Door and Passageway:

Calvin’s use of Romans as Hermeneutical and Theological Guide

Gary Neal Hansen

University of Dubuque Theological Seminary

 

 

Section 1: Calvin¬ís presentation of Romans as ¬ďdoor¬Ē and ¬ďpassageway¬Ē

Even today, many are most aware of Calvin as the writer of the Institutes of the Christian Religion.¬† In recent decades, however, scholars have drawn more attention to Calvin¬ís work as a biblical commentator.¬† From 1540 to the end of his life in 1564 Calvin produced commentaries in a variety of forms on 24 books of the Old Testament and all but three books of the New.¬† Biblical interpretation was a major focus of Calvin¬ís publishing career, and he saw his commentaries as a full theological partner with the Institutes.¬† That is to say, they were equally important genres, and were intended to be read together.¬† In the commentaries, one finds a thorough discussion of individual texts in conversation with the teachings of Scripture as a whole, as synthesized in the Institutes, but without extensive excurses on points of doctrine.¬† In the Institutes, one finds a synthesis of the consistent teachings of Scripture, supported with references to individual texts, but without extensive commentary on the texts.¬† This was Calvin¬ís plan as he laid it out in the ¬ďletter to the reader¬Ē from the 1539 second edition of the Institutes where he went so far as to refer to that work as a ¬ďnecessary tool¬Ē for the study of Scripture.[1]¬†

In this paper I will argue that the two genres meet at Paul’s letter to the Romans.  I will begin by showing that this ought to be so.  Then I will attempt to show two ways that it is so: As Calvin intended the Institutes as a hermeneutical guide to Scripture,[2] Romans functioned as his own theological guide in developing the Institutes, and similarly functioned as a hermeneutical guide in interpreting passages of Scripture. 

Calvin was working on that second edition of the Institutes at the same time as he was writing his first biblical commentary.[3]¬† Calvin dated his dedicatory letter to the Romans commentary October 18, 1539, and the second edition of the Institutes had been published only two months before, in August.[4]¬† So, just after completing a work intended to guide students into the meaning of Scripture, Calvin described his new work on the letter to the Romans in a very significant way.¬† In Calvin¬ís words in his dedicatory letter ¬ď...if we understand this Epistle, we have a passage opened (patefactum habet) to us to the understanding of the whole of scripture.¬Ē[5] ¬†He says much the same thing a few pages later in the Argumentum or summary preface to the epistle.¬† The supreme virtue of Paul¬ís letter to the Romans is that ¬ďif we have gained a true understanding of this Epistle, we have an open door (adeundos habeat apertas fores) to all the most profound treasures of Scripture.¬Ē[6]¬† So Romans is the door, and Romans is the passageway.¬† And when one travels through that metaphorical opening, according to Calvin, one gets somewhere very important indeed.¬† So important it is expressed in two divergent dimensions: through Romans one finds the whole of Scripture, a measure of breadth, and through Romans one finds the profound treasure of Scripture, a measure of depth.

The two dimensions are, in fact, related.¬† This becomes clear when Calvin discusses what these ¬ďmost profound treasures¬Ē are. In summary form, he refers to ¬ďthe main subject of the whole epistle, which is that we are justified by faith.¬Ē[7]¬† This epistle more than any other provides a thorough exposition of the doctrine which the Protestant reformers felt was most central to the faith.¬† Justification by faith, the distinctly Pauline summary of divine human relationship, was certainly a topic of great 16th century controversy.¬† Calvin, like Luther, saw the doctrine as central to the Scripture, and therefore to Christian theology.¬†

In the prefatory letter to the Romans commentary, he notes that commentators of different ages and the current age differ in their exposition of biblical texts. One ought not expect unanimity.¬† In the same paragraph, the case is different for doctrine: ¬ď... but in the teachings of religion (religionis autem dogmatibus), in which God has particularly desired that the minds of his people should be in agreement, we are to take less liberty.¬Ē[8]¬†¬† To be a bit more systematic about it than Calvin was: Romans is the door and passageway to the heart of biblical teaching, because it is an exposition of the central Reformation doctrine of justification.¬† This is, it seems, why Calvin commented on Romans first among all books of Scripture.¬† Biblical teaching is what he says the Institutes summarizes and, especially in the case of such a central doctrine, the Church¬ís teaching needs to be clear and unchanging.¬† There is a parallel of subject matter between the Institutes and the Romans Commentary which should lead us to expect Romans to serve as a guide to his theology and hermeneutics.¬†

Section 2: the book of Romans as the passageway to the structure of the Institutes

One can see the influence of the letter to the Romans in Calvin’s Institutes in at least two ways.  First is in the structure of the Institutes, and second is in Calvin’s selection of texts to buttress his theological points.  In both cases will confine our study to the final 1559 version of the Institutes.  Though this is methodologically problematic, particularly because the structure of the Institutes shifted significantly over time,[9] it does work well with the space limitations of this paper.

From a bird’s eye view, there are similarities, though not an exact correspondence, between the structure of Romans and the structure of the Institutes.  This is clearest if one removes from consideration the material on the salvation of the Jews, an issue much more pressing for the Apostle than for the Reformer.   We will examine them by Book of the Institutes.

Romans chapter one, with its discussion of God¬ís self revelation in nature, and human sin as neglect of this revelation to the point of idolatry, finds its parallel in Book One of the Institutes, ¬ďThe Knowledge of God the Creator¬Ē.¬† Book One, chapters 3 and 5 discuss natural revelation, and chapter 4 deals with the limited human access to such revelation.¬† Book One, chapters 11 and 12 deal with the distinction between the biblical God and idols.¬†

Romans chapters 2 and 3, with their discussion of the universality of human sin, find their parallel in the first half of Book Two of the Institutes, ¬ďThe Knowledge of God the Redeemer in Christ.¬Ē¬† The universality of sin is made emphatically clear in Book Two, chapters 1 through 3.¬† Paul¬ís discussion of the value of the law relates thematically to Book Two, chapters 7 through 8.¬†

Romans chapters 4 and 5, where Abraham and justification by faith are discussed in detail, find their topics covered in Book Three of the Institutes, ¬ďThe Way in Which We Receive the Grace of Christ.¬Ē¬† This is Calvin¬ís focused presentation of justification by faith, including the definition of faith in Book Three, chapter 2, the doctrine of justification Book Three, chapters 11 through 14, and the futility of works, which takes the argument up through Book Three, chapter 18.¬† Admittedly, Romans 5 includes material on Christ as mediator, which Calvin treats in the second half of Book Two the Institutes.¬† The parallel patterns are not exact. Still, the overall parallels do continue: Romans 8 says much about Christian freedom, as does Institutes Book Three, chapter 19, and this is followed by discussion of election both in Romans 9, and Institutes Book Three, chapter 21-24.

Though again inexactly, the parallels continue at the end of Romans and the Institutes.¬† In chapters 14 and 15 of Romans Paul deals with attitudes toward Old Testament ceremonies in the Christian community, or at least Calvin takes him to be doing so.[10]¬† Calvin takes up an analogous topic as the core of Book Four of the Institutes, ¬ďThe External Means or Aids by Which God Invites Us into the Society of Christ.¬Ē Here Calvin is concerned with the Reformed Church, its government, and its sacraments, particularly in comparison to those of the Roman Church.¬† Paul deals with the Christian¬ís relationship to civil authorities in Chapter 13 of Romans, while Calvin deals with this in the final chapter of the Institutes, Book Four, chapter 20.

One must admit that there are also major sections in the Institutes that are not discussed in the book of Romans: as well as Calvin’s extensive polemical discussions with opponents in his own day, this includes extensive discussion of Scripture as clearer revelation, the Trinity and Unity of God, God’s providence, and human nature before the fall.  Even within the examples above, some topics in Calvin are only analogous to those Romans.  Still, the overall ordering of Calvin’s theology has parallels to Romans that are somewhere between suggestive and striking.  Calvin was very intentional about his selection and ordering of topics in the Institutes, and it seems most likely that these parallels express his stated understanding that Romans is the passageway through which one finds an understanding of Scripture as a whole.

When one examines the distribution of citations of Romans in the 1559 Institutes (Figures 1 and 2)[11] a pattern emerges that is similar to that described above.  In Book One of the Institutes, a full third of the citations are from chapter one of Romans, with the rest of the chapters entering the discussion only sporadically.  In Book Two the greatest number of citations are from Romans 3, especially verses on the universality of sin, and Romans 5 and 8, especially verses on Christ’s mediatorial work.  In Book three has by far the most citations of Romans, drawing on Romans treatment of the crucial issue of justification in chapters 3 through 5, and the controversial issue of predestination in 9 through 11.  The largest number of citations from a single chapter in a single book of the Institutes is Romans 8 in Book Three, where verses are cited in relation to many topics including faith, justification, prayer, and predestination.  As citations of in Book One of the Institutes come most heavily from the first part of Romans, citations from Book Four tend to come more heavily from the latter parts of Romans.  There are significant numbers of citations from Romans 12 and 13 in Calvin’s sacramental theology, his critique of Catholic teaching on the sacraments, and on matters of law, both ecclesiastical and civil.  The exception to this pattern in Book Four is the large number of citations from Romans 6, these being primarily citations of Paul’s discussion of Baptism in Calvin’s treatment of that topic.  One should note that in the index to the McNeill-Battles edition of the Institutes there are more citations to Romans than to any book of Scripture except the Psalms.  When one keeps in mind the far shorter length of Romans, than the 150 Psalms, the importance of Romans becomes evident. 

A third type of observation which would lend support to this sense that Romans shapes Calvin’s theological work in the Institutes is the particular ways he tends to cite Romans.  Though he very frequently cites other works of Paul, and indeed quotes scripture from Genesis to just shy of Revelation, he cites Romans with what often sounds like a peculiar confidence and authority.  One can illustrate this with one citation among many, as when discussing the law and human capacity he cites Romans once for each of the three other books by Paul cited.[12]  Calvin will at times cite Romans for summary information, as in the first section of his exposition of prayer where he cites Romans no less than four times.[13]  Proving this point in a more substantial way is beyond the scope of this paper, but the picture emerging from these examples, along with the parallels in the structure between Romans and the Institutes and the distribution of citations of Romans, should give a sense of how this particular book of Paul was indeed Calvin’s guide in his theological work.

Section 3: the theology of Romans as the door to the true meaning of other texts.

When one considers how the book of Romans functioned in the writing of Calvin’s commentaries, the picture is somewhat different.  There are several aspects to consider, but all are implications of idea that Romans is the clearest book of scripture on the most important topics in scripture.  As a brief case study we will look at a few of Calvin’s many citations of Romans in his commentary on Genesis.  Genesis is useful in this, both because Romans refers to passages in that book quite prominently, and because the stories of the ancient forebears of the faith there raise ethical problems.

Certainly the most important case is that of Abraham¬ís faith, which Genesis says was counted as righteousness, and on which Paul bases much of his doctrine of justification.¬† Calvin¬ís initial comment shows clearly his views on of Paul and Romans: ¬ďNone of us would be able to conceive the rich and hidden doctrine which this passage contains, unless Paul had borne his torch before us. (Romans 4:3).¬Ē ¬†Paul is the ¬ďluminous expositor¬Ē who ¬ďleads us to the celestial tribunal of God.¬Ē[14]¬† The discussion that follows runs to three and a half columns in the Corpus Reformatorum, and at times it seems that Calvin is more intent on discussing the fine points of the Romans text than the Genesis text he has at hand.¬† Here Romans clearly has led Calvin to what he thinks of as the profound treasure of Scripture.

His engagement with Romans, and the dominance of Romans on theological topics, is seen in a variety of ways in other passages of the Genesis commentary.  On the question of who is guilty for the sin in the garden, Calvin must decide between Paul in First Timothy, who says the woman, and Paul in Romans who says the man.  Against other interpreters, Calvin interprets the Genesis text in harmony with the Romans text.[15]  A little later on the same passage, in discussing the pervasiveness of original sin, Calvin refers the reader to the Institutes, but summarizes his point with two passages from Romans.[16]  Commenting on an obscure reference to King Chedorlaomer who quelled a rebellion, Calvin affirms his right to do so based on the teaching of Romans 13:1 that civil authorities are put in place by God.[17]  His comments on Jacob and Esau, which weigh so heavily in his discussion of predestination in Romans, lead to another lengthy discussion dealing heavily with the Romans text.[18]

Calvin also is guided by Romans on ethical issues, first around food and drink.  When God grants all plants but one for human food, rather than emphasizing this early call to vegetarianism, Calvin uses the text to illustrate an ethical teaching from Romans:

For it is of great importance that we touch nothing of God’s bounty but what we know he has permitted us to do; since we cannot enjoy anything with a good conscience, except we receive it as from the hand of God. And therefore Paul teaches us that, in eating and drinking we always sin, unless faith be present, (Romans 14:23.)[19]

 

When, after the flood, animals too are given for human food, Calvin disagrees with other interpreters that this is, in fact, a change.¬† Though he says it is not important, his own opinion is guided by Romans: ¬ďWe have heard what Paul says, that we are at liberty to eat what we please, only we do it with the assurance of conscience, but that he who imagines anything to be unclean, to him it is unclean, (Romans 14:14).¬Ē[20]

Calvin also makes a number of ethical judgments on characters in Genesis, grounding his judgments in Romans.  For instance, Jacob is judged on standards from Romans.  When he tries to trick his father into granting him the blessing belonging to Esau, Calvin tells us his behavior is problematic because it is

¬Övery contrary to faith. For when the Apostle teaches, that ¬ďwhatsoever is not of faith is sin,¬Ē (Romans 14:23,) he trains the sons of God to this sobriety, that they may not permit themselves to undertake anything with a doubtful and perplexed conscience.

 

Lest we miss the fact that an ethical precept is being offered, he tells us that this is ¬ďthe only rule of right conduct¬Ē for such circumstances.[21]¬† Here Calvin quotes the same passage he was shown quoting above on Genesis 1:28 to explain the ethics of eating.¬† Calvin is equally unimpressed by Jacob¬ís clever strategy to produce sheep and goats in particular colors and patterns by putting sticks in their watering troughs.¬† He is not troubled by the magic trick but by the motive:

Therefore Jacob ought not to have resorted to this stratagem, for the purpose of producing degenerate cattle, but rather to have followed the rule which the Lord delivers by the mouth of Paul, that the faithful should study to overcome evil with good, (Romans 12:21.) This simplicity, I confess, ought to have been cultivated by Jacob, unless the Lord from heaven had commanded otherwise.[22]

 

Calvin’s ethical standard is a text from Romans, and it is a prominent one for him: It will appear twice more in the examples that follow.  What is really surprising here is that he seems to expect that Jacob should have known this standard, and taken it as an order from God.  Paul’s voice in Romans is not merely clear but functions as a kind of reverse prophecy. 

Some of Calvin¬ís ethical judgments rooted in Romans are less straightforward.¬† When Abraham remarries and has more children after the death of Sarah, Calvin strongly disapproves, condemning it as ¬ďunworthy of his gravity.¬Ē¬† The only biblical citation is from Romans:

Besides, when Paul commends his faith, (Romans 4:19,) he not only asserts that the womb of Sarah was dead, when Isaac was about to be born, but also that the body of the father himself was dead. Therefore Abraham acted most foolishly, if, after the loss of his wife, he, in the decrepitude of old age, contracted another marriage. Further, it is at variance with the language of Paul, that he, who in his hundredth year was cold and impotent, should, forty years afterwards, have many sons.[23]

 

The real basis of judgment seems to be Calvin¬ís sense of propriety, an echo of his response to William Farel¬ís May-December marriage.¬† He tries, however, to root it in the authority of Romans.¬† Lacking a real ethical standard in Paul¬ís words about Abraham, Calvin seems to use the interpretation of the facts in Romans to shed doubt on veracity of the history as recorded in Genesis.¬† When Calvin says Abraham was ¬ďcold and impotent¬Ē nearly half a century earlier, is it simply foolish, as he says, or is he implying that it was grossly unlikely a remarried Abraham have children?¬†

Calvin also makes positive ethical judgments on biblical characters based on passages in Romans. Through the testimony of Romans, Calvin is so sure of the solidity of Abraham¬ís earlier faith that when Genesis says that he fell down and laughed at the promise of a son, Calvin judges even this as an expression of faith.[24] Commenting on the scene where Joseph and his brothers feasted and drank, Calvin is careful to argue that it is not implied that they drank to excess.¬† God gives such gifts liberally, beyond meeting mere needs, but still we must exercise restraint.¬† The definition of this restraint comes from Romans: ¬ďAnd, truly, I confess, we must diligently attend to what Paul prescribes, (Romans 13:14,) ¬ĎMake not provision for the flesh to fulfill the lusts thereof.¬í¬Ē[25] ¬†On Joseph¬ís forgiveness and generosity to his brothers, Calvin notes that ¬ďIt was a token of a solid and not a feigned reconciliation, not only to abstain from malice and injury, but also to ¬Ďovercome evil with good,¬í as Paul teaches, (Romans 12:21:)¬Ö¬Ē[26]

There are also interesting and similar cases in the New Testament commentaries.¬† This is so even in the Gospels, where the words of Jesus Christ are in question.¬† When Jesus says not to resist evil, which perhaps seems plain enough, Calvin will say ¬ďPaul is our best interpreter of this passage, at Rom. 12.7 (and 21), where he tells us rather to overcome evil with good than to struggle with those who wish us harm.¬Ē[27]¬† The roles of Word of God and interpreter seem reversed at times in Calvin¬ís thinking as when, in reference to Christ¬ís words when raising a dead man to life, the Reformer writes, ¬ďIn these words, Christ testifies to the truth of Paul¬ís teaching (Rom. 4.17), ¬ĎGod¬Öcalleth the things that are not, as though they were.¬í¬Ē[28]¬† Similarly in the Lord¬ís Prayer, when we are told to pray for forgiveness, Calvin writes that ¬ďThus is fulfilled the teaching of Paul (Rom. 3.19, 23), ¬ĎFor all have sinned, and fall short of the glory of God¬Ö¬Ē[29]¬† Calvin does constantly interpret Scripture with Scripture in the New Testament Commentaries as in the Old, and he makes use of the whole of the Bible in doing so.¬† Still, Paul is presented as the voice in Scripture who really must be heard to make sense of the words of others, and in such cases Romans appears with particular prominence.

Of course, a more systematic study is needed to differentiate between cases were Calvin is simply using Romans as he might use any passage of scripture to resolve a difficulty, and cases where Romans has a distinctive role shaping the theology he is willing to draw from other texts.  Even in the Genesis commentary, Calvin can at times use Genesis to interpret Romans, just as he uses Romans to interpret Genesis.[30]  One would need to look at the proportion of citations and develop a classification of particular types of citations.

One sees in the citations of Romans, whether in the Genesis commentary or elsewhere, that this epistle does indeed function as Calvin’s passageway to the whole of scripture.  All of Paul, but Romans in particular, creates a theological substructure, an invisible system of theological and ethical ideas, which guides Calvin to clarity in the interpretation of both the plain and the obscure passages.  As the outline and details of Romans shaped Calvin’s Institutes, providing a passageway into the whole of scripture, the fully digested contents of Romans served as a door through which Calvin traveled as he mined the treasure in the individual books of the Bible.


 

 

 

Chapter of Romans

 

 

 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

Total

Institutes

Book 1

10

0

1

0

1

0

0

3

3

2

2

0

0

4

1

2

29

 

Book 2

12

2

22

5

21

7

12

28

12

5

2

1

5

2

1

2

139

 

Book 3

7

8

28

27

19

20

4

78

33

21

24

7

5

12

4

0

297

 

Book 4

5

4

4

7

2

14

4

7

7

9

5

16

15

4

4

2

109

 

total

34

14

55

39

43

41

20

116

55

37

33

24

25

22

10

6

 

 

Figure 1: Number of citations of each chapter of Romans in each book of the Institutes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Figure 2: Citations of Romans in the Institutes. 

Horizontal: Chapter of Romans. 

Vertical: Number of citations of this chapter of Romans.

 

 



[1] ¬ďJohn Calvin to the Reader,¬Ē in Calvin: Institutes of the Christian Religion, ed. John T. McNeill, trans. Ford Lewis Battles (Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1960) 4-5.¬† Hereinafter, Institutes.¬† Joannis Calvini, Opera Selecta vol. 3, ed. Petrus Barth (Monachii: Chr. Kaiser, 1928) 6.¬† Hereinafter, OS 3.6: ¬ďnecessario instrumento¬Ē.

[2] To use the phrase of R. Ward Holder, ¬ďCalvin as Commentator on the Pauline Epistles, in Calvin and the Bible, ed. Donald K. McKim (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006) 235.

[3] On this and the changes to later editions, and to place this commentary in the context of all of Calvin’s commentaries on Paul, see Holder, op. cit., especially pp. 226-228, and 231-232.

[4] For the 1539 Institutes, OS 3.7.¬† For the Romans Commentary, Calvin¬ís [New Testament] Commentaries, vol. 8, trans Ross Mackenzie, ed. David W. Torrance and Thomas F. Torrance (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, reprint 1991) 4.¬† Hereinafter CNTC 8.4.¬† Ioannis Calvini Opera Exegetica, vol. 13, T.H.L. Parker and D.C. Parker (Gen√®ve: Librairie Droz, 1999) 6.¬† Hereinafter OE 13.6: ¬ďXV Calend. Novemb. M.D. XXXIX.¬Ē

[5] CNTC 8.2.¬† OE13.4: ¬ďquando siquis eam intelligat, aditum sibi quendam patefactum habet ad totius Scripturae intelligentiam.¬Ē

[6] CNTC 13.5, OE 13.7: ¬ďquod siquis veram eius intelligentiam sit assequutus, ad reconditissimos quosque Scripturae thesauros adeundos habeat apertas fores.¬Ē

[7] CNTC 13.5, OE 13.7.

[8] Dedicatory Epistle to Romans, CNTC 8.4, OE 13.6: ¬ďin religionis autem dogmatibus, in quibus praecipue voluit Dominus consentaneas esse suorum mentes, minus sumatur libertatis.¬Ē

[9] See the diagrams in Ford Lewis Battles assisted by John R. Walchenbach, Analysis of the Institutes of the Christian Religion, reprint edition (Phillipsburg, NJ: R & R Publishing, 1980) 15-16, and Battles ¬ďCalculus Fidei,¬Ē in Calvinus ecclesiae doctor (Kampen, Netherlands : J H Kok, 1979) 85-110.

[10] CNTC 8.10-11, OE 13.12.  CNTC 8.289, OE 13.280-281.

[11] The data being analyzed in these figures and observations is found in the scripture index from the McNeill-Battles English edition of the 1559 Institutes  (pp. 1577-1580).  There are methodological dangers in this choice, since McNeill and Battles attempt to include not only the scriptural citations made explicitly by Calvin, but also scriptural quotations that Calvin did not point out with a formal reference.

[12] Institutes 2.5.6, OS 3.304.

[13] Institutes 3.20.1, OS 4.297.

[14] On Genesis 15:6.  Calvin’s Commentaries, vol. 1, trans. John King (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, reprint 1993) 404-405.  Hereinafter CC 1.404-405; Ioannis Calvini opera quae supersunt omnia, ed Guilielmus Baum et al., (Brunsvigae: C.A. Schwetschke et filium, 1882) col. 211-212.  Hereinafter CO 51.211-212. 

[15] On Genesis 3:6.  CC 1.152; CO 51.60.

[16] On Genesis 3:6. CC 1.155; CO 51.62.

[17] On Genesis 14:1.  CC 1.382; CO 51.382.

[18] On Genesis 25:23.  CC 1.45-46; CO 51.350.

[19] On Genesis 1:28.   CC 1.99, CO 51.29.

[20] On Genesis 9:3. CC 1.292; CO 51.144.

[21] On Genesis 27:11.  CC 1.85; CO 51.374.

[22] On Genesis 30:37.  CC 1.155; CO 51.417.

[23] On Genesis 25:1.  CC 1.32-33; CO 51.342-343.

[24] Genesis 17:17.  CC 1.459-460; CO 51.245.

[25] On Genesis 43:33.  CC 1. 363; CO 51.545.

[26] On Genesis 50:21. CC 1.489; CO 51.620.

[27] On Matt. 5:39, CNTC 1.193, CO 45.184.

[28] On Luke 7:14, CNTC 1.252.

[29] CNTC 1:211, CO 45.200-201.

[30] E.g., on Genesis 18:25, which he believes has influenced Paul in writing Romans 3:5-6; CC 1.489; CO 51. 263.  Also Genesis 17:11 which he says influenced Romans 4:11. CC 1.454; CO 51.241.