men. Now therefore upon this custom of man's testament Paul argues after this manner: How does it come to pass that man is obeyed and not God? Political and civil ordinances, as concerning testaments and other things, are diligently kept. There nothing is changed, nothing is added or taken away. But the testament of God is changed: that is to say, his promise concerning the spiritual blessing, that is, concerning heavenly and everlasting things, which the whole world ought not only to receive with great zeal and affection: but also ought most religiously to reverence and honor. This persuades vehemently, when we so argue from the examples and laws of men. Therefore he says: I speak after the manner of men: that is to say, I bring to you a similitude taken of the custom and manner of men. As if he should say: The testaments of men and such other corruptible things are strictly executed, and that which the law commands is diligently observed and kept. For when a man makes his last will, bequeathing his lands and goods to his heirs and thereupon dies, this last will is confirmed and ratified by the death of the testator, so that nothing may now be either added to it, or taken from it, according to all law and equity. Now, if a man's will be kept with so great fidelity, that nothing is added to it or taken from it after his death: how much more ought the last will of God to be faithfully kept, which he promised and gave to Abraham and his seed after him? For when Christ died, then was it confirmed in him, and after his death the writing of his last testament was opened: that is to say, the promised blessing of Abraham was preached among all nations dispersed throughout the whole world. This was that last will and testament of God the great testator confirmed by the death of Christ: therefore no man ought to change it or to add anything to it, as they that teach the law and man's traditions do. For they say, unless you be circumcised, keep the law, do many works, and suffer many things, you cannot be saved. This is not the last will or testament of God. For he said not to Abraham: if you do this or that, you shall obtain the blessing: or they that be circumcised and keep the law shall obtain the same: but he says, In your seed shall all the nations of the earth be blessed. As if he should say: I of mere mercy do promise to you, that Christ shall come of your seed, who shall bring the blessing upon all nations oppressed with sin and death: that is to say, which shall deliver the nations from the everlasting curse: to wit, from sin and death, receiving this promise by faith: In your seed, etc. Therefore, even as the false apostles were in time past, so are all the Papists and Justiciaries at this day perverters and destroyers, not of man's testament (because they are forbidden by the law): but of God's testament, whom they fear nothing at all, although he be a consuming fire. For such is the nature of all hypocrites, that they will observe man's law exactly: but the laws of God they do despise, and most wickedly transgress. But the time shall come when they shall bear a horrible judgment, and shall feel what it is to contemn and pervert the testament of God. This argument then grounded upon the ordinance of God, is strong enough.

Verse 16. Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He says not: And to the seeds, as speaking of many: but and to your seed, as of one which is Christ.

Here by a new name he calls the promises of God made to Abraham concerning Christ that should bring the blessing to all nations, a testament. And indeed the promise is nothing else but a testament, not yet revealed, but sealed up. Now, a testament is not a law, but a donation or free gift. For heirs look not for laws, exactions, or any burdens to be laid upon them by the testament, but they look for the inheritance confirmed thereby.

First of all therefore he expounds the words: afterwards he applies the similitude, and stands upon this word seed. There were no laws given to Abraham (says he), but a testament was made and delivered to him: that is to say, the promises were pronounced to him as touching the spiritual blessing: therefore somewhat was promised and given to him. If then the testament of a man be kept, why should not rather the testament of God be kept? of which the testament of man is but a shadow? Again, if we will keep the signs, why do we not rather keep the things which they signify?

Now, the promises are made to him, not in all the Jews, or in many seeds, but in one seed, which is Christ. The Jews will not receive this interpretation of Paul: for they say, that the singular number is here put for the plural, one for many. But we gladly receive this meaning and interpretation of Paul, who oftentimes repeats this word seed, and expounds this seed to be Christ: and this he does with a true Apostolic spirit. Let the Jews deny it as much as they will: we notwithstanding have arguments strong enough, which Paul has before presented, which also confirm this thing, and they cannot deny them. Hitherto, as touching the similitude of God's ordinance, that is to say: of man's testament. Now he expounds and amplifies the same.

Verse 17. And this I say, that the law which was 430 years after, cannot annul the covenant that was confirmed before of God in respect of Christ, that it should make the promise of none effect.

Here the Jews might object, that God was not only content to give promises to Abraham, but also after 430 years he made the law. God therefore mistrusting his own promises, as insufficient to justify, added thereto a better thing: that is to say, the law, to the end that when the same, as a better successor, was come, not the idle but the doers of the law might be made righteous thereby. The law therefore which followed the promise, did abrogate the promise. Such evasions and starting holes the Jews seek out.

To this cavilation Paul answers very well and to the purpose, and strongly confutes the same. The law (says he) was given 430 years after the promise was made: In your Seed, etc., and it could not make the promise void and unprofitable. For the promise is the Testament of God, confirmed by God himself in Christ so many years before the law. Now, that which God once has promised and confirmed, he calls not back again, but it remains ratified and sure forever.

Why then was the law added? Indeed it was delivered so many ages after to the posterity of Abraham, not to the end he might through it obtain the blessing (for it is the office of the law to bring men under the curse, and not to bless): but that there might be in the world a certain people, which might have the word and testimony of Christ, out of the which, Christ also according to the flesh, might be born: And that men being kept and shut up under the law, might sigh and groan for their deliverance through the Seed of Abraham, which is Christ: which only should and could bless, that is to say, deliver all nations from sin and everlasting death. Moreover, the ceremonies commanded in the law, did foreshadow Christ. Therefore the promise was not abolished either by the law, or by the ceremonies of the law: but rather by the same, as by certain seals, it was for a time confirmed, until the letters themselves or the writing of the Testament (to wit, the promise) might be opened and by the preaching of the Gospel might be spread abroad among all nations.

But let us suffer the law and the promise to encounter together, and then shall we see which of them is the stronger: that is to say, whether the promise be able to abolish the law, or the law the promise. If the law abolish the promise, then it follows, that we by our works make God a liar and his promise of none effect. For if the law does justify us and deliver us from sin and death, and consequently our works and our own strength performing the law, then the promise made to Abraham is utterly void and unprofitable, and so consequently God is a liar and a dissembler. For when he which promises will not perform his promise, but makes it of none effect, what does he else but show himself to be a liar and a dissembler? But it is impossible that the law should make God a liar, or that our works should make the promise void, nay rather it must needs be firm and stable forever (for God promises not in vain) although we were able to keep and fulfill the law. And let us admit that all men were as holy as Angels, so that they should not need the promise (which notwithstanding is impossible): yet must we think that the same promise abides most sure and certain: or else God should be found a liar, which either has promised in vain, or else will not or can not perform his promises. Therefore, like as the promise was before the law, so is it far more excellent than the law.

And God did excellently well in that he gave the promise so long before the law. Which he did of purpose and to this end, that it should not be said, that righteousness was given through the law, and not through the promise. For if he would that we should have been justified by the law, then would he have given the law 430 years before the promise, or else together with the promise. But now at the first he speaks not a word as concerning the law, but at the length after 430 years he gives the law. In the meantime, all that time he speaks only of his promises. Therefore the blessing and free gift of righteousness came before the law through the promise: The promise therefore is far more excellent than the law. And so the law does not abolish the promise, but Faith in the promise (whereby the believers even before Christ's time were saved) which is now published by the Gospel throughout the whole world, destroys the law, so that it can not increase sin any more, terrify sinners, or bring them into desperation, laying hold upon the promise through Faith.

And in this also lies a certain vehemence specially to be noted, that he expressly sets down the number of 430 years. As if he would say: Consider with yourselves how long it was between the promise given, and the law. It is plain that Abraham received the promise a long time before the law. For the law was given to the people of Israel 430 years after. And this is an invincible argument gathered and grounded upon a certain time. And he speaks not here of the law in general, but only of the written law. As if he would say: God could not then have regard to the ceremonies and works of the law, and give righteousness to the observers thereof. For as yet the law was not given, which commands ceremonies, requires works, and promises life to those that observe them, saying: The man that shall do these things, shall live in them. And although it promise such things, yet it follows not therefore that we obtain these promises: For it says plainly: The man that shall do these things, &c. Now, it is certain that no man can do them. Moreover, Paul says that the law cannot abolish the promise: therefore that promise made to Abraham 430 years before the law, remains firm and constant. And that the matter may be better understood, I will declare the same by a comparison. If a rich man, not constrained, but of his own good will, should adopt one to be his son, whom he knows not, and to whom he owes nothing, and should appoint him to be the heir of all his lands and goods, and certain years after that he has bestowed this benefit upon him, he should lay upon him a law to do this or that: he cannot now say that he has deserved this benefit by his own works, seeing that many years before, he asking nothing, had received the same freely and of mere favor. So, God could not respect our works and deserts going before righteousness: for the promise and the gift of the Holy Spirit was 430 years before the law.

Hereby it appears that Abraham obtained not righteousness before God through the law. For there was yet no law. If there were yet no law, then was there neither work nor merit. What then? Nothing else but the mere promise. This promise Abraham believed, and it was counted to him for righteousness. By the same means then that the father obtained this promise, the children do also obtain it and hold it. So say we also at this day: Our sins were purged by the death of Christ above a thousand and five hundred years ago, when there were yet no religious Orders, no Canon or rule of Penance, no merits of congruence and worthiness. We cannot now therefore begin to abolish the same by our own works and merits.

Thus Paul gathers arguments of comparisons, of a certain time, and of persons, so sure and strong on every side that no man can deny them. Let us therefore arm and fortify our consciences with such like arguments: For it helps us exceedingly, to have them always ready in temptations. For they lead us from the law and works, to the promise and to faith: from wrath to grace: from sin to righteousness, and from death to life. Therefore these two things (as I do often repeat): to wit, the law and the promise must be diligently distinguished. For in time, in place, and in person, and generally in all other circumstances they are separate as far asunder as heaven and earth, the beginning of the world and the latter end. Indeed they are near neighbors, for they are joined together in one man or in one soul: but in the inward affection and as touching their office, they ought to be separate far asunder: so that the law may have dominion over the flesh, and the promise may sweetly and comfortably reign in the conscience. When you have thus appointed to them both their own proper place, then you walk safely between them both in the heaven of the promise, and in the earth of the law. In spirit you walk in the Paradise of grace and peace: In the flesh you walk in the earth of works and of the cross. And now the troubles which the flesh is compelled to bear, shall not be hard to you, because of the sweetness of the promise, which comforts and rejoices the heart exceedingly. But now, if you confound and mingle these two together, and place the law in the conscience, and the promise of liberty in the flesh, then you make a confusion, (such as was in Popery): so that you shall not know what the law, what the promise, what sin, or what righteousness is.

Therefore if you will divide the word of truth aright, you must put a great difference between the promise and the law as touching the inward affections and whole practice of life. It is not for nothing that Paul prosecutes this argument so diligently. For he foresaw in spirit that this mischief should creep into the Church, that the word of God should be confounded: that is to say, that the promise should be mingled with the law, and so the promise should be utterly lost. For when the promise is mingled with the law, it is now made nothing else but the very law. Therefore accustom yourself to separate the promise and the law asunder, even in respect of time, that when the law comes and accuses your conscience, you may say: Lady law, you come not in season, for you come too soon. Wait yet until 430 years be expired, and when they are past, then come and spare not. But if you come then, yet shall you come too late. For then has the promise prevented you 430 years: to which I assent and sweetly repose myself in the same. Therefore I have nothing to do with you: I hear you not. For now I live with the believing Abraham: or rather since Christ is now revealed and given to me, I live in him: who is my righteousness, who also has abolished you, O law. And thus let Christ be always before your eyes, as a certain summary of all arguments for the defense of faith, against the righteousness of the flesh, against the law, and against all works and merits whatever.

Hitherto I have rehearsed almost all, but specially the principal arguments which the Apostle Paul handles in this Epistle for the confirmation of this Doctrine of Justification. Among which, the argument as touching the promise made to Abraham and to the other Fathers, is the weightiest and of greatest efficacy: which Paul does chiefly prosecute both here and in the Epistle to the Romans: the words whereof he diligently weighs: and moreover treats both of the times and persons. Also he stands upon this word Seed, applying the same to Christ. Finally, he declares by the contrary what the law works: namely that it holds men under the Curse. And thus he fortifies the Article of Christian righteousness with strong and mighty arguments. On the other side, he overthrows the arguments of the false apostles which they used in defense of the righteousness of the law, and he turns them upon their own heads: That is to say, whereas they contended that righteousness and life is obtained by the law, Paul shows that they work nothing but malediction and death in us. You contend (says he) that the law is necessary to salvation. Have you not read, that it says: He that shall do these things shall live in them? Now, who is he that does perform or accomplish them? No man living. Therefore, as many as are of the works of the law are under the Curse. And again, in another place: The sting of death is sin, and the strength of sin is the law. Now follows the conclusion of all these arguments.

Verse 18. For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more by the promise. &c.

So he says in Romans 4: For if they which be of the law be heirs, then is Faith but vain, and the promise of no effect. And it can not otherwise be: for this distinction is plain, that the law is a thing far differing from the promise. Indeed natural reason, although it be never so blind, is compelled to confess, that it is one thing to promise, and another thing to require: one thing to give, and another thing to take. The law does require and exact of us our works: the promise of the Seed does offer to us the spiritual and everlasting benefits of God, and that freely for Christ's sake. Therefore we obtain the inheritance or Blessing through the promise, and not through the law. For the promise says: In your seed shall all nations of the earth be blessed. Therefore he that has the law, has not enough, because he has not yet the Blessing, without the which he is compelled to abide under the Curse. The law therefore can not justify because the Blessing is not joined to it. Moreover, if the inheritance were of the law, then should God be found a liar, and the promise should be in vain. Again, if the law could obtain the Blessing, why did God then make this promise: In your Seed? &c. Why did he not rather say: Do this and you shall receive the Blessing? Or else by keeping of the law, you may deserve everlasting life. This argument is grounded upon contraries: The inheritance is given by the promise: therefore not by the law.

Verse 18. But God gave it to Abraham by promise.

It can not be denied, but that God before the law was, gave to Abraham the inheritance or Blessing by the promise: that is to say, remission of sins, righteousness, salvation, and everlasting life, that we should be sons and heirs of God, and fellow heirs with Christ. For it is plainly said in Genesis: In your seed shall all nations be blessed. There the Blessing is given freely without respect of the law or works. For God gave the inheritance before Moses was born, or before any man had yet once thought of the law. Why vaunt you then that righteousness comes by the law, seeing that righteousness, life, and salvation was given to your father Abraham without the law, indeed before there was any law? He that is not moved with these things, is blind and obstinate. But this argument of the promise I have before handled more largely, and therefore I will now but touch it by the way.

Hitherto we have heard the principal part of this Epistle. Now the Apostle goes about to show the use and office of the law, adding certain similitudes of the Schoolmaster, and of the little Heir: Also the allegory of the two sons of Abraham, Isaac and Ishmael &c. Last of all he sets forth certain precepts concerning manners.

Verse 19. Therefore then serves the law?

When we teach that a man is justified without the law and works, then does this question necessarily follow: If the law does not justify, why then was it given? Also: Why does God charge us and burden us with the law, if it does not justify? What is the cause that we are so hardly exercised and vexed with it, if they which work but one hour are made equal with us, which have borne the heat and burden of the day? When that grace is once published to us which the Gospel sets out, by and by arises this great murmuring: without the which the Gospel can not be preached. The Jews had this opinion, that if they kept the law, they should be justified thereby. Therefore when they heard that the Gospel was preached concerning Christ, who came into the world to save, not the righteous, but sinners, and that they should go before them into the kingdom of God, they were wonderfully offended, complaining that they had borne the heavy yoke of the law so many years with great labor and toil, and that they were miserably vexed and oppressed with the tyranny of the law, without any profit, or rather to their great hurt: Again, that the Gentiles who were idolaters, obtained grace without any labor or travail. So do our Papists murmur at this day, saying: What has it profited us that we have lived in a cloister twenty, thirty, or forty years: that we have vowed chastity, poverty, obedience: that we have said so many psalters, and so many Canonical hours, and so many masses: that we have so punished our bodies with fasting, prayers, chastisements. &c. If a husband, a wife, a Prince, a governor, a master, a scholar: if a hireling or a drudge bearing sacks, if a wench sweeping the house shall not only be made equal with us, but also be accepted as better and more worthy before God than we?

This is therefore a hard question, with which reason is struck dumb, and cannot answer, but is greatly offended with it. Reason after a sort understands the righteousness of the law, which also it teaches and urges, and imagines that the doers of it are righteous: but it does not understand the office and end of the law. Therefore when it hears this sentence of Paul, which is strange and unknown to the world: That the law was given for transgressions, thus it judges: Paul abolishes the law, for he says, that we are not justified through it: indeed he is a blasphemer against God who gave the law, when he says: that the law was given for transgressions. Let us live therefore as Gentiles which have no law. Indeed, let us sin and abide in sin, that grace may abound: Also, let us do evil, that good may come thereof. This happened to the Apostle Paul: and the self same happens at this day to us. For when the common people hear out of the Gospel, that righteousness comes by the mere grace of God through Faith only, without the law and without works, they gather by and by of it, as did the Jews in times past: If the law does not justify, then let us work nothing: and surely they perform this excellently well.

What should we then do? This impiety does indeed very much vex us, but we cannot remedy it. For when Christ preaches, he must needs hear, that he was a blasphemer and a seditious person: that is to say, that through his doctrine he deceived men, and made them rebels against Caesar. The self same thing happened to Paul and all the rest of the Apostles. And what marvel is it if the world in like manner accuse us at this day? Let it accuse us, let it slander us, let it persecute us and spare not: yet must we not therefore hold our peace, but speak freely, to the end that afflicted consciences may be delivered out of the snares of the Devil. And we must not regard the foolish and ungodly people in that they do abuse our doctrine: for whether they have a law or no law, they cannot be reformed. But we must consider how afflicted consciences may be comforted, that they perish not with the multitude. If we should dissemble and hold our peace, poor afflicted consciences should have no consolation, which are so entangled and snared with men's laws and traditions, that they can wind themselves out by no means.

As Paul therefore seeing some to set themselves against his doctrine, and others some to seek the liberty of the flesh and thereby to be made worse, comforted himself after this sort, that he was an Apostle of Jesus Christ sent to preach the Faith of God's elect, and that he must suffer all things for the elect's sake, to the end that they also might obtain salvation: even so we at this day do all things for the elect's sake, whom we know to be edified and comforted through our doctrine. But as for the dogs and swine (of whom the one sort does persecute our doctrine, and the other sort does tread under foot the liberty which we have in Christ Jesus) I am so offended with them, that in all my life for their sakes I would not utter so much as one word: but I would rather wish that these hogs, together with our adversaries the dogs, were yet still subject to the Pope's tyranny, rather than that the holy name of God should be so blasphemed and evil spoken of through them.

Therefore, albeit not only the foolish and ignorant people, but they also which seem in their own conceits to be very wise, do argue after this sort: If the law does not justify, then is it in vain and unprofitable, yet is it not therefore true. For like as this consequence is nothing worth: Money does not justify or make a man righteous, therefore it is unprofitable: the eyes do not justify, therefore they must be plucked out: the hands make not a man righteous therefore they must be cut off: so is this naught also: The law does not justify, therefore it is unprofitable: for we must attribute to every thing its proper effect and use. We do not therefore destroy and condemn the law because we say that it does not justify: but we answer otherwise to this question: To what end then serves the law? Then our adversaries do, who do wickedly and perversely counterfeit an office and use of the law which belongs not to it.

Against this abuse and forged office of the law we dispute and answer with Paul, that the law does not justify. But in so saying, we affirm not that the law is unprofitable, as they do by and by gather: If the law does not justify (say they) then is it given in vain. No, not so. For it has its proper office and use, but not that which the adversaries do imagine, namely, to make men righteous: but it accuses, terrifies, and condemns them. We say with Paul that the law is good, if a man does rightly use it: that is to say, if he uses the law as the law. If I give to the law its proper definition, and keep it within the compass of its office and use, it is an excellent thing: But if I transfer it to another use, and attribute that to it which I should not, then do I not only pervert the law, but also the whole Scripture.

Therefore Paul fights here against those pestilent hypocrites, who could not abide this sentence: The law was added for transgressions. For they think that the office of the law is to justify. And this is the general opinion of man's reason among the Sophisters, and throughout the whole world, that righteousness is gotten through the works of the law. And reason will by no means suffer this pernicious opinion to be wrested from it, because it does not understand the righteousness of faith. From this it comes that the Papists both foolishly and wickedly say: The Church has the law of God, the traditions of the Fathers, the decrees of Councils: If it lives after them, it is holy. No man shall persuade these men, that when they keep these things, they please not God, but provoke his wrath. To conclude, they that trust in their own righteousness, think to pacify the wrath of God by their will-worship and voluntary religion. Therefore this opinion of the righteousness of the law is the sink of all evils, and the sin of sins of the whole world. For gross sins and vices may be known and so amended, or else repressed by the punishment of the Magistrate. But this sin, to wit, man's opinion concerning his own righteousness, will not only not be counted sin, but also will be esteemed for a high religion and righteousness. This pestilent sin therefore is the most high and sovereign power of the Devil over the whole world, the very head of the Serpent, and the snare whereby the Devil entangles and holds all men captive. For naturally all men have this opinion, that they are made righteous by keeping of the law. Paul therefore, to the end he might show the true office and use of the law, and might root out of men's hearts that false opinion concerning the righteousness thereof, answers to this objection: Why then serves the law if it justifies not? after this sort: It was not given to make men righteous (says he) but,

Verse. 19. It was added because of transgressions.

As things are diverse and distinct: so the uses thereof are diverse and distinct: Therefore they may not be confounded. For if they be, there must needs be a confusion of the things also. A woman may not wear a man's apparel, nor a man a woman's attire. Let a man do the works that belong to a man, and a woman the works that belong to a woman. Let every man do that, which his vocation and office requires. Let Pastors and Preachers teach the word of God purely. Let Magistrates govern their subjects, and let subjects obey their Magistrates. Let every thing serve in its due place and order. Let the sun shine by day, the moon and the stars by night: let the sea give fish, the earth grain, the woods wild beasts and trees. etc. In like manner let not the law usurp the office and use of another: that is to say, of justification: but let it leave this only to grace, to the promise, and to faith. What is then the office of the law? Transgression, or else (as he says in another place), The law entered in, that sin should abound. A goodly office forsooth. The law (says he) was added for transgressions: that is to say, it was added besides and after the promise, until Christ the Seed should come to whom it was promised.

Since this passage gives us the opportunity, we must say something about the arguments our opponents bring against the teaching of faith — namely, that we are made righteous by faith alone. There are many passages in both the Old and New Testaments concerning works and the rewards of works, which our opponents cite and think they can use to overturn the teaching of faith that we teach and defend. We must therefore be well equipped and prepared so that we can not only instruct our fellow believers but also answer these objections.

The Scholastics and all who do not understand the article of justification know no righteousness other than civil righteousness and the righteousness of the law — which the Gentiles in a general way also understand. From the law and from moral philosophy they borrow certain terms such as 'to do' and 'to work,' and apply them to spiritual matters — which they do in the most perverse and harmful way. We must take great care to distinguish between Christian theology and human philosophy. The Scholastics themselves grant and teach that in the natural order, being comes before doing — the tree exists before the fruit. They also grant that a morally performed work is not truly good unless it is preceded by sound reason and a right will or good intention. So they require a right judgment of reason and a good intention to come before the work — that is, they acknowledge that the person must be morally upright before the work. Yet in theology and spiritual matters — where this principle should apply most of all — they are so dull and thick-headed that they reverse everything entirely, placing the work before reason and the good intention.

Therefore the word 'doing' means one thing in nature, another in moral philosophy, and another in theology. In nature the tree must exist first, and then the fruit. In moral philosophy, doing requires a good intention and sound reason as its foundation — and here all the philosophers stop and go no further. Therefore the theologians say that moral philosophy does not have God as its object and final end. For Aristotle, a Sadducee, or any person of civic decency calls it a right reason and a good intention if one seeks the public benefit of the community, and its peace and order. A philosopher or law-worker rises no higher than this. He does not think that through right reason and a good intention he will obtain forgiveness of sins and eternal life — as the sophist or the monk does. Therefore the pagan philosopher is much better than such a hypocrite. For the philosopher stays within his proper limits — considering only the honesty and peace of the civil community — without mixing heavenly and earthly things. The sophist, by contrast, imagines that God regards his good intentions and works. Therefore he mixes earthly and heavenly things together and abuses God's name. And this idea he takes from moral philosophy — except that he misuses it far worse than the pagan ever did.

We Christians must therefore rise higher than nature and philosophy with this word 'doing' — so that it is made entirely new, joined with a right judgment of reason and a good will, not morally but divinely. This means: knowing and believing by the word of the Gospel that God has sent His Son into the world to redeem us from sin and death. Here 'doing' is an entirely new thing — unknown to reason, to philosophers, to law-workers, and to all people, for it is 'wisdom hidden in a mystery' (1 Corinthians 2:7). Therefore in theology the work necessarily requires faith to precede it.

Therefore when our opponents cite passages of Scripture about the law and works — where the terms 'working' and 'doing' appear — you must answer them that these are theological terms, not natural or moral ones. If they are applied to natural or moral matters, they may be taken in their ordinary sense. But when they are applied to theological matters, they must include such a right reason and good will as is beyond human reason's comprehension. Therefore 'doing' in theology must always be understood as faithful doing. This faithful doing is a completely new realm — entirely separate from natural or moral doing. Therefore when we theologians speak of doing, we must necessarily mean that faithful doing, for in theology we have no right reason or good will or intention apart from faith.

This principle is well illustrated in Hebrews 11, where many works of the saints from Scripture are cited. Among them is David, who killed a lion and a bear and struck down Goliath. The sophist or Scholastic — that foolish observer — looks at nothing but the outward appearance of the act, as an ox stares at a new gate. But the work of David must be examined by first looking at what kind of person David was before he did this deed. Then you will see that he was a person whose heart trusted in the Lord God of Israel — as the text plainly shows: 'The Lord who delivered me from the paw of the lion and from the paw of the bear will deliver me from the hand of this Philistine' (1 Samuel 17:37). And again: 'You come to me with a sword and with a spear and with a javelin, but I come to you in the name of the Lord of hosts, the God of the armies of Israel, whom you have defied. This day the Lord will deliver you into my hand... for the battle is the Lord's, and He will give you into our hand' (1 Samuel 17:45-47). You see then that David was a righteous man, accepted by God, and strong and constant in faith before he performed this deed. David's doing, therefore, is not a natural or moral doing but a faithful doing.

The same principle applies to Abel, as the same letter says: 'By faith Abel offered to God a more acceptable sacrifice than Cain' (Hebrews 11:4). If the Scholastics encounter this passage as it appears in Genesis — where both Cain and Abel offered their gifts and the Lord regarded Abel and his offerings — they immediately seize on these words: 'They offered their gifts to the Lord; the Lord had respect to the offerings of Abel.' And they cry out: 'Here you see that God regarded the offerings — therefore works justify!' These blind people treat righteousness as if it were a purely moral matter, looking only at the outward appearance of the work rather than at the heart of the one who does it — even though even in philosophy they are forced to look not just at the bare act but at the good will of the doer. And yet here they focus entirely on the words 'they offered gifts' and 'the Lord had regard to Abel and his offerings,' while failing to see that the text of Genesis plainly says the Lord first regarded the person of Abel, who was pleasing to God because of his faith, and only then his offerings. In theology, therefore, we speak of faithful works, sacrifices, offerings, and gifts — that is, works that are offered and done in faith, as the letter to the Hebrews declares: 'By faith Abel offered a more acceptable sacrifice; by faith Enoch was taken up; by faith Abraham obeyed God' (Hebrews 11:4-8). We have a clear rule laid out for us in Hebrews 11 for answering every objection our opponents raise about the law and works — simply say: this person did this deed in faith. With this answer you resolve all their arguments and silence them with nothing left to reply.

From this it is abundantly clear that in theology and in matters of God, the work is worthless without faith — you must have faith before you begin to work. For 'without faith it is impossible to please God; and whoever would draw near to God must believe' (Hebrews 11:6). This is why in Hebrews the sacrifice of Abel is said to be better than the sacrifice of Cain — because Abel believed, and therefore his work or sacrifice was a faithful one. Cain, by contrast, was wicked and hypocritical — he had no faith or trust in God's grace and favor, only the presumption of his own righteousness. Therefore his work, by which he aimed to please God, was hypocritical and faithless. Even our opponents are therefore compelled to grant that in all the works of the saints, faith is presupposed — and it is on account of that faith that their works please God and are accepted by Him. In theology, therefore, there is a new kind of doing, entirely unlike the moral doing.

We also commonly distinguish faith in this way: faith is sometimes spoken of without the accompanying work, and sometimes together with the work. Just as a craftsman speaks differently depending on the material he is working with, and a gardener speaks differently of a barren tree versus a fruitful one, so the Holy Spirit speaks of faith in Scripture in different ways — sometimes of faith absolutely, and sometimes of faith in its compound or 'incarnate' form. Absolute faith is what Scripture describes when it speaks simply of justification or of those who are justified — as in the letters to the Romans and the Galatians. But when Scripture speaks of rewards and works, it speaks of the compound or incarnate faith — faith at work. Some examples of this kind of faith: 'faith working through love' (Galatians 5:6); 'Do this and you will live' (Luke 10:28); 'If you want to enter into life, keep the commandments' (Matthew 19:17); 'The one who does these things will live by them' (Romans 10:5); 'Turn away from evil and do good' (Psalm 34:14). In all these passages and similar ones throughout Scripture, wherever doing is mentioned, Scripture is always speaking of faithful doing. When it says 'Do this and you will live,' it means: 'First see that you have faith, that you have a right mind and a right will — that is, faith in Christ. Once you have this faith, then work on, with God's blessing.'

Is it any wonder, then, that rewards are promised to this incarnate faith — that is, to working faith, like the faith of Abel, or to faithful works? And why should Holy Scripture not speak in different ways about faith, just as it speaks in different ways about Christ as God and man — sometimes of His whole person, sometimes of His two natures separately, whether His divine nature or His human nature? When it speaks of the natures separately, it speaks of Christ in an absolute sense; but when it speaks of the divine nature united in one person with the human nature, it speaks of Christ in His compound, incarnate form. Among the Scholastics there is a well-known rule about the communication of attributes — where the properties belonging to Christ's divinity are attributed to His humanity — and this can be seen throughout Scripture. So in Luke 2, the angel calls the infant born of the virgin Mary the Savior of all people and the Lord of both angels and men. And in Luke 1, He is called the Son of God. I can therefore truthfully say that the infant lying in the manger in the virgin's arms created heaven and earth and is Lord of the angels. Here I am speaking of a man — but in this statement 'man' is being used in a new way, referring back to the divinity — meaning: this God who has become man has created all things. Creation belongs to Christ's divinity alone; the humanity does not create. And yet it is entirely correct to say 'the man created,' because the divinity, which alone creates, is incarnate with the humanity — and therefore the humanity, together with the divinity, shares in those divine properties. Therefore it is completely right and godly to say: 'This man Jesus Christ led Israel out of Egypt, struck Pharaoh, and worked all the wonders from the beginning of the world.'

Therefore when Scripture says 'If you want to enter into life, keep the commandments' (Matthew 19:17) or 'Do this and you will live' (Luke 10:28), we must first ask what kind of keeping and doing is meant. For in these and similar passages — as I said — Scripture is speaking of compound faith, not of naked and simple faith. And the meaning of 'Do this and you will live' is this: you will live on account of this faithful doing, or this doing will give you life — and it does so because of your faith alone. In this way justification is attributed to faith alone, just as creation is attributed to the divinity. And yet, just as it is truly said that Jesus the Son of Mary created all things, so justification may be attributed to incarnate faith — to faithful doing. Therefore we must never think, as the sophists and hypocrites do, that works justify in an absolute sense or that rewards are promised to moral works. Rewards are promised only to faithful works.

Let us therefore allow the Holy Spirit to speak as He does in Scripture — sometimes of naked, simple, and absolute faith, and sometimes of compound and incarnate faith. Everything that is attributed to works properly belongs to faith. For works must not be looked at through moral eyes but through the eyes of faith and the Spirit. Faith is the divinity of works — spread throughout the works of the faithful just as the divinity is spread throughout the humanity of Christ. Faith, if I may say so, is the one who does it all in faithful works. Abraham is called faithful because faith pervades the whole person of Abraham — so that when I look at him working, I see not the physical or the working Abraham, but the believing Abraham.

Therefore when you read in Scripture how the fathers, prophets, and kings worked righteousness, raised the dead, and overcame kingdoms, you must remember that such statements must be explained as the letter to the Hebrews explains them: 'By faith they worked righteousness; by faith they raised the dead; by faith they overcame kings and kingdoms' (Hebrews 11:33-35). So faith incorporates the work and gives it its perfection. Our opponents, if they are being reasonable, cannot deny this — and they have no real objection to raise against it. They may cry out that Scripture often speaks of doing and walking. We always answer: it also speaks of faithful doing. For reason must first be enlightened by faith before it can work rightly. Once it has a true knowledge and understanding of God, the work is then incorporated into that faith — so that whatever is attributed to faith is afterward attributed to works as well, but only because of faith alone.

Therefore in reading Scripture we must learn to distinguish between the true and the hypocritical — the moral and the spiritual — doing of the law. This will enable us to declare the true meaning of all those passages that appear to uphold the righteousness of works. Now, the true doing of the law is a faithful and spiritual doing — which the person who seeks righteousness by works does not have. Therefore every self-styled doer of the law and every holy moral performer is under the curse. For he walks in presumption of his own righteousness against God, seeking to be justified by human free will and reason — and so in performing the law, he does not actually do it. This is what it means, according to Paul, to be under the works of the law: that hypocrites perform the law, and yet in performing it they do not actually do it — for they understand the word 'doing' according to the law's literal surface, which in true Christian theology is worthless. They do many things, but in the presumption of their own righteousness, without the knowledge of God and without faith — as the Pharisee did in Luke 18, and as Paul did before his conversion. Therefore they are blind, miserably in error, and remain under the curse.

Again I remind you: passages that our opponents cite from Scripture concerning works and their rewards must be interpreted spiritually. If they cite Daniel 4:27 — 'Redeem your sins with acts of righteousness and your iniquities with mercy to the oppressed' — do not interpret this in a moral sense but in the spirit of the Gospel. Then you will see that the word 'redeem' points not to a moral doing but a spiritual one — that is, it includes faith. For in Scripture, a work — as I have said — also requires a right will and a right judgment of reason to precede it, not a moral judgment as our opponents would have it, but a divine and spiritual one, which is faith. By this means you will be able to silence these persistent sophists. They themselves are compelled to grant — and indeed teach from Aristotle — that every good work proceeds from a person's choice or will. If this is true in philosophy, how much more must a right will and sound judgment guided by faith precede the work in theology and divine matters? This is what all imperative words — all commanding words — and all words that teach the law mean in Scripture, as the letter to the Hebrews makes plain: 'By faith Abel offered...'

Now, even granting that this answer is not sufficient — though in fact it is most certain and sure — let this still stand as the argument of all arguments, the supreme standard for every Christian to hold before them against all temptations and objections, whether from opponents or from the devil himself: to take hold of and cling to the one Head, who is Christ. And further: even if the sophists, being craftier and more subtle than I, should so entangle and trap me with their arguments for works against faith that I could find no way to answer them — which is in fact impossible — I would still give credit and reverence to Christ alone rather than be persuaded by all the passages they could possibly bring forward to establish the righteousness of works against the teaching of faith.

Therefore the answer to these opponents must be given simply and plainly like this: Here is Christ; there are the Scripture's testimonies about the law and works. Christ is the Lord of Scripture and of all works. He is also Lord of heaven, earth, the Sabbath, the temple, righteousness, life, wrath, sin, death — and of everything whatever. And Paul His apostle shows that He was made sin and became a curse for me. I therefore conclude that it fell entirely to Christ Himself to overcome my sin, my death, and my curse in His own body — not to the works of the law or to any work of mine. Even reason is compelled to agree and say that Christ is not a work of the law or a work of mine — that His blood and death is not circumcision, keeping of ceremonies, and still less a monk's robe, a shaved head, fasting, vows, or the like. Therefore, if He is the price of my redemption — if He was made sin and curse so that He might justify me and bless me — then I do not care if you bring a thousand Scripture passages for the righteousness of works against the righteousness of faith and cry as loudly as you like that Scripture is against me. I have the Author and Lord of Scripture with me, on whose side I will stand rather than believe all the company of law-workers and merit-seekers. It is in fact impossible that Scripture should be against this teaching — except in the minds of senseless and hardened hypocrites. Among the godly and those with understanding, Scripture bears witness for its Lord, Jesus Christ. So work out for yourself how you will reconcile the Scripture you say is against my teaching. As for me, I will hold to the Author of Scripture.

Therefore if anyone feels unable to adequately reconcile such Scripture passages or answer the objections of opponents, and yet is forced to hear their arguments and objections, let him give this simple and plain answer: 'You are setting against me the servant — that is, Scripture — and not even all of it, not even its main message, but only certain passages about works.' 'I leave that servant to you.' 'But I come with the Lord Himself, who stands above Scripture and who is for me the merit and price of righteousness and eternal life.' 'I take hold of Him, I cling to Him, and I leave works to you — works you never actually did.' No devil or law-worker can ever take this answer from you or demolish it. Beyond this, you are safe before God — for your heart remains fixed on the object called Christ, who was nailed to the cross and made a curse, not for Himself but for us, as the text says. Hold fast to this and set it against every sentence about the law and works, and say: 'Do you hear this, Satan?' At that, he must give way — for he knows that Christ is his Lord and Master.

Verse 11. Now it is evident that no one is justified before God by the law, for 'The righteous shall live by faith.'

This is another argument drawn from the testimony of the prophet Habakkuk. It is a statement of great weight and authority, which Paul sets against all the passages that speak of the law and works. It is as if he were saying: Why do we need any lengthy debate? Here I bring forward the clearest possible testimony from the prophet, against which no one can object: 'The righteous shall live by faith' (Habakkuk 2:4). If the righteous lives by faith, then he does not live by the law — for the law is not of faith. And here Paul excludes works and the law as things contrary to faith.

The sophists — always ready to corrupt the Scripture — twist and distort this passage in the following way: 'The righteous man does live by faith' — meaning, they say, by a faith that is active and working, or 'formed' and made perfect by love. But if it is a faith not formed by love, then it does not justify. This explanation they themselves invented, and by it they do violence to the prophet's words. If by 'formed' or 'furnished' faith they meant the true faith that the Gospel teaches, their explanation would not trouble me at all — for then faith would not be separated from love, only from a shallow opinion of faith. We too distinguish between a counterfeit faith and a true faith. Counterfeit faith is the kind that hears about God, about Christ, and about all the mysteries of His incarnation and our redemption; it takes in and carries away what it hears, can even talk about it fluently — and yet nothing remains in the heart except a bare opinion and an echo of the Gospel. How far this falls short of true faith is plain from this: it neither renews nor transforms the heart. It does not make a new person but leaves him in the emptiness of his old ways and habits. This is a thoroughly dangerous kind of faith. The moral philosopher is actually far better than the hypocrite who holds such a faith.

Therefore if our opponents were making a distinction between their 'formed' faith and a false or counterfeit faith — as I described — their distinction would not trouble me. But they speak of faith in such a way that they make love the form and perfection of faith. This is to place love above faith and to attribute righteousness not to faith but to love. And when they refuse to attribute righteousness to faith except for love's sake, they in effect attribute nothing to faith at all.

But the Holy Spirit, who gives every person both mouth and tongue, knows how to speak. He could have said — as the sophists wickedly imagine — 'The righteous man shall live by faith formed and perfected by love.' But He deliberately leaves that out and says plainly: 'The righteous man lives by faith.' Let these foolish sophists therefore take their wicked and poisonous interpretation and go. We will hold fast to and exalt this faith — the faith that God Himself has named 'faith': a true and certain faith that does not doubt God, does not doubt His promises, does not doubt the forgiveness of sins through Christ. We dwell safe and secure in Christ our object and keep continually before our eyes the suffering and blood of the Mediator and all His benefits. And it is faith alone — faith that takes hold of Christ — that keeps these benefits from being taken from our sight or wrested away from us. Therefore, setting aside this poisonous interpretation, we must understand this passage as speaking of faith alone. This is exactly what Paul declares when he argues against the notion of faith formed with love.

Verse 12. But the law is not of faith.

The Scholastics say: The righteous man lives if his faith is formed and adorned with love. But Paul says the opposite: 'The law is not of faith.' But what is the law? Is it not also a commandment about love? Indeed, the law commands nothing other than love, as the text itself shows: 'You shall love the Lord your God with all your soul' (Deuteronomy 6:5); and 'showing lovingkindness to thousands who love Him and keep His commandments' (Deuteronomy 5:10); and 'On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets' (Matthew 22:40). If the law, which commands love, is therefore contrary to faith, it necessarily follows that love is not of faith. So Paul plainly refutes the sophists' invented gloss about 'formed faith' and speaks of faith as it stands separate from the law. Once the law is set aside, love is also set aside — along with everything that belongs to the law. Faith alone remains — faith that justifies and gives eternal life.

Paul therefore argues here from a plain testimony of the prophet: that no one obtains justification and life before God except the believing person, who receives righteousness and eternal life without the law and without love — by faith alone. The reason is that the law is not of faith — that is, the law is not faith, nor anything belonging to faith, for the law does not believe. Nor are the works of the law faith, or of faith. Faith is therefore something entirely different from the law, just as the promise is entirely different from the law. For the promise is not received by working but by believing. Indeed there is as great a difference between the promise and the law — and therefore between faith and works — as there is between heaven and earth.

It is therefore impossible for faith to be of the law. Faith rests in the promise alone; it alone takes hold of God and knows Him; it stands entirely in receiving good things from God. The law and works, by contrast, consist in demanding, performing, and giving to God. Abel, when he offered his sacrifice, gave to God — but in believing, he received from God. Paul therefore concludes powerfully from Habakkuk that the righteous man lives by faith alone. For the law in no way belongs to faith, since the law is not the promise — and faith rests on the promise alone. Therefore, just as there is a difference between the law and the promise, so there is between works and faith. The Scholastics' gloss, which joins the law with faith — or rather, quenches faith and puts the law in faith's place — is therefore wicked and false. Note here that Paul always speaks of those who perform the law in a moral and external sense, not according to the Gospel. But whatever is said of good works according to the meaning of the Gospel is attributed to faith alone.

Verse 12. But the law is not based on faith; on the contrary, 'The one who does them shall live by them.'

I take this clause to be spoken with a touch of irony. I do not deny that it may also be read in a straightforward sense: that those who fulfill the law outwardly and without faith — in a civil, external manner — shall 'live in them,' meaning they will not be punished externally but will receive earthly rewards. But I read this passage in the broader sense, much as I read Christ's words 'Do this and you will live' — that is, with something of a sarcastic edge. Paul is here showing what the true righteousness of the law and of the Gospel each consist in. The righteousness of the law is to fulfill the law, according to the statement: 'He who does them shall live by them.' The righteousness of faith is to believe, according to the statement: 'The righteous man lives by faith.' The law therefore requires that we yield something to God. But faith does not require that we work or give God anything — only that in believing His promise, we receive from Him. Therefore the highest function of the law is to exact and perform, while the function of faith is to receive the promise. Faith is the faith of the promise; the work is the work of the law. Paul therefore stands on this word 'doing' — and to show clearly what the confidence of the law is and what the confidence of works is, he sets them side by side, promise against law, and faith against works. He says that from the law comes nothing but doing; but faith is a completely different thing — it is what receives and holds the promise.

Away, then, with these sophists and their accursed interpretation, and with their blind distinction between formed and unformed faith. These newly coined terms — 'formed faith,' 'unformed faith,' 'faith acquired by human effort,' and the like — are monsters invented by the devil for no other purpose than to disfigure and destroy true Christian teaching and faith, to blaspheme and trample Christ underfoot, and to establish the righteousness of works. Works must certainly follow faith — but faith must not be works, nor works faith. The realms and limits of the law and of faith must be rightly distinguished from one another.

When we believe, therefore, we simply live by faith in Christ — who is without sin and who is our shelter, our propitiation, and our forgiveness. By contrast, when we perform the law, we do work — but we have neither righteousness nor life. For the office of the law is not to make righteous and to give life, but to expose sin and to destroy. The law does say: 'He who does these things shall live by them.' But where is the person who actually does the law — who loves God with all his heart and his neighbor as himself? No one does it — and even those who try their hardest, in their doing fail to do it — and therefore remain under the curse. But faith does not work; it believes in Christ the Justifier. A person therefore lives not because of his doing but because of his believing. And the faithful person does begin to fulfill the law — and whatever he fails to do is forgiven through the remission of sins for Christ's sake, and whatever still remains is not counted against him.

Paul in this passage, and in Romans 10, sets the righteousness of the law and the righteousness of faith side by side when he says: 'He who does these things shall live by them' (Romans 10:5). It is as if he were saying: It would be a wonderful thing if we could fulfill the law — but since no one does, we must flee to Christ, who is 'the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes' (Romans 10:4). He was made under the law to redeem those who were under the law. By believing in Him we receive the Holy Spirit and begin to do the law — and what we fall short of is not counted against us because of our faith in Christ. But in the life to come we will no longer need faith. For then we will no longer see dimly through a glass (as we do now) but face to face (1 Corinthians 13:12). There will be a glorious brightness of the eternal Majesty — we will see God as He truly is. There will be a true and perfect knowledge and love of God, a perfect light of reason, and a perfect will — not a moral and philosophical will as the papist Scholastics dream of, but a heavenly, divine, and eternal one. Here in the meantime, by faith in the Spirit, we await the hope of righteousness (Galatians 5:5). Those, by contrast, who seek forgiveness of sins through the law rather than through Christ, never fulfill the law and remain under the curse.

Paul therefore calls only those righteous who are justified through the promise — through faith in the promise — without the law. Those who are of the works of the law and claim to be doing the law are not actually doing it. For the apostle simply concludes that all who are of the works of the law are under the curse — and they would not be under the curse if they were actually fulfilling the law. It is true in principle that a person who does the works of the law shall live in them — that is, shall be blessed. But no such person can be found. Now, since the law has two uses — one civil and one spiritual — whoever wants to understand this statement in a civil sense may do so: 'He who does these things shall live in them' means that if a person outwardly obeys the magistrate in the realm of civil governance, he will escape punishment and death — the civil authority has no power over him. This is the civil use of the law, which serves to restrain those who are rough and lawless. But Paul here is not speaking of this use — he is handling this passage as a theologian, and therefore a necessary condition is implied. It is as if he said: if people could keep the law, they would be blessed. But where are those people? They are not doers of the law unless they have first been made righteous before and apart from the law — through faith.

Therefore when Paul condemns those who are of the works of the law, he is not speaking of those who are justified through faith, but of those who try to be justified by works without faith in Christ. I say this lest anyone follow the foolish thinking of Jerome, who being misled by Origen understood nothing of Paul and regarded him as nothing more than an ordinary civil lawyer. On that basis Jerome reasons like this: the holy patriarchs, prophets, and kings were circumcised and offered sacrifice — therefore they kept the law. But it would be wicked to say they are under the curse — therefore not all who are of the works of the law are under the curse. In this way he argues against Paul with no discernment whatsoever, making no distinction between the true doers of the law who are justified by faith and those workers who seek to be justified by the law without faith.

Paul here is speaking nothing against those who are justified by faith and are truly doing the law — for they are not of the works of the law. He is speaking against those who not only fail to keep the law but actually sin against it. For the law commands that we should fear, love, and worship God in true faith. These people do not do this — instead they devise new forms of worship and works that God never commanded, by which God is not appeased but more provoked to anger, according to the words: 'In vain do they worship Me, teaching as doctrines the commandments of men' (Matthew 15:9). Therefore they are full of ungodliness — rebels against God and idolaters, sinning most seriously against the first commandment above all others. Beyond this, they also carry sinful desires and other deep disorders. In short, there is nothing good in them — they only want to appear righteous on the outside and have people believe they are doing the law.

We who are made righteous by faith — as were the patriarchs, prophets, and all the saints — are likewise not of the works of the law in the matter of justification. But because we are still in the flesh and still have the remnants of sin in us, we are under the law — yet not under the curse, because those remnants of sin are not counted against us for Christ's sake, in whom we believe. For the flesh is an enemy of God, and the sinful desires that remain in us not only fail to fulfill the law but actually sin against it, rebelling within us and dragging us into bondage (Romans 7). Now, if the law is not fulfilled even in the saints — if many things contrary to the law happen in them, if evil desires and the remnants of sin remain in them and so hinder them that they cannot fear and love God, cannot call on God with firm confidence, cannot praise God and honor His word as they ought — how much more is this true of someone who has not yet been justified by faith but is an enemy of God who despises and hates God's word and work with his whole heart? You see then that Paul is speaking here of those who seek to fulfill the law and be justified by it without yet having received faith — not of the fathers and saints as Jerome imagines, who are already justified by faith.

Verse 13. Christ redeemed us from the curse of the Law, having become a curse for us — for it is written, 'Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree' (Deuteronomy 21:23).

Here again Jerome and the Scholastics who follow him are deeply troubled by this most comforting passage and torture it miserably, trying to remove from Christ the ignominy of being called a curse. They get around the statement by claiming Paul did not mean it seriously. Most wickedly, they therefore assert that Paul's Scripture contradicts itself. They make their case like this: the statement from Moses that Paul cites here, they say, was not speaking of Christ. Furthermore, the universal word 'everyone' which Paul uses is not present in Moses. Also, Paul leaves out the words 'of God' which appear in Moses. Finally, it is clear enough that Moses was speaking of a thief or criminal who by his evil deeds deserved the gallows, as Deuteronomy 21 plainly shows. Therefore they ask: how can this passage be applied to Christ — that He is cursed of God and hanged on a tree — when He is no criminal or thief but righteous and holy? This may impress simple and uninformed people, who think the sophists or Scholastics are saying something clever and devout by this — protecting the honor and glory of Christ by warning Christians not to think so wickedly of Him as to say He became a curse. Let us therefore consider what Paul actually means.

Paul chose his words here with great care and deliberate precision. But here again we must make a distinction, as Paul's own words make plain. For he does not say Christ was made a curse for Himself, but for us. The entire weight of the matter rests on these two words: 'for us.' For Christ is innocent in His own person and therefore ought never to have been hanged on a tree. But because according to the law of Moses every thief and criminal was to be hanged, Christ was also hanged according to the law — because He took on the person of a sinner and a thief, not of one, but of all sinners and thieves. For we are the sinners and thieves, guilty of death and eternal condemnation. Christ took all our sins upon Himself and died for them on the cross. Therefore it was necessary that He should become a transgressor — and as the prophet Isaiah says (Isaiah 53), He was 'numbered with the transgressors.'

And this, without doubt, all the prophets foresaw in the Spirit: that Christ would become the greatest sinner, murderer, adulterer, thief, rebel, and blasphemer who ever existed or could exist in all the world. For He, being made a sacrifice for the sins of the whole world, is no longer in that role an innocent person without sins — He is no longer the Son of God born of the virgin Mary standing in His own person. He is a sinner who carries the sin of Paul, who was a blasphemer, a persecutor, and an oppressor; of Peter, who denied Christ; of David, who was an adulterer and murderer and caused the Gentiles to blaspheme the name of the Lord; and in short, who carries and bears the sins of all people in His body. Not because He committed them Himself, but because He received them — sins committed by us — and laid them on His own body to make satisfaction for them with His own blood. Therefore the general statement from Moses encompasses Him as well — though in His own person He was innocent — because it found Him among sinners and transgressors. It is like a magistrate who takes someone as a thief and punishes him when he is found among other thieves and criminals, even if he himself has done nothing worthy of death. Christ was not merely found among sinners by chance — He willingly, by the will of His Father, chose to be a companion of sinners, taking upon Himself the flesh and blood of those who were sinners, thieves, and plunged in every kind of wickedness. When the law therefore found Him among thieves, it condemned and killed Him as a thief.

The sophists and Scholastics rob us of this knowledge of Christ and of this most heavenly comfort — namely, that Christ was made a curse in order to deliver us from the curse of the law — when they separate Him from sins and sinners and set Him before us only as an example to be imitated. By doing this they make Christ not only useless to us but actually a judge and a tyrant who is angry with our sins and condemns sinners. But we must understand Christ as wrapped up in our sins, our curse, our death, and all our evils — just as truly as He is wrapped up in our flesh and blood.

But someone will say: 'It is deeply offensive and scandalous to call the Son of God a cursed sinner.' I answer: If you will deny that He is a sinner and under the curse, then you must also deny that He was crucified and died. For it is no less scandalous to say that the Son of God — as our faith confesses — was crucified and suffered the punishments of sin and death, than to say He became a sinner and was cursed. But if it is not scandalous to confess and believe that Christ was crucified between two thieves, then it is not scandalous to say He was made a curse and the greatest of all sinners. Paul's words are not empty: 'Christ became a curse for us.' And as 2 Corinthians 5:21 says: 'God made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, so that in Him we might become the righteousness of God.'

In the same way, John the Baptist calls Him 'the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world' (John 1:29). He is truly innocent — for He is the spotless and undefiled Lamb of God. But because He bears the sins of the world, His innocence is charged with the sin and guilt of the entire world. Whatever sins I, you, and all of us have committed or will ever commit — these are as truly Christ's own sins as if He had committed them Himself. In short: our sin must become Christ's own sin, or else we will perish forever. This true knowledge of Christ — which Paul and the prophets have set before us so plainly — is what the wicked Scholastics and sophists have darkened and disfigured.

Isaiah says this of Christ in chapter 53: 'God laid on Him the iniquity of us all' (Isaiah 53:6). We must not water down these words but leave them in their full and proper meaning. For God does not play games in the words of the prophet but speaks in complete earnest, and out of immeasurable love — declaring that Christ, this Lamb of God, would bear the sins of us all. But what does it mean to bear? The sophists answer: to be punished. Very well. But why is Christ punished? Is it not because He has sin and bears sin? That Christ has sin, the Holy Spirit Himself testifies in Psalm 40: 'My sins have overtaken me, and I am not able to look up; they are more than the hairs of my head' (Psalm 40:12). In this psalm and in others the Holy Spirit speaks in the person of Christ and plainly witnesses that He had sins. For these words are not the voice of an innocent Christ, but of a suffering Christ who took upon Himself the person of all sinners and was therefore made guilty of the sins of the whole world.

Therefore Christ was not only crucified and died — sin also was, through divine love, laid upon Him. When sin was laid upon Him, the law came and said: 'Every sinner must die.' 'Therefore, O Christ, if You will stand in for sinners, take on their guilt, and suffer their punishment, You must also bear their sin and their curse.' Paul therefore rightly cites that general statement from Moses and applies it to Christ: 'Everyone who hangs on a tree is cursed by God; but Christ hung on a tree; therefore Christ is cursed by God.'

And it is a singular and remarkable comfort for all Christians to clothe Christ with our sins in this way — to wrap Him in my sins, your sins, and the sins of the whole world, and to see Him bearing all our iniquities. For beholding Him in this way easily overcomes all the invented ideas of the papists about justification by works. For they imagine — as I have said — a certain faith 'formed and adorned with love.' By this, they say, sins are taken away and people are justified before God. But what is this but to unwrap Christ, strip Him clean of our sins, declare Him innocent, and load us with our own sins — looking at those sins not in Christ but in ourselves? What is this but to take Christ away entirely and make Him utterly useless to us? For if we put away sin through the works of the law and through love, then Christ does not take them away. But if He is the Lamb of God appointed from the beginning to take away the sins of the world — and if He is so wrapped in our sins that He became a curse for us — then it necessarily follows that we cannot be justified by works. For God has laid our sins not on us but on His Son Christ, so that by bearing the punishment for them He might be our peace and by His wounds we might be healed (Isaiah 53:5). Therefore our sins cannot be removed by us. All of Scripture bears witness to this — and we also confess it in the articles of the Christian faith when we say: 'I believe in Jesus Christ the Son of God, who suffered, was crucified, and died for us.'

From this it is plain that the teaching of the Gospel — which above all others is the sweetest and most filled with unique consolation — says nothing about our works or the works of the law, but only about the immeasurable mercy and love of God toward us, who are utterly wretched and miserable sinners. Our most merciful Father, seeing us crushed and held captive under the curse of the law — bound so tightly that we could never break free by our own strength — sent His only Son into the world and laid upon Him the sins of all people, saying: 'Be Peter the denier; be Paul the persecutor, blasphemer, and cruel oppressor; be David the adulterer; be the sinner who ate the apple in Paradise; be the thief hanging on the cross; in short, be the person who has committed the sins of all people — and pay and make satisfaction for them all.' Then the law came and said: 'I find Him a sinner — and such a one as has taken upon Himself the sins of all people, and I see no sin anywhere else but in Him — therefore He must die on the cross.' And so the law set upon Him and killed Him. In this way the whole world is purged and cleansed from all sin and delivered from death and all evils. Now that sin has been defeated and death abolished by this one Man, God would see nothing in the whole world — if it believed — but pure cleansing and righteousness. And if any remnants of sin were to remain, for the sake of the great glory that is in Christ, God would overlook them and not count them against us.

We must magnify the article of Christian righteousness above the righteousness of the law and works — even though no words can fully express its immeasurable greatness. The argument Paul handles here is the mightiest of all arguments against law-righteousness. It contains an irresistible logic that cannot be denied: if the sins of the whole world are in that one man Jesus Christ, then they are not in the world. But if they are not in Him, then they remain in the world. If Christ is made guilty of all the sins we have committed, then we are freed from all sins — not by ourselves, not by our own works or merits, but by Him. But if He is innocent and does not bear our sins, then we bear them, and in them we will die and be condemned. But thanks be to God, who has given us victory through our Lord Jesus Christ. Amen.

Now let us see how two such opposite things can be reconciled in this one person, Christ. Not only my sins and yours, but the sins of the whole world — past, present, and future — fall upon Him and set out to condemn Him, and indeed they do condemn Him. But in this same person — who is the greatest, the highest, and the only sinner — there is also an eternal and unconquerable righteousness. So these two meet head-on: the greatest and only sin against the greatest and only righteousness. One of them must be defeated and give way to the other, because they clash with such tremendous force. The sin of the whole world charges against righteousness with all its power. What happens in this battle? Righteousness is eternal, immortal, and unconquerable. Sin is also a powerful and savage tyrant that rules over the whole world, bringing all people into bondage. Indeed, sin is a mighty force that devours all of humanity — the learned, the unlearned, the holy, the powerful, and the wise. This tyrant rushes upon Christ and tries to swallow Him up as it does all others. But it does not see that Christ is a person of unconquerable and eternal righteousness. So in this battle, sin must be defeated and destroyed, and righteousness must triumph, live, and reign. In Christ, then, all sin is conquered, killed, and buried — and righteousness remains the victor and reigns forever.

In the same way, death — which is an all-powerful ruler over the entire world, killing kings, princes, and all people — charges mightily against life, thinking it can entirely overcome and swallow it up, and it does indeed appear to succeed. But because life was immortal, when it was overcome, it overcame in turn — conquering and killing death.

Death has therefore been conquered and abolished throughout the whole world through Christ, so that now it is merely a hollow shadow of death — stripped of its sting, it can no longer harm those who believe in Christ, who has become the death of death, as the prophet Hosea says: 'O death, I will be your death.'

Likewise, the curse — which is God's wrath upon the whole world — has the same kind of conflict with the blessing: that is, with grace and God's eternal mercy in Christ. The curse fights against the blessing and tries to defeat and destroy it, but it cannot. For the blessing is divine and eternal, and so the curse must give way. If the blessing in Christ could be overcome, then God Himself would also be overcome — and that is impossible. Therefore Christ, the power of God — righteousness, blessing, grace, and life — overcomes and destroys these monsters: sin, death, and the curse, without weapons, in His own body, as Paul delights to say: 'Disarming the rulers and authorities and putting them to open shame, by triumphing over them in Himself' (Colossians 2:15), so that they can no longer harm those who believe.

The phrase 'in Himself' makes this battle all the more wonderful and glorious. It shows that all these immeasurable things had to be accomplished in that one person, Christ — the curse, sin, and death destroyed, and the blessing, righteousness, and life taking their place — so that through this one person the whole creation would be renewed. If you look at the person of Christ, you will see sin, death, the wrath of God, hell, the devil, and all evils conquered and put to death in Him. Because Christ reigns by His grace in the hearts of believers, there is no sin, no death, no curse. But where Christ is not known, all these things still remain. So all who do not believe lack this immeasurable blessing and glorious victory. For this, as John says, is our victory that overcomes the world — our faith.

This is the central article of all Christian teaching, which the Scholastics have completely obscured. Here you see how necessary it is to believe and confess the article of Christ's divinity — for when Arius denied it, he also necessarily denied the article of our redemption. To overcome the sin of the world, death, the curse, and the wrath of God within Himself is not the work of any creature but of divine power alone. Therefore the one who overcomes these things in Himself must truly and by nature be God. Against the mighty power of sin, death, and the curse — which of itself rules throughout the world and over all creation — a greater and mightier power had to be set. No such power exists apart from the supreme divine power. To abolish sin, to destroy death, to remove the curse from within Himself — and in their place to give righteousness, bring life to light, and bestow the blessing — these are works of divine power alone. Since Scripture attributes all of these to Christ, He is life, righteousness, and blessing — God by nature and in essence. Those who deny the divinity of Christ lose all of Christianity and become no better than Gentiles. We must therefore learn the article of justification carefully, as I often urge you. All the other articles of our faith are contained in it, and if it stands sound, all the rest stand sound as well. When we teach that people are justified by Christ and that Christ is the conqueror of sin, death, and the eternal curse, we are also testifying that He is truly and substantially God.

This makes plain how terrible the wickedness and blindness of the papists was, when they taught that these cruel and mighty tyrants — sin, death, and the curse, which swallow up all humanity — must be overcome not by the righteousness of God's law (which, though just, good, and holy, can do nothing but bring people under the curse), but by human works: fasting, pilgrimages, masses, vows, and similar trifles. But has anyone ever actually conquered sin, death, and the devil equipped with such weapons? Paul in Ephesians 6 describes an entirely different kind of armor — and that is the armor we must use against these savage enemies. By leaving us naked and unarmed before these unconquerable tyrants, these blind guides have not only handed us over to be devoured but have made us ten times more wicked sinners than thieves, prostitutes, or murderers. For destroying sin, abolishing death, creating righteousness, and giving life belong to divine power alone. Yet the papists attributed this divine power to our own works, saying: 'If you do this deed or that, you will overcome sin, death, and the wrath of God.' In doing so they set us in God's place and, in effect, made us into God. In this way the papists, under the name of Christ, proved themselves to be seven times worse idolaters than the Gentiles ever were. For what happened to them is like what happens to a pig that, after being washed, goes right back to the mud. As Christ says, when a person falls away from faith, an evil spirit re-enters the house from which it was driven out, taking with it seven spirits more wicked than itself, and there they live. And the final condition of that person is worse than the first.

Let us therefore receive this sweet and comforting teaching with thanksgiving and with firm faith. It teaches that Christ, being made a curse for us — that is, a sinner subject to God's wrath — took on our person and laid our sins on His own shoulders, saying: 'I have taken on the sins that all people have committed.' Therefore He was truly made a curse under the law — not for Himself, but as Paul says, for us. For unless He had taken upon Himself my sins and yours and the sins of the whole world, the law would have had no claim over Him, since the law condemns only sinners and holds only them under the curse. Therefore He could neither have been made a curse nor have died, since sin is the only cause of the curse and of death — and from sin He was free. But because He took our sins upon Himself willingly, not by compulsion, He had to bear the punishment and the wrath of God — not for His own person, which was just and unconquerable and could not be found guilty, but for ours.

In this blessed exchange, He took on our sinful person and gave us His innocent and victorious person. Clothed in that person, we are freed from the curse of the law — for Christ willingly became a curse for us, saying: 'As for my own person, I am blessed and have no need of anything. But I will set aside my own person and take on your person and your condition — your human nature — and walk among you in it, suffering death in order to deliver you from death.' Taking on the sin of the whole world in our person, He was seized, suffered, was crucified, and put to death, and became a curse for us. But because He was a divine and eternal person, it was impossible that death could hold Him. So He rose from death on the third day and now lives forever — and in Him there is no longer any sin, no death, no trace of our condition, but only pure righteousness, life, and eternal blessedness.

This image and this mirror we must keep constantly before us and gaze upon it with steady eyes of faith. Whoever does so possesses the innocence and victory of Christ — no matter how great a sinner he may be. By faith alone, then, we are made righteous, for faith takes hold of Christ's innocence and victory. As much as you believe this, that much you receive. If you believe that sin, death, and the curse have been abolished, they are abolished. For Christ has conquered and removed these in Himself, and He wants us to believe that just as there is now no appearance of sin or trace of death in His own person, so there is none in ours — since He has accomplished everything for us.

Therefore, if sin troubles you and death frightens you, know that it is nothing more than a false illusion — a deception of the devil. For in truth there is no longer any sin, curse, death, or devil — Christ has conquered and abolished them all. The victory of Christ is absolutely certain, and there is no defect in the thing itself, which is completely true; the defect is in our unbelief. It is a hard thing for reason to believe these immeasurable blessings and unspeakable riches. On top of this, the devil with his spiritual forces never stops attacking us. The devil with his fiery darts, and his servants with their wicked and false teaching, work to strip this doctrine from us and destroy it entirely. We endure the hatred and fierce persecution of the devil and the world especially on account of this article, which we teach so diligently. For Satan feels the power and fruit of this article.

That there is no longer any sin, death, or curse — since Christ now reigns — we confess daily in the Apostles' Creed: 'I believe in a holy Church.' This is really nothing other than saying: 'I believe there is no sin, no curse, no death in the Church of God.' For those who believe in Christ are not sinners, are not subject to death — they are holy and righteous, lords over sin and death, living forever. But only faith sees this, which is why we say: 'I believe in a holy Church.' If you trust reason and your own eyes, you will conclude the opposite. You see many things in the godly that trouble you — you see them sometimes fall into sin, be weak in faith, be subject to anger, envy, and other evil passions — and so you conclude that the Church is not holy. I reject that conclusion. If I look at my own person or my brother's person, it will never appear holy. But if I look at Christ, who has sanctified and cleansed His Church, then it is completely holy — for He has taken away the sins of the whole world.

Therefore, where sin is seen and felt, there it is — in a sense — no longer sin. According to Paul's theology, there is no sin, no death, no curse remaining in the world, but only in Christ — the Lamb of God who has taken away the sins of the world, who was made a curse to deliver us from the curse. According to philosophy and human reason, by contrast, sin, death, and the curse exist nowhere except in the world, in the flesh, and in sinners. A Scholastic theologian can speak of sin no differently than a pagan philosopher. As a philosopher says, sin clings to a person as color clings to a wall — and therefore it must be cleansed by the opposite action, namely love. But true theology teaches that sin no longer exists in the world — for Christ, upon whom the Father laid the sins of the whole world, conquered and destroyed them in His own body. Having died once for sin and been raised again, He dies no more. Therefore wherever there is true faith in Christ, sin is abolished, dead, and buried. Where there is no faith in Christ, sin still remains. And though remnants of sin remain in the saints because their faith is not yet perfect, those remnants are still dead in the sense that they are not counted against them because of their faith in Christ.

This is a powerful argument that Paul presses against the righteousness of works. It is not the law or works that deliver us from the eternal curse — it is Christ alone. So I urge you, Christian reader: distinguish Christ from the law, and carefully follow what Paul says and how he says it. All who do not fulfill the law, he says, are necessarily under the curse. But no one fulfills the law — therefore all people are under the curse. He then adds a second proposition: Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us. It follows that the law and works do not redeem us from the curse — they actually bring us further under it. Love, therefore — which the Scholastics say gives form and perfection to faith — has not only failed to redeem us from the curse but actually wraps us more deeply in it.

This text makes it plain that all people — even apostles, prophets, and patriarchs — would have remained under the curse if Christ had not stood against sin, death, the curse of the law, and the wrath and judgment of God, and overcome them in His own body. No power of flesh and blood could have overcome those overwhelming and terrifying enemies. But Christ is not the law or a work of the law — He is a divine and human person who took upon Himself sin, the condemnation of the law, and death — not for Himself, but for us. Therefore all the weight and force of this rests on those two words: for us.

We must not imagine Christ as merely an innocent private person — as the Scholastics and nearly all the early church fathers did — holy and righteous only for Himself. It is true that Christ is perfectly pure and spotless. But you must not stop there, for you do not yet truly have Christ by simply knowing He is God and man. You truly have Him when you believe that this perfectly pure and innocent person has been freely given to you by the Father to be your High Priest and Savior — indeed, your servant. He set aside His own innocence and holiness, took your sinful person upon Himself, bore your sin, your death, and your curse, and was made a sacrifice and a curse for you — so that He might deliver you from the curse of the law.

You can see with what apostolic boldness Paul handles this argument about blessing and curse — for he not only makes Christ subject to the curse but says He was made a curse. Similarly in 2 Corinthians 5, Paul calls Him sin, saying: 'He made Him who knew no sin to be sin for us, so that in Him we might become the righteousness of God.' Although these statements can be explained this way — Christ is made a curse, meaning a sacrifice for the curse; sin, meaning a sacrifice for sin — I think it is better to keep the plain meaning of the words, because the force and impact is greater that way. For when a sinner truly comes to know himself, he feels not only that he is miserable, but that he is misery itself — not only that he is a sinner and is cursed, but that he is sin and the curse itself. It is indeed a great thing to bear sin, the wrath of God, the curse, and death. The person who truly feels these things — as Christ truly and fully felt them on behalf of all humanity — becomes in that sense sin, death, and the curse itself.

Paul handles this passage with a truly apostolic spirit. No sophist, lawyer, Jew, Anabaptist, or anyone else speaks as he does. Who else would dare take this passage from Moses — 'Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree' — and apply it to Christ? Just as Paul applied that statement to Christ, so we may apply to Christ not only the whole of Deuteronomy 27 but may gather all the curses of Moses' law together and interpret them as falling on Christ. For as Christ is innocent of this general curse in His own person, He is innocent of all the rest as well. And just as He is counted guilty under this general curse — being made a curse for us and hanging on the cross as a criminal, a blasphemer, a murderer, and a traitor — so He is counted guilty under all the others. For all the curses of the law are heaped together and laid upon Him, and He bore and suffered them all in His own body for us. Therefore He was not only cursed — He was made a curse for us.

This is the right, truly apostolic way to interpret Scripture. No one can speak this way without the Holy Spirit — that is, to comprehend the whole law in this one statement, 'Christ was made a curse for us,' and to lay the entire law upon Christ. And conversely, to gather together all the promises of Scripture and declare that they are all fulfilled at once in Christ. This is indeed an apostolic and irresistible argument — drawn not from one passage of the law but from the whole law — and Paul uses it as a sure foundation.

Here we can see how carefully Paul read the holy Scriptures and how precisely he weighed every word of this passage: 'In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed.' First, from the word 'blessing,' he draws this argument: if the blessing is to come to all nations, then all nations are under the curse — including the Jews who have the law. He then cites a Scripture passage to prove that all Jews under the law are under the curse: 'Cursed is everyone who does not abide by all the things written in this book.'

He also carefully weighs the phrase 'all nations.' From this he reasons that the blessing belongs not only to the Jews but to all the nations of the entire world. Since it belongs to all nations, it cannot be obtained through the law of Moses — for no nation had the law except the Jews. And even though the Jews had the law, they were so far from obtaining the blessing through it that the harder they tried to keep it, the more they fell under the curse. Therefore there must be another righteousness — one far greater than the righteousness of the law — through which not only Jews but all nations everywhere can receive the blessing.

Finally, Paul interprets the words 'in your seed' to mean that a specific person would come from Abraham's line — namely, Christ — through whom the blessing would then come upon all nations. Since Christ was to bless all nations, He also had to take away the curse from them. But He could not do this through the law, because the law only increases the curse. What did He do then? He joined Himself to the company of the cursed, taking on their flesh and blood, and placed Himself as the mediator between God and people, saying: 'Although I am flesh and blood and now live among the cursed, I am the blessed one through whom all people must be blessed.' In this way He united God and man in one person and, being joined to us who were cursed, was made a curse for us — hiding His blessing within our sin, our death, and our curse, which condemned Him and put Him to death. But because He was the Son of God, He could not be held by them — He overcame them, led them captive, and triumphed over them, carrying away with Him everything that had attached itself to the flesh He took on for our sake. Therefore all who cling to this flesh are blessed and delivered from the curse — that is, from sin and eternal death.

Those who do not understand this gift of Christ — which the Gospel particularly proclaims — and know no righteousness besides the righteousness of the law, are offended when they hear that works of the law are not necessary for salvation. They are offended to hear that people receive salvation by simply hearing and believing that Christ, the Son of God, took on our flesh and joined Himself to the cursed so that all nations might be blessed. They either understand nothing of this, or they understand it only in a worldly way. Their minds are taken up with other thoughts and imaginary ideas, and so these things strike them as strange. Indeed, even for us who have received the first fruits of the Spirit, it is impossible to understand these things fully — for they clash powerfully with human reason.

To sum up: all evils should have overwhelmed us, as they will overwhelm the wicked forever. But Christ, being made for us a transgressor of all laws, guilty of all our curses, our sins, and all our evils, came as mediator and embraced us wicked and condemned sinners. He took upon Himself and bore all our evils that should have crushed and tormented us forever. These evils beat Him down for a time and rolled over His head like water, as the prophet speaks in Christ's person: 'Your indignation has pressed hard upon me, and You have overwhelmed me with all Your waves.' And again: 'Your wrath has swept over me, and Your terrors have undone me.' By this means, through Christ, we are delivered from these eternal terrors and anguish and will enjoy eternal and immeasurable peace and joy — if we believe.

These are the deep mysteries and secrets that Moses also foreshadowed dimly in certain places — mysteries that the prophets and apostles knew and handed down to those who came after them. The saints of the Old Testament rejoiced more over these things as something yet to come than we do over the same things now that they have been fulfilled. We do acknowledge that this knowledge of Christ and the righteousness of faith is an immeasurable treasure, but we do not feel the full joy of spirit that the prophets and apostles felt. This is why they — and especially Paul — set forth the article of justification so richly and so diligently. For this is the proper work of an apostle: to proclaim the glory and the gift of Christ, and by doing so to lift up and comfort troubled and burdened consciences.

Verse 14. That the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles through Christ Jesus.

Paul always has this passage in view: 'In your seed,' and so on. The blessing promised to Abraham could come upon the Gentiles only through Christ, the seed of Abraham — and it could come only by this means: He had to become a curse, so that the promise made to Abraham, 'In your seed all nations shall be blessed,' might be fulfilled. There was no other way for this promise to be accomplished than for Jesus Christ to become a curse and join Himself to those who were cursed, so that He might remove the curse from them and bring them righteousness and life through His blessing. Note here — as I have warned before — that the word 'blessing' is not empty, as the Jews imagine when they take it to mean merely a greeting in speech or writing. Paul speaks here of sin and righteousness, of death and life before God. He is speaking of immeasurable and incomprehensible things when he says that the blessing of Abraham might come upon the Gentiles through Jesus Christ.

Consider also what merits we bring and by what means we receive this blessing. This is our merit and our preparation: that Christ Jesus was made a curse for us. For we are ignorant of God, enemies of God, dead in sin, and cursed — so what do we deserve? What can someone deserve who is cursed, ignorant of God, dead in sin, and subject to the wrath and judgment of God? When the Pope excommunicates a person, everything that person does is considered cursed. How much more, then, must we say that a person is cursed before God — as all of us were before we knew Christ — who does nothing but cursed things? Therefore there is no other way to escape the curse than to believe and say with firm confidence: 'You, Christ, are my sin and my curse — or rather, I am Your sin, Your curse, Your death, Your wrath of God, Your hell. And in return, You are my righteousness, my blessing, my life, my grace of God, and my heaven.' The text is plain: Christ was made a curse for us. Therefore we are the reason He was made a curse — indeed, we ourselves are His curse.

This is an excellent passage, full of spiritual comfort. Although it does not satisfy blind and hard-hearted Jews, it satisfies those of us who are baptized and have received this teaching — for it concludes with great power that we are blessed through the curse, the sin, and the death of Christ, meaning we are justified and made alive. As long as sin, death, and the curse remain in us, sin terrifies, death kills, and the curse condemns us. But when these are transferred and laid on Christ's back, those evils become His own and His good things become ours. Let us therefore learn, in every trial, to transfer sin, death, the curse, and all the evils that oppress us from ourselves onto Christ — and from Him to receive righteousness, mercy, life, and blessing. He bears all our evils upon Himself. God the Father laid on Him the iniquity of us all, as the prophet Isaiah says, and He willingly took it on — for He was not guilty. He did this to fulfill the will of His Father, by which we are made holy forever.

This is the infinite and boundless mercy of God that Paul would gladly express with all the eloquence and words he could find — yet the limited capacity of the human heart cannot comprehend it, much less put into words that unsearchable depth and burning love of God toward us. The immeasurable greatness of God's mercy not only makes it hard to believe, but actually produces unbelief itself. For I am hearing not merely that almighty God, the Creator of all things, is good and merciful — I am hearing that this supreme Majesty cared so deeply for me, a condemned sinner, a child of wrath and eternal death, that He did not spare His own dear Son but handed Him over to a disgraceful and shameful death. Hanging between two thieves, He was made a curse and sin for me — a cursed sinner — so that I might be made blessed, a child and heir of God. Who can praise and magnify this extraordinary goodness of God enough? Not even all the angels in heaven. The teaching of the Gospel — the book of God — speaks of far different things than any book of politics or philosophy, or even the book of Moses itself: namely, the unspeakable and divine gifts of God, which far surpass the understanding of both people and angels.

Verse 14. That we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.

'The promise of the Spirit' is a Hebrew expression meaning 'the Spirit that was promised.' The Spirit is freedom from the law, sin, death, the curse, hell, and the wrath and judgment of God. There is no merit or worthiness of ours here — only a free promise and a gift given through the seed of Abraham, so that we might be free from all evils and receive every good thing. We receive this freedom and gift of the Spirit through no merits of our own, only through faith alone. For faith alone takes hold of God's promise, as Paul plainly says here: that we might receive the promise of the Spirit, not by works, but by faith.

This is a sweet and truly apostolic teaching, showing that the very things many prophets and kings longed to see and hear have now been fulfilled and given to us. Passages like this one were gathered from the words of various prophets, who foresaw long before in the Spirit that all things would be transformed, restored, and governed by this one man, Christ. Even the Jews, who had the law of God, nevertheless looked for Christ beyond that law. None of the prophets or leaders of God's people established any new law. Elijah, Samuel, David, and all the other prophets remained under the law of Moses — they did not set up new tablets, a new kingdom, or a new priesthood. That great transformation of the kingly priesthood, the law, and the worship was reserved for the one about whom Moses had prophesied long before: 'The Lord your God will raise up for you a Prophet from your own people, from among your brothers — you shall listen to Him.' It is as if Moses said: 'You shall listen to Him alone, and to no other.'

The early church fathers understood this well. No one could teach more excellent or profound things than Moses himself, who gave outstanding laws covering matters of great importance — such as the Ten Commandments, and especially the first commandment: 'I am the Lord your God. You shall have no other gods before Me. You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart.' This command to love God extends even to the angels. It is therefore the source of all divine wisdom. And yet it was still necessary for another teacher to come — Christ — who would bring and teach something far surpassing even these excellent laws: namely, grace and the forgiveness of sins. This is therefore a powerful statement. In this brief phrase — 'that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith' — Paul pours out everything he could possibly say. When he can go no further — for nothing greater or more excellent could be said — he stops. He rests there.

Verse 15. Brethren, I speak in human terms: though it is only a man's covenant, once it has been ratified, no one sets it aside or adds to it.

After this principal and irresistible argument, Paul adds another based on the analogy of a human will or covenant. This may seem like a weak argument — not the kind an apostle should use to confirm something of such great importance. In weighty matters, we normally confirm earthly things by divine things, not divine and heavenly things by earthly comparisons. It is true that such arguments are among the weakest when they attempt to prove heavenly matters with earthly and perishable things, as Scotus is accustomed to doing. Scotus argues: a person is able to love God above all things, because he loves himself above all things — and therefore, since a greater good deserves more love, he is able to love God above all things by his own natural power. He then concludes that a person can, by pure natural strength alone, easily fulfill the commandment: 'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart.' His reasoning is: since a person can love even the smallest good thing above all things — giving up his own life, the most precious thing of all, for a little money — he can certainly do the same for God's sake.

You have often heard me say that civil ordinances come from God — He has established and approved them just as He has the sun, the moon, and all other creatures. Therefore an argument drawn from God's ordinances or from creation is valid, provided it is used correctly. The prophets very often used illustrations drawn from creation, calling Christ the Sun, the Church the Moon, and the preachers of the Word the stars. There are also many comparisons in the prophets involving trees, thorns, flowers, and the fruits of the earth. The New Testament is similarly full of such illustrations. Therefore, where God's ordinance is reflected in creation, an argument may rightly be drawn from it and applied to divine and heavenly matters.

Our Savior Christ does exactly this in Matthew 7, arguing from earthly things to heavenly: 'If you then, being evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask Him?' Similarly Paul argues: we must obey people; therefore, much more must we obey God. Jeremiah in chapter 35 argues the same way: the Rechabites obeyed their father — how much more ought you to have obeyed Me? These things — that fathers give gifts to their children and that children obey their parents — are established by God and are His ordinances. Such arguments are therefore valid when they are grounded in God's ordering of creation. But when they are drawn from people's corrupt desires, they are worthless. Scotus's argument is an example: 'I love the lesser good, therefore I love the greater even more.' I reject that conclusion. My loving is not God's ordinance — it is a corrupt, sinful distortion. It should be true that if I love myself or another creature, I should love God the Creator even more. But it is not true in practice, because the love with which I love myself is corrupt and against God.

I say this so that no one objects that an argument drawn from perishable things and applied to divine and spiritual matters is worthless. As I have said, such an argument is strong enough — provided it is grounded in God's ordinance, as is the case with the argument Paul makes here. The civil law, which is one of God's ordinances, says it is unlawful to break or alter a person's will. It commands that a person's last will and testament be strictly honored, since this is one of the most sacred and praiseworthy customs among people. Paul therefore argues from this custom of human wills: how is it that people obey other people, but not God? Political and civil ordinances — concerning wills and other such matters — are carefully upheld. Nothing is changed, nothing added, nothing taken away. But the testament of God — His promise concerning the spiritual blessing, that is, heavenly and eternal things, which the whole world ought to receive with great eagerness and honor with the deepest reverence — this is being changed. Paul's argument is forceful when he reasons from human examples and laws this way. When he says 'I speak in human terms,' he means: 'I bring you an illustration from human custom and practice.' When a person makes a last will, leaving his land and goods to his heirs, and then dies, that will is confirmed and ratified by the testator's death, so that nothing may be added or taken from it — by law and by common justice. Now if a person's will is upheld with such care that nothing can be added or taken away after death, how much more should God's last will be faithfully kept — the will He promised and gave to Abraham and his seed? When Christ died, it was confirmed in Him, and after His death the terms of His testament were opened — that is, the promised blessing of Abraham was proclaimed among all the nations scattered throughout the world. This was God's last will, confirmed by the death of Christ — and no one should change it or add to it, as those who teach the law and human traditions do. They say: unless you are circumcised, keep the law, do many works, and endure many things, you cannot be saved. That is not God's last will and testament. For He did not say to Abraham: 'If you do this or that, you will receive the blessing' — or that those who are circumcised and keep the law will receive it. He said: 'In your seed all the nations of the earth shall be blessed.' It is as if He said: 'Out of pure mercy I promise you that Christ will come from your seed and will bring the blessing upon all nations crushed by sin and death — delivering them from the eternal curse of sin and death — and they will receive this promise by faith: In your seed.' Therefore, just as the false apostles were perverters and destroyers of God's testament in their day, so are all the papists and those who seek justification through works in ours. They would never dare to tamper with a person's will — the law forbids it. But God's testament they change without fear, even though He is a consuming fire. Such is the nature of all hypocrites: they observe human law precisely while despising and wickedly transgressing the laws of God. But the time will come when they will face a terrible judgment and feel what it means to despise and pervert the testament of God. This argument, then, grounded in God's ordinance, is strong enough.

Verse 16. Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. He does not say 'and to seeds,' as referring to many, but rather 'and to your seed,' as referring to one — who is Christ.

Here Paul gives a new name to God's promises made to Abraham concerning Christ, who was to bring the blessing to all nations — he calls it a testament. And indeed the promise is nothing other than a testament, not yet opened, but sealed. Now a testament is not a law but a gift given freely. Heirs do not expect laws, demands, or burdens from a testament — they expect an inheritance confirmed by it.

First Paul explains the words, then he applies the analogy, resting his argument on the word 'seed.' No laws were given to Abraham, he says — instead a testament was made and delivered to him: promises were declared to him concerning the spiritual blessing. So something was promised and given to him. If a person's testament is upheld, why should God's testament not be upheld even more — a testament of which the human will is only a shadow? And again: if we keep the symbols, why do we not rather keep the realities they signify?

The promises were made to Abraham not in all the Jews or in many seeds, but in one seed — which is Christ. The Jews will not accept Paul's interpretation, arguing that the singular 'seed' is simply used in place of the plural, meaning many. But we gladly receive Paul's meaning and interpretation. He repeatedly uses the word 'seed' and consistently interprets it as referring to Christ — and he does this with a truly apostolic spirit. The Jews may deny it as much as they like; we nonetheless have the strong arguments Paul has already set forth, which confirm this interpretation and which they cannot refute. So much for the analogy drawn from God's ordinance — that is, from human wills. Now Paul goes on to explain and develop the analogy further.

Verse 17. What I mean is this: the Law, which came four hundred and thirty years later, does not invalidate a covenant previously ratified by God, so as to nullify the promise.

Here the Jews might object: God was not satisfied with giving promises to Abraham — after 430 years He also gave the law. God therefore, distrusting His own promises as insufficient to justify, added something better: the law. Now that this better thing had come, they argue, it was the doers of the law — not the idle believers of a promise — who would be made righteous. The law, they say, followed the promise and therefore superseded it. These are the kinds of evasions and loopholes the Jews look for.

Paul answers this objection sharply and powerfully, and refutes it completely. The law, he says, was given 430 years after the promise — 'In your seed,' and so on — and it could not make the promise void and useless. For the promise is God's testament, confirmed by God Himself in Christ many years before the law. What God has once promised and confirmed, He does not revoke — it remains ratified and certain forever.

Why then was the law added? It was delivered so many generations after Abraham's time — not so that people might obtain the blessing through it (for the function of the law is to bring people under the curse, not to bless), but so that there might be a people in the world who would have the word and testimony of Christ, from whom Christ could also come according to the flesh. People kept under the law would sigh and long for their deliverance through the seed of Abraham — Christ — who alone could and would bless, that is, deliver all nations from sin and eternal death. Furthermore, the ceremonies commanded in the law foreshadowed Christ. Therefore the promise was not abolished by the law or by the ceremonies of the law, but was rather confirmed for a time by them, as by certain seals — until the actual text of the testament (that is, the promise itself) could be opened and spread among all nations through the preaching of the Gospel.

But let the law and the promise face each other, and we will see which is stronger — whether the promise can abolish the law, or the law can abolish the promise. If the law abolishes the promise, it follows that we, through our works, make God a liar and render His promise worthless. For if the law justifies us and delivers us from sin and death — and if our works and our own strength can fulfill the law — then the promise made to Abraham is completely void and useless, and God is a liar and a deceiver. For when someone who makes a promise refuses to keep it and makes it worthless, what is that but proving himself a liar? But it is impossible that the law should make God a liar, or that our works should make the promise void. Rather, the promise must remain firm and stable forever — for God does not promise in vain — even if we were somehow able to keep and fulfill the law. Even if all people were as holy as angels and had no need of the promise — which is of course impossible — we must still hold that the promise stands absolutely certain. Otherwise God would be found a liar who either promised in vain or is unwilling or unable to keep His promises. Therefore, just as the promise came before the law, it is also far more excellent than the law.

And God acted wisely in giving the promise so long before the law. He did this on purpose — so that it could never be said that righteousness came through the law and not through the promise. For if He wanted us to be justified by the law, He would have given the law 430 years before the promise, or at least at the same time. But in fact He first spoke nothing at all about the law, and only gave it 430 years later. All that time, He spoke only of His promises. Therefore the blessing and the free gift of righteousness came before the law, through the promise. The promise is therefore far more excellent than the law. The law does not abolish the promise — rather, faith in the promise destroys the power of the law, so that the law can no longer increase sin, terrify sinners, or drive them to despair. Through faith, believers lay hold of the promise — as they did even before Christ's time — and now that same promise has been proclaimed by the Gospel throughout the whole world.

There is also special emphasis worth noting in the fact that Paul explicitly states the number 430 years. It is as if he is saying: 'Think carefully about how long it was between the giving of the promise and the giving of the law.' It is plain that Abraham received the promise long before the law — the law was given to the people of Israel 430 years afterward. This is an irresistible argument built on a specific, fixed point in history. Paul is also not speaking of the law in general here, but specifically of the written law. It is as if he says: God could not at that earlier time have had in mind the ceremonies and works of the law as the basis for giving righteousness to those who observe them. The written law did not yet exist — the law that commands ceremonies, requires works, and promises life to those who observe them, saying: 'The man who does these things will live by them.' And even though the law promises these things, it does not follow that anyone actually obtains them — for the text plainly says: 'The man who does these things.' And it is certain that no one can do them. Paul therefore concludes that the law cannot abolish the promise — the promise made to Abraham 430 years before the law stands firm and certain. To make this clearer, consider this illustration: if a wealthy man, not under any obligation but freely out of his own good will, adopted someone he had never known and who owed him nothing, and appointed him as heir to all his property, and then several years later laid on him a set of rules to follow — that man cannot now claim he deserved the inheritance by his works, since he had received it freely as a gift many years before, without being asked to do anything. In the same way, God could not have based righteousness on our works and merits — for the promise and the gift of the Holy Spirit came 430 years before the law.

From this it is clear that Abraham obtained righteousness before God not through the law — for there was no law yet. If there was no law, there were no works and no merits. What was there then? Nothing but the bare promise. Abraham believed that promise, and it was counted to him as righteousness. By the same means through which the father received the promise, his children receive and hold it as well. So we say today: our sins were cleansed by the death of Christ more than fifteen hundred years ago, when there were no religious orders, no canon of penance, no merits of fittingness or worthiness. We cannot now begin to undo what He accomplished by our own works and merits.

Paul builds his arguments from analogies, from specific dates, and from persons — so solid and thorough on every side that no one can deny them. Let us therefore arm and equip our consciences with such arguments, for they help us greatly when temptation comes. They lead us from the law and works to the promise and to faith — from wrath to grace, from sin to righteousness, from death to life. These two things — the law and the promise — must therefore be carefully distinguished, as I often repeat. In time, place, person, and all other circumstances they are as far apart as heaven and earth, the beginning of the world and the end of it. They are close neighbors in the sense that they dwell together in one person and one soul. But in inner experience and in their function, they must be kept far apart — the law ruling over the flesh, and the promise sweetly and comfortably reigning in the conscience. When you have assigned each to its proper place, you walk safely between them — in heaven by the promise, and on earth by the law. In spirit you walk in the paradise of grace and peace; in the flesh you walk on the earth of works and the cross. Now the troubles the flesh must endure will not weigh so heavily on you, because of the sweetness of the promise, which enormously comforts and gladdens the heart. But if you confuse and mix the two together — putting the law in the conscience and the promise of freedom in the flesh — you create the same chaos that reigned in popery, where no one could tell what the law was, what the promise was, what sin was, or what righteousness was.

Therefore, if you are going to rightly divide the word of truth, you must make a great distinction between the promise and the law in your inner life and in all of your practice. It is not without reason that Paul pursues this argument so diligently. He foresaw in the Spirit that this corruption would creep into the Church — that the word of God would be confused, the promise mixed with the law, and the promise thereby completely lost. For when the promise is mixed with the law, it becomes nothing other than law itself. Therefore train yourself to separate the promise and the law, even in terms of time. When the law comes and accuses your conscience, say: 'Lady law, you are not in season — you have come too soon. Wait until 430 years have passed, and then come as strongly as you like. But even then you will come too late — for the promise has already gone before you by 430 years, and I have rested in it.' 'Therefore I have nothing to do with you. I will not hear you. For now I live with believing Abraham — or rather, since Christ has now been revealed and given to me, I live in Him, who is my righteousness and who has abolished you, O law.' Let Christ therefore always be before your eyes — the single summary of all arguments for the defense of faith, against the righteousness of the flesh, against the law, and against all works and merits whatever.

I have now reviewed nearly all the principal arguments Paul handles in this letter for the confirmation of the doctrine of justification. Among them, the argument from the promise made to Abraham and to the other fathers is the weightiest and most powerful — and Paul pursues it here and in the letter to the Romans, carefully weighing the words and examining both the time periods and the persons involved. He also rests his argument on the word 'seed,' applying it to Christ. He then makes clear by contrast what the law produces — namely, holding people under the curse. In this way he fortifies the article of Christian righteousness with strong and powerful arguments. On the other side, he demolishes the arguments of the false apostles who defended the righteousness of the law, turning their arguments back on them. They contended that righteousness and life are obtained through the law. Paul shows instead that the law produces only curse and death. 'You claim,' he says, 'that the law is necessary for salvation. Have you not read that it says: He who does these things shall live by them? Now, who actually does them? No one. Therefore all who are of the works of the law are under the curse.' And again in another place: 'The sting of death is sin, and the power of sin is the law.' Now follows the conclusion of all these arguments.

Verse 18. For if the inheritance is based on law, it is no longer based on a promise.

As Paul says in Romans 4: 'For if those who are of the law are heirs, faith is emptied and the promise is nullified.' It cannot be otherwise, for the distinction is plain: the law is something entirely different from the promise. Even natural reason, however blind, is compelled to admit that promising and demanding are two different things — giving and taking are two different things. The law demands and exacts our works; the promise of the Seed freely offers us the spiritual and eternal blessings of God, for Christ's sake. We therefore receive the inheritance and the blessing through the promise, not through the law. The promise says: 'In your seed all nations of the earth shall be blessed.' Therefore having the law is not enough, because the law does not bring the blessing — without the blessing a person is still under the curse. The law cannot justify because the blessing is not attached to it. Moreover, if the inheritance were based on law, God would be found a liar and the promise would be worthless. If the law could obtain the blessing, why did God make the promise 'In your seed'? Why did He not simply say: 'Do this and you will receive the blessing,' or 'By keeping the law you may earn eternal life'? The argument rests on opposites: the inheritance is given through the promise, and therefore not through the law.

Verse 18. But God granted it to Abraham by means of a promise.

It cannot be denied that God gave the inheritance and the blessing to Abraham through the promise before the law ever existed — meaning forgiveness of sins, righteousness, salvation, and eternal life, and the right to be children and heirs of God and fellow heirs with Christ. For it is plainly stated in Genesis: 'In your seed all nations shall be blessed.' The blessing is given there freely, without any consideration of the law or of works. God gave the inheritance before Moses was born, before anyone had thought of the law. Why, then, do you boast that righteousness comes through the law, when righteousness, life, and salvation were given to your father Abraham without the law — indeed before any law existed? Anyone unmoved by these arguments is blind and stubborn. But I have already treated this argument about the promise at greater length, so I will only touch on it briefly here.

We have now covered the main body of this letter. The apostle now turns to explaining the purpose and function of the law, adding illustrations of the tutor and the young heir, as well as the allegory of Abraham's two sons, Isaac and Ishmael. Finally he sets out some practical instructions about how to live.

Verse 19. Why the law then?

When we teach that a person is justified without the law and without works, this question necessarily follows: if the law does not justify, why was it given? Why does God burden us with the law, if it does not justify? Why are we so harshly subjected to it, if those who worked only one hour are made equal with those who have borne the heat and burden of the whole day? Once the grace proclaimed by the Gospel is announced, this kind of loud complaint immediately arises — and the Gospel cannot be preached without it. The Jews believed that if they kept the law, they would be justified by it. So when they heard the Gospel proclaimed about Christ, who came to save not the righteous but sinners, and that sinners would enter the kingdom of God ahead of them, they were deeply offended. They complained that they had borne the heavy yoke of the law for so many years with great labor and toil, that they had been wretchedly burdened by the tyranny of the law, and all for nothing — or rather, to their great harm. Meanwhile, Gentiles who had been idolaters received grace without any labor or effort. Today our papists murmur in the same way, saying: 'What good has it done us that we spent twenty, thirty, or forty years in a monastery — that we vowed chastity, poverty, and obedience, said so many psalters and canonical hours and masses, and punished our bodies with fasting, prayer, and self-discipline? And now a husband, a wife, a prince, a governor, a master, a student, a laborer carrying sacks, or a servant girl sweeping the floor will not only be made equal to us before God but will actually be regarded as better and more worthy?'

This is a hard question that leaves reason speechless and greatly offended. Reason can understand the righteousness of the law to some extent — it teaches it, insists on it, and imagines that those who keep it are righteous. But it does not understand the purpose and goal of the law. So when reason hears Paul's statement, which is foreign and unknown to the world — that the law was given on account of transgressions — it concludes: Paul is abolishing the law, since he says it does not justify. Indeed, he is blaspheming God who gave the law by saying it was given for transgressions. Let us therefore live like Gentiles who have no law. Let us sin and remain in sin, so that grace may abound. Let us do evil so that good may come from it. This happened to the apostle Paul, and the same happens to us today. When ordinary people hear from the Gospel that righteousness comes by God's pure grace through faith alone, without the law and without works, they quickly conclude — as the Jews once did — that if the law does not justify, there is no need to do anything. And they live out that conclusion very consistently.

What then should we do? This wickedness greatly troubles us, but we cannot cure it. When Christ preached, He was accused of being a blasphemer and a troublemaker — someone whose teaching led people astray and stirred up rebellion against Caesar. The same happened to Paul and all the other apostles. Why should we be surprised if the world accuses us today in the same way? Let it accuse us, slander us, and persecute us without mercy — we must still not be silent but speak freely, so that burdened consciences may be rescued from the devil's traps. We must not let the foolish and godless misuse of our teaching stop us — those people cannot be reformed whether they have a law or not. What we must focus on is how troubled consciences can be comforted, so that they do not perish with the crowd. If we stayed silent and said nothing, poor afflicted consciences would have no comfort — those so tangled up in human laws and traditions that they cannot find their way out.

When Paul saw some people opposing his teaching and others using the freedom of the Gospel as an excuse for living however they wished and becoming worse than before, he took comfort in this: he was an apostle of Jesus Christ, sent to preach the faith to God's elect, and he had to endure all things for the sake of the elect, so that they too might be saved. We do the same today — we do all things for the sake of the elect, whom we know are being built up and comforted through our teaching. As for the dogs and pigs — those who either attack our teaching or trample underfoot the freedom we have in Christ Jesus — I am so offended by them that I would not speak a single word for their sake. I would rather they were still subject to the Pope's tyranny, along with our adversaries, than that the holy name of God should be so blasphemed and dishonored because of them.

Therefore, although both foolish and ignorant people — and those who think themselves very wise — argue this way: 'If the law does not justify, then it is pointless and useless' — this does not make it true. This logic is no better than saying: money does not justify, therefore it is useless; or, eyes do not justify, therefore they should be torn out; or hands do not justify, therefore they should be cut off. The argument 'the law does not justify, therefore it is useless' is equally invalid — for every thing must be assessed according to its proper purpose and use. We do not destroy or condemn the law by saying it does not justify. We simply answer the question differently: what then is the purpose of the law? Our answer is different from our opponents', who wickedly and wrongly invent a purpose for the law that does not belong to it.

Against this misuse and invented purpose of the law, we dispute and answer with Paul: the law does not justify. But in saying this, we are not saying the law is useless — as our opponents immediately conclude: 'If the law does not justify, then it was given for nothing.' Not so. The law has its proper purpose and function — but that function is not what the opponents imagine, namely, to make people righteous. Instead it accuses, terrifies, and condemns them. We say with Paul that the law is good if it is used rightly — that is, used as law. If I give the law its proper definition and keep it within the boundaries of its purpose, it is an excellent thing. But if I move it into another role and attribute to it what does not belong to it, I pervert not only the law but the whole of Scripture.

Paul here argues against those dangerous hypocrites who cannot accept the statement that the law was added on account of transgressions. They believe the purpose of the law is to justify. This is the general opinion of human reason — among the Scholastics and throughout the world — that righteousness is obtained through works of the law. And reason will not give up this harmful opinion under any circumstances, because it does not understand the righteousness of faith. This is why the papists say, both foolishly and wickedly: the Church has God's law, the traditions of the fathers, the decrees of councils — if it lives according to these, it is holy. No one can convince these people that by keeping such things they do not please God but provoke His wrath. In short, those who trust in their own righteousness believe they can quiet God's wrath through self-chosen worship and voluntary religious exercises. This opinion of righteousness through law-keeping is therefore the source of all evils — the sin of sins of the whole world. Gross sins and vices can be recognized, and either corrected or at least restrained by the civil authorities. But this sin — a person's belief in their own righteousness — will not only not be recognized as sin but will be esteemed as high religion and righteousness itself. This deadly sin is therefore the devil's greatest power over the whole world — the serpent's head and the snare by which the devil entangles and holds all people captive. For by nature all people believe they are made righteous by keeping the law. Paul therefore, in order to show the true purpose and function of the law, and to pull out of people's hearts that false belief in law-righteousness, answers the objection — 'Why then the law if it does not justify?' — in this way: it was not given to make people righteous, but rather —

Verse 19. It was added because of transgressions.

As different things have different purposes, so their uses must be kept distinct — they must not be mixed together. If they are mixed, confusion of the things themselves inevitably follows. A woman must not wear a man's clothing, nor a man a woman's. Let men do the work that belongs to men, and women the work that belongs to women. Let every person fulfill what their calling and station requires. Let pastors and preachers teach God's word faithfully. Let civil authorities govern their people, and let people obey their authorities. Let everything serve in its proper place and order. Let the sun shine by day, the moon and stars by night; let the sea provide fish, the earth grain, and the forests game and timber. In the same way, let the law not usurp the office that belongs to something else — namely, justification. Let it leave justification to grace, to the promise, and to faith. What then is the proper office of the law? Transgression — or as Paul says elsewhere: 'the law came in so that transgression would increase.' A striking purpose, to be sure. The law was added on account of transgressions, he says — that is, it was added alongside and after the promise, to remain until Christ the Seed came, to whom the promise had been made.