Verses 1-3
What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather, discovered in this matter? If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works, he had something to boast about - but not before God. What does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God and it was credited to him as righteousness."

What then shall we say - This rhetorical question connects the extended illustration which follows with the classic presentation of the doctrine of justification by grace through faith in Christ in the preceding verses. This linking phrase occurs regularly in the Letter to the Romans (cf. 3:5; 6:1; 7:7; 8:31; 9:14,30)

That Abraham, our forefather, discovered in this matter? - Paul had earlier declared that the Law and the Prophets testify to the doctrine of justification by grace through faith (3:21). This truth is not a novelty or an innovation. It has been the essence of the plan of salvation from the beginning. Abraham, the father and founder of the Hebrew nation, is now cited as the prime illustration of justification by faith. John MacArthur comments on the perfect appropriateness of Paul's selected illustration:

By using Abraham as the supreme Scriptural example of justification, or salvation, by faith alone, Paul was storming the very citadel of traditional Judaism. By demonstrating that Abraham was not justified by works, the apostle demolished the foundation of rabbinical teaching - that man is made right with God by keeping the Law, that is, on the basis of his own religious efforts and works. If Abraham was not and could not have been justified by keeping the Law, then no one could be. Conversely, if Abraham was justified solely on the basis of his faith in God, then everyone else must be justified in the same way, since Abraham is the Biblical standard of a righteous man. (MacArthur, p. 233)

Jewish tradition has elevated Abraham to lofty heights. Unlike the Book of Genesis, which realistically portrays Abraham as a man afflicted with the same weaknesses and flaws of other men, the writings of the Jewish Apocrypha had exalted Abraham to the level of sinless perfection.

For Abraham was perfect in all of his actions with the Lord and was pleasing through righteousness al the days of his life. (The Book of Jubilees 23:10)

Abraham was the great father of a multitude of nations, and no one has been found like him in glory; he kept the laws of the Most High, and was taken into covenant with him; he established the covenant in his flesh and when he was tested, he was found faithful. (Sirach 44:19-20)

Therefore, thou, O Lord, God of the righteous, hast not appointed repentance for the righteous, for Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, who did not sin against thee, but thou hast appointed repentance for me who am a sinner. (The Prayer of Manasseh, vs.8)

Those who proudly claimed the distinction of descent from Father Abraham believed they had no need for the salvation which John the Baptist and Christ Himself proclaimed to them. The Baptist warned them: Do not think that you can say to yourselves; "We have Abraham as our father." I tell you that out of these stones God can raise up children for Abraham. (Matthew 3:9; cf. also John 8:31-41) In contrast to this distortion, Paul's presentation of Abraham as a beneficiary of justification by grace becomes all the more compelling. The patriarch is described as Abraham our forefather. With these words Paul identifies with the Israel of God and affirms his ongoing relationship with the founder of the Hebrew nation and the father of believers. Abraham is our forefather the apostle declares.

In the Greek text, the next phrase literally reads according to the flesh (Greek - kata sarka). In the New Testament, particularly in the writings of Paul, the term flesh refers to man or human activity apart from God. The NIV chose to translate the phrase kata sarka as in this matter. While this translation is linguistically possible, it is unlikely in the context and serves to weaken the thrust of the apostle's argument. The question that Paul is posing could be paraphrased in this way: What shall we then say about what Abraham our forefather found to be the case so far as his own human ability was concerned?

The specific meaning of the Greek verb eurekenai (NIV - discovered) in this phrase is also significant. The word refers to finding grace or mercy. Abraham himself uses the term this way in the Septuagint's translation of Genesis 18:3 - If I have found favor in Your eyes, My Lord. The concept the word conveys is that of being granted a favored standing before someone who has the power to withhold or bestow the favor as he chooses. Thus the very word that the apostle has selected foreshadows the thrust of the argument to come which insists that Abraham's status before God was an act of divine favor by grace.

If, in fact, Abraham was justified by works - If any man would ever have had the right to boast about his own good works, that man would have been Abraham, who left his home at God's command and raised the knife to sacrifice his only son (cf. James 2:20-24). But there is no difference for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. (3:22,23). Even Father Abraham falls under that condemnation. The fact of the matter is that not even Abraham was justified by works. Therefore boasting is excluded (3:27), for Abraham and for all. Not even the man whom God Himself called My friend (Isaiah 41:8; 2 Chronicles 20:7) could boast of his own works before God.

What does the Scripture say? - The possibility of boasting about good works before God is excluded and God Himself is now called upon to testify to that effect. Paul appeals to the Old Testament, the inspired and inerrant Word of God, as the conclusive authority in this matter. The Scriptural citation is Genesis 15:6 - Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness. Abraham was the quintessential man of faith. In the roll call of the heroes of faith in the Letter to the Hebrews we read:

By faith, Abraham, when he was called, obeyed by going out to a place which he was to receive for an inheritance; and he went out, not knowing where he was going. By faith he lived as an alien in the land of promise, as in a foreign land, dwelling in tents with Isaac and Jacob, fellow heirs of the same promise; for he was looking for a city which has foundations, whose architect and builder is God. (Hebrews 11:8-10)

In the parallel reference in Galatians Paul asserts: Therefore, be sure that those who are of faith are the sons of Abraham. (Galatians 3:6-7). That faith was gloriously fulfilled in the person of Jesus Christ. Abraham rejoiced to see my day, and he saw it and was glad. (John 8:56)

Genesis 15:6 is a most significant passage. It figured prominently in Judaic discussion of the role of Abraham. However, among the rabbis, the focus was on faithfulness, not faith, thus perverting the verse into a proof text for work righteousness. 1 Maccabees, in the Jewish Apocrypha, paraphrases the passage to that effect: Was not Abraham found faithful when tested, and it was reckoned to him as righteousness? (1 Maccabees 2:52) Given that abuse, Paul's citation of the passage here becomes all the more compelling. Stoeckhardt calls Genesis 15:6 the classic passage of the Old Testament for the teaching of justification. (Stoeckhardt, p.50) James Montgomery Boice goes so far as to contend that from the viewpoint of the doctrine of salvation this is the single most important verse in the entire Bible. He explains his contention in this way:

This is because in Genesis 15:6 the doctrine of justification by faith is set forth for the first time. It is the first reference in the Bible to (1) faith, (2) righteousness, and (3) justification...This is the first time that any specific individual is said to have been justified. (Boice, I, p.433)

Abraham believed God - God promised Abraham that despite the fact that in his old age he still had not had a son, his offspring would be a numerous as the stars in the sky (Genesis 15:4-5) and that through him all the nations of the earth would be blessed (Genesis 12:3). Abraham trusted in and relied upon that divine promise all the external evidence to contrary notwithstanding. That was the substance of Abraham's faith. Luther explains: Thus the expression "Abraham believed God" is equivilent to saying that he considered God truthful, for to believe God means to believe Him always and everywhere. (Luther, 25, p.255).

And it was credited to him as righteousness. - The key word in this text is the verb credited (Greek - logizomai). The word is actually a bookkeeping term from the world of accounting which Paul figuratively applies to this divine transaction. It might literally be translated booked to his credit. Lenski quotes this precise definition:

Something is transferred to the subject person in question and reckoned as his, which he, in his own person, does not have...It is accounted to the person "per substitutionem"; the object present (faith) takes the place of what it counts for (righteousness), it is substituted for it." (Lenski, p. 289)

The image depicts God as a bookkeeper recording debits and credits in a ledger. Thus, God took the sin of Abraham from the debit side of the ledger book of Abraham's life and transferred it to the ledger book of Christ, who had died for the sins of the world. So also He took the righteousness of Christ from the credit side of the ledger book of Christ's life and transferred it to that of Abraham. Faith is the channel through which this transfer takes place for each believing individual. The great Renaissance scholar Erasmus used the legal term impute (Latin - imputatum est) in his Latin translation of this phrase. This word came to have crucial significance in Lutheran formulations of the doctrine of forensic justification. Imputed righteousness is righteousness that is attributed to man by the declarative act of God based upon the vicarious satisfaction of Christ. This righteousness is not inherent in us. It is not the result of our mode of living or our good deeds. It is a righteousness outside of man in the heart of God. Luther declares:

All of our good is outside of us, and this good is Christ...The saints are always sinners in their own sight, and therefore always justified outwardly. But the hypocrites are always righteous in their own sight, and thus always sinners outwardly. I use the term "inwardly" to show how we are in ourselves, in our own eyes, in our own estimation; and the term "outwardly" to indicate how we are before God and in His reckoning. Therefore we are righteous outwardly when we are righteous solely by the imputation of God and not of ourselves or of our own works. For His imputation is not ours by reason of anything in us or in our own power. Thus our righteousness is not something in us or in our power. (Luther, 25, p.267, 257)

On this point the reformers were in complete agreement with one another. John Calvin affirmed:

It is entirely by the intervention of Christ's righteousness that we obtain justification before God. This is equivalent to saying that man is not just in himself, but that the righteousness of Christ is communicated to him by imputation, while he is strictly deserving of punishment. (Sproul, p.93)

The beauty of Paul's image lies in the clarity with which it presents the unilateral nature of God's action in justification. Listen once again to Lenski's careful definition:

When Abraham believed he was in his own person no more righteous than before he believed, but God counted his faith as righteousness for him. God's accounting did not make him righteous, it did not change Abraham, it changed his status with God. Although he was not righteous, God counted him as righteous nevertheless...This is not an arbitrary, not an unjust reckoning. "Perish the thought!" Only our crooked minds could harbor such an evil thought. Faith is not righteousness. It is counted or reckoned as being righteousness. The believer is really never in and of himself righteous, he is righteous only in God's accounting. What is there in his faith that God can account for righteousness in the believer? No virtue or merit of either the believer or of his faith, nothing of this sort to the end of his life; something else entirely, namely the contents of his faith, Christ, His ransom, His merit. The faith that holds these God counts for righteousness and no other faith. The substitution takes place right here. Christ's merit and righteousness is His own; God counts it as though it were the believer's. Faith only lays its hand upon it. God Himself moves it to do so. The by grace and altogether gratuitously God reckons faith with its content as righteousness for him who believes. (Lenski, p.290,291)

It is impossible to overestimate the importance of this fundamental concept. A righteousness that is in no way our own, an alien righteousness to use Luther's terms, is credited to us by grace, through faith, for Christ's sake. R.C. Sproul explains Luther's language in this way:

Martin Luther and the other reformers insisted that the righteousness by which we are justified is a "iustitia extra nos," a "righteousness outside of or apart from us. When Luther spoke of this righteousness "extra nos" he understood that the extra becomes ours in the sight of God by faith. Again, the focus is on the grounds of our justification. The righteousness by which I am declared righteous is one that was achieved and merited before I was even born. It is the righteousness of another, even Jesus Christ, the Righteous. His righteousness is not my righteousness intrinsically. It becomes mine only by forensic imputation. It is a righteousness that counts for me, and is reckoned to my account, but it was neither achieved nor wrought by me. In like manner, Luther argued that the righteousness providing the ground for our justification is an "iustitia alienum," an "alien righteousness." This is the righteousness of another, one who is a "foreigner" to us. He is foreign to us, not in the sense that he is unknown to us or that he remains a mysterious stranger to us, but in the sense that he is ever and always distinguishable from us, even though, by faith, we are "in" him and he is "in " us. (Sproul, 107)

For the New Testament, and for the Protestant Reformers, this concept is the essence of Christianity. This is literally, as the Lutheran dogmaticians declare, the doctrine upon which the church stands or falls (articulus stantis et cadentis ecclesiae). Luther insists:

If the article of justification is lost, all Christian doctrine is lost at the same time. And all the people in the world who do not hold to this justification are either Jews or Turks or papists or heretics; for there is no middle ground between these two righteousnesses; the active one of the law and the passive one which comes from Christ. Therefore, the man who strays from Christian righteousness must relapse into the active one, that is, since he has lost Christ, he must put his confidence in his won works...Without this article the world is utter death and darkness...This doctrine is the head and the cornerstone. It alone begets, nourishes, builds, preserves, and defends the church of God; and without it the church of God cannot exist for one hour...This is the heel of the Seed that opposes the old Serpent and crushes its head. That is why Satan, in turn, cannot but persecute it. (What Luther Says, p. 703,704)

This is precisely the point at which Rome and Wittenberg parted company in the 16th Century. Roman Catholicism taught, and teaches, that the grace of God in Christ is infused into the individual thus enabling him to do good works. On the basis of those good works the individual is then declared by God to be justified. The reformers rejected this view as a clear denial of salvation by grace through faith alone. Each side condemned the other's position on justification as apostasy, that is, a falling away from the Christian faith. The Roman Catholic Council of Trent unambiguously declared:

If anyone says that the sinner is justified by faith alone, meaning that nothing else is required to co-operate in order to obtain the grace of justification, and that it is not in any way necessary that he be prepared and disposed by the action of his own will, let him be anathema. (Canon 9) If anyone says that men are justified either by the sole imputation of the justice of Christ or by the sole remission of sins, to the exclusion of the grace and the charity which is poured forth in their hearts by the Holy Ghost (Romans 5:5), and remains in them, or also that the grace by which we are justified is only the good will of God, let him be anathema. (Canon 11)

John Calvin aptly responded to these decrees by saying: It is not us that these Tridentine Fathers anathematize so much as Paul, to whom we owe the definition that the righteousness of man consists in the forgiveness of sins. (Sproul, p.115) The classic response of Lutheranism to the Canons and Decrees of the Council of Trent was written by Martin Chemnitz in his monumental four volume work Examination of the Council of Trent. Chemnitz insists that the disagreement on justification is not merely an argument over terminology:

We are by no means such troublemakers that we are opposed to a true, solid, and salutary concord and so greedy for contentions that even if a true, godly, and salutary agreement were established concerning the matters themselves, we would still look for things to fight about from battles about words...The dissension and strife in the article of justification is not only about words, but chiefly about the matters themselves. (Chemnitz, I, p.168)

What is at issue here, Chemnitz argues, is not some peripheral point or obscure theological distinction but the very heart of the Christian gospel of salvation.

For this is the chief question, this is the issue, the point of contention, namely what that is on account of which God receives sinful man into grace; what must and can be set over against the judgment of God, that we may not be condemned according to the strict sentence of the Law; what faith must apprehend and bring forward, on what it must rely when it wants to deal with God, that it may receive the remission of sins; what intervenes, on account of which God is rendered appeased and propitious to the sinner who has merited wrath and eternal damnation; what the conscience should set up as the thing on account of which the adoption may be bestowed upon us, on what confidence can safely be reposed that we shall be accepted into life eternal; whether it is the satisfaction, obedience, and merit of the Son of God, the Mediator, or, indeed, the renewal which has begun in us, the love, and other virtues in us. Here is the point at issue in the controversy which is so studiously and deceitfully concealed in the Tridentine decrees. (Chemnitz, I, p. 468)

The argument was not over the importance of good works in the Christian life. Lutherans freely acknowledged that believers were to walk in newness of life, expressing and demonstrating their faith in deeds of love. However, Lutherans categorically rejected the Roman insistence that these good works became at least a part of the basis for our justification. Is the ground of our justification to be found in us or in Christ? This is the fundamental question upon which the Reformation occurred and on this question no compromise was possible. Chemnitz clarifies this point with meticulous care.

On this hinge the controversy between us and the papalists chiefly turns in the article of justification, namely, whether the regenerate are justified before God to life eternal on account of their newness and works. But I repeat what has already been said a number of times: We acknowledge that renewal is a very great benefit of the Son of God, the Mediator, through the Holy Spirit in us. We teach that new obedience must follow after reconciliation; and we give to it, in its place, that which the Scripture gives to it, as we shall show later when we speak about good works. However, we have learned from Scripture that this dignity and glory, that they are our justification before God to life eternal, must not be given to our renewal and good works. For this dignity and glory belongs to the obedience, or righteousness, of the only-begotten Son of God, our Mediator, imputed to us through faith. So far we have shown how the Scripture denies to us and takes away from us the justification before God to life eternal, so that it demonstrates by a division or enumeration that there is nor inheres neither in nature nor in life nor in qualities, habits, or works of men in this life, whether they be Jews or Gentiles, regenerate or unregenerate, that by which they can so stand in the judgment of God that on account of it they may be justified to life eternal. And this division, whether there is or inheres in any part of man, or in his actions, something by which he can be justified before God, was instituted by Paul...And for the doctrine of justification solely through the grace, or mercy, of God, it is necessary that it be removed and taken away completely from all the things which are, or inhere, in man, whether he be Jew or Gentile, regenerate or unregenerate. (Chemnitz, I, p.492)

As it was for Father Abraham, so it must be for everyone else - Abraham believed God and it was credited to him as righteousness.

Verses 4-5
Now when a man works, his wages are not credited to him as a gift, but as an obligation. However, to the man who does not work but trusts God who justifies the wicked, his faith is credited as righteousness.

Now when a man works... - Having used an accounting term from the business world to describe God's justification of Abraham, the apostle now draws upon an axiom from everyday world of work and wages to demonstrate that the justification of Abraham, and of every believer, is absolutely by grace. The laborer who does his work well earns his wages. They are not credited to him as a gift. He simply gets what he has coming to him as the result of his effort. This can in no way be considered a gift (Greek - kata charin - as a favor, out of goodwill). It is instead an obligation. The workman may rightly demand that which he has earned. Works and grace cannot be combined. Either one has earned that which he receives, or he has not. If he earned it, it's not a gift. If it is a gift, then he did not earn it.

However, to the man who does not work but trusts God... - Great care must be taken not to view faith itself as a good work which merits the favor of God. Faith is not our work but God's. It is not the basis for our salvation, but only the God-given means through which we receive that which God has done for us in Christ. Likewise it be comes clear again that faith for Paul is something qualitatively distinct from any human-originated endeavor. We believe, but we can take no credit for it. (Moo, p.264) The righteousness which was credited to Abraham was not a matter of wages paid for work performed. Paul insists that the man who trusts God is a man who does not work. Working and trusting are placed in contrast to one another with the adversative conjunction but. In this way the apostle clearly indicates that faith is not to be viewed as a good work performed by man which in any way contributes to or merits his salvation. The believer has given up working because he knows that all hope by way of works is vacuous, that all claims which men make upon God for pay in accord with obligation are deadly fiction; he simply believes and trusts. (Lenski, p.292) It should be noted that Paul's strong contrast between faith and works does not suggest that it is unnecessary for the believer to actively put his faith into practice. The point here is not that the Christian need not do good works, but that we may never depend upon those good works for our standing before God.

The object of the believer's trust is God who justifies the wicked. This startling paradox is advanced in language that was, no doubt, deliberately provocative. The wicked (Greek asebe - literally the ungodly, one who refuses to worship) in traditional Jewish thinking were those whose actions put them outside of the covenant, Gentiles and religiously non-observant Jews. Paul uses this terminology to re-emphasize the gracious nature of God's justification. The phrase boldly highlights the nature of God, loving, freely giving, incapable of being put under obligation to any human being. Above all else, our God is a God of full and free grace. It is that grace which is the object of faith. Faith looks to God, the gracious Reckoner, for that which is "legally" impossible; it looks to Him for righteousness "apart from the law." (Franzmann, p. 78) To such a man, the believer who trusts in the undeserved grace of God, his faith is credited as righteousness. The great Puritan preacher-theologian Jonathan Edwards observes that the point of this verse is: that God, in the act of justification, has no regard to anything in the person justified, as godliness or any goodness in him; but that immediately before this act, God beholds him only as an ungodly creature; so that godliness in the person to be justified is no so antecedent to his justification as to be the ground for it. (Moo, p. 265) This incredible point becomes all the more important because it is made in reference to Father Abraham himself. As St. John Chrysostom remarks: For a person who had no works to be justified by faith was nothing unlikely. The necessity of grace there is plain to see. But for a person richly adorned with good deeds, not to be made just from these, but from faith, this is the thing to cause wonder and to see the power of faith in a strong light. (Moo, p.265)

Verses 6-8
David says the same thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works: "Blessed are they whose transgressions are forgiven, whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man whose sin the Lord will never count against him."

David says the same thing... - It was customary among the teaching of the rabbis to offer primary proof for a theological point from the Torah, the Five Books of Moses, and then to add a secondary witness from the Writings or the Prophets. It would seem that Paul is following that traditional rabbinic pattern in this instance. Having cited the example of the founder of the Jewish nation from the Book of Genesis, the apostle proceeds to demonstrate that the greatest of the Hebrew kings also clearly understood and affirmed justification by grace through faith from the Book of Psalms. The quotation is from Psalm 32: 1-2. The language of the Psalm closely parallels the Genesis text previously cited. Both passages utilize the key verb to credit or to count. Paul rightly contends that in this verse David proclaims the blessedness of the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works. Blessedness (Greek - makarismos) means happiness or good fortunate. The word usually carries the connotation of being the privileged recipient of divine favor. This is also the word used in the beloved Beatitudes of our Lord's Sermon on the Mount (cf. Matthew 5:1-12).

Paul's citation of this passage reveals that the forgiveness of sins is a basic component in justification. Joachim Jeremias asserts Justification is forgiveness, nothing but forgiveness! (Dunn, p.206) David employs three terms for sin and correspondingly, three terms for its removal. First, transgressions (Greek - anomia) which means lawlessness, drawn from a root meaning revolt or rebellion against a government. Second, sins (Greek - hamartia) which means to miss the mark. Lenski amplifies the meaning of the word in this context:

This "missing the mark" does not have a connotation of one earnestly trying to hit the mark and missing it only because of weakness and ignorance. The contrary is true...This is criminal refusal to come up to the divinely set mark, the mark set by God's Law. It is the godless, rebellious action of abolishing such a mark, of setting up that pleases the sinner better, setting it up, not merely by word of mouth, but by deed. (Lenski, p.297)

In the Greek text, hamartia is repeated in the third line, but in the original Hebrew a different, third term is used. The Hebrew word is havon which means to deliberately turn aside or turn away. The prophet Isaiah uses the same word to describe Israel's obstinate rejection of her divine Messiah: We have turned everyone to his own way. (Isaiah 53:6) The cumulative effect of these three powerful words is devastating in its presentation of the total depravity of fallen sinful, rebellious man.

But just as these three words convey the darkness and despair of sin with grim realism, the three terms used to describe the removal of guilt and blame convey the light and hope of the Gospel with equal power. Together, they reveal the wonder of justification in all of its blessedness. First, man's transgressions are forgiven. The Hebrew verb (nasa) means to dismiss or to send away. E. Koenig explains the word in this way in his Hebrew dictionary:

"Nasa" means to take away or to carry away...to take away all of man's sin and guilt, the whole frightening, stinking, deadly, damnable mess, to remove it from him and carry it away so far that it will never be found; "as far as the East is from the West" (Psalm 103:12), "into the depths of sea (Micah 7:19)...Forgive and forgiveness, the English renderings are too pale. (Lenski, p.298)

The verb is in the aorist tense indicating a past definite fact with permanent significance: literal translation - dismissed once and for all!

The second verb is are covered (Greek - epekaluphthesan). This is the only instance in the New Testament where the term occurs. The thrust of the verb is that man's sins are covered forever and will never be exposed to the sight of God. The allusion is to the blood of the sacrificial offering covering of the Mercy Seat upon the Ark of the Covenant on the Day of Atonement. Hence the reference fits the flow of Paul's argument beautifully given his earlier reference to Christ as our Mercy Seat (cf. 3:25).

Finally, the third verb is the crucial word will never count against (Greek - logisetai) which repeats the previous use of the verb by Moses in Genesis 15:6 (cf. vs.3). In verse 3 the term was used in a positive sense as righteousness was credited to believing Abraham. David used the word negatively to make exactly the same point when he promised that a man's sin...will never count against him.

Paul, Moses, and David all teach the same thing on the doctrine of justification by grace through faith for Christ's sake. The apostolic witness is reinforced by that of the prophet and the psalmist. God has done it all! An early 20th century hymn by James Procter, based upon Christ's dying words from the cross, express this foundational truth in a most touching way.

"IT IS FINISHED"
by James Procter, 1922

1. Nothing, either great or small - nothing, sinner, no;
Jesus did it, did it all, long, long ago.

2. When He, from His lofty throne, stooped to do and die,
Everything was fully done, hearken to His cry!

3. Weary, working, burdened one, Wherefore toil you so?
Cease your doing, all was done long, long ago.

4. Till to Jesus' work you cling by a simple faith,
"Doing" is a deadly thing - "Doing" ends in death.

5. Cast your deadly "Doing" down, down as Jesus' feet;
Stand in Him, in Him alone, gloriously complete.

6. "It is finished!" Yes, indeed, finished every jot;
Sinner, this is all you need, tell me, is it not?

Paul's quotation of David's inspired words from Psalm 32 serve to emphasize, once again, the apostle's strongly forensic understanding of justification.

He uses this quotation to compare justification to the non-accrediting, or not "imputing" of sins to a person. That is an act that has nothing to do with moral transformation, but "changes" people only in the sense that their relationship to God is changed - they are acquitted rather than condemned. (Moo, p. 266)

Verses 9-12
Is this blessedness only for the circumcised, or also for the uncircumcised? We have been saying that Abraham's faith was credited to him as righteousness. Under what circumstances was it credited? Was it after he was circumcised, or before? It was not after, but before! And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness that he had by faith while he was still uncircumcised. So then, he is the father of all who believe but have not been circumcised, in order that righteousness might be credited to them. And he is also the father of the circumcised who not only are circumcised but also walk in the footsteps of the faith that our father Abraham had before he was circumcised.

Is this blessedness only for the circumcised... - St. Paul now returns to the topic of circumcision (cf. 2:25-29) to demonstrate beyond any shadow of a doubt that Abraham's salvation was completely by grace and in no way the result of his own efforts. Since it is Abraham whom Paul is using as his model of justification it is not unreasonable to anticipate the suggestion that the great patriarch's righteousness before God is at least partially the result of his own faithfulness. His participation in the rite of circumcision is a prime example of that faithful obedience. Many among the Jews had come to believe that God's love and His plan of salvation was reserved only for the circumcised descendants of Abraham. The Jewish Intertestamental Book of Jubilees declares that circumcision is the indispensable and indelible mark of God's favor:

The law is for all generations forever, and there is no circumcision of the time, and no passing over one day of the eight days; for it is an eternal ordinance, ordained and written on the heavenly tables. And everyone that is born, the flesh of whose foreskin is not circumcised on the eighth day, belongs not to the children of the covenant which the Lord made with Abraham, for he belongs to the children of destruction; nor is there, moreover, any sign of him that he is the Lord's, but he is destined to be destroyed and slain from the earth. (Jubilees 15:25-28)

The author of the Book of Jubilees goes on to directly connect the Jews loss of the Promised Land with their failure to consistently follow the practice of circumcision.

And now I will announce unto thee that the children of Israel will not keep true to this ordinance, and they will not circumcise their sons according to all this law; for in the flesh of their circumcision they will omit this circumcision of their sons, and all of them, sons of Belial, will have their sons uncircumcised as they were born. And there shall be great wrath from the Lord against the children of Israel, because they have forsaken His covenant and turned away from His Word, and have provoked and blasphemed as they have not observed the ordinance of this law; for they treat their members like the Gentiles, so that they may be removed and rooted out of the land. And there will be no pardon or forgiveness for them." (Jubilees 15: 29-31)

The role of circumcision as a mark of God's favor was so absolute among the Jews that the rabbis taught that a Jew who practiced idolatry would have his circumcision undone before he was consigned to Hell. Dr. David Scaer describes the Judaistic perversion of the rite of circumcision in this way:

The Jews, who had lost control of the Promised Land, had turned circumcision into a racial, nationalistic badge. It had become a magical ritual and even worse, a prideful, human-centered expression of the law through which they thought they could merit God's favor "ex opere operato." The Jews had lapsed into a formalism in which race, not grace, was the criterion for salvation. The prophets of long ago had warned Israel of this kind of formalism, urging them not to throw away the worship forms but to carry them out in the right spirit. In any event, the New Testament speaks out against circumcision as it had been abused. Having rejected the Spirit given in true circumcision, the Jews were uncircumcised in heart and ears (Acts 7:51). (Scaer, p.24)

Continuing to use Abraham as his model the apostle clearly proves that This blessedness, the gift of having been declared righteous by grace through faith alone, is not limited to or contingent upon the rite or circumcision. It is not only for the circumcised but also for the uncircumcised.

We have been saying that Abraham's faith was credited to him as righteousness. - To make his point, Paul cites the text of Genesis 15:6 once again, in this instance introducing it with the emphatic verb legomen (literally - we maintain). Paul proposes that the circumstances of that crediting be examined in greater detail, specifically with reference to its timing in regard to Abraham's circumcision. Under what circumstances was it credited? Was it after he was circumcised, or before? The time sequence is of crucial significance if we are to properly understand the relationship between Abraham's justification and his circumcision. Which came first, justification or circumcision? The sequence of events in Genesis is clear. The declaration of Abraham's justification takes place in chapter fifteen in connection with the renewal of God's promise of a son. At that time Abraham is uncircumcised. The rite of circumcision is not instituted until Genesis seventeen. In the rabbinical traditions of the Jews, twenty-nine years separated those two events. These facts are so well known that they need not be proven. Therefore the apostle is content to simply assert them as common knowledge. It was not after but before! Abraham's justification before God could not have been the result of his circumcision because he had not yet been circumcised.

Circumcision is not rejected but its proper role within God's plan of salvation is carefully explained, using the unique example of Father Abraham's experience. To emphasize that circumcision was a gift of God, not a meritorious good work performed by Abraham himself, Paul reminds his readers that he received the sign of circumcision. The verb indicates that Abraham is a passive recipient, not an active initiator. In Genesis 17:11, circumcision is called the sign of the covenant. Paul builds upon that language here as he describes the rite as the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness which he had by faith. The sign (Greek - semeion) and seal (Greek - sphragis) terminology is very important and frequently misunderstood.

A sign is that which represents, reveals, or signifies something else. It is not the thing itself, but an emblem of it. However, we must recognize that signs in Scripture are not merely empty external symbols which are able to accomplish nothing. This is the sense in which classic Zwinglism and Calvinism use the term to rob the New Testament's sacraments, Baptism and Holy Communion, of their unique ability to offer and convey, faith, the forgiveness of sins, life, and salvation. Understood in this false sense, the sign is once again perverted into a human work, something that we do in response to God's ordinance and command. No, it is the God from Whom we have received the sign Who is at work in that which He has established. There is real power here, the power of God's grace at work in the Word of His promise.

The word "sign," suffice it to say, participates in the reality which it makes visible, the "signum" (Latin - "sign") is not to be divorced from the "res signata" (Latin - "that which is signified"). The covenant sign is not merely an outward sign of inward grace. Nor does the sign point only to an external act which demands to be taken figuratively. The sign is wrapped up in concrete acts. In both Testaments, "signs and wonders" are the real acts of God in history, not mere pictorial illustrations which point toward real acts. As real actions themselves, signs can also simultaneously set future actions into motion, and thus they are normally connected with the Word of God. (Scaer, p.13)

That becomes even more clear as St. Paul uses the term seal to explain the sign of circumcision. Circumcision did not merely signify something, it was God's own seal of attestation and approval. In this divinely ordained action, God Himself was at work. The apostle's use of the term in this context is most appropriate. The prayer pronounced during Judaism's circumcision ceremony says: Blessed be He Who sanctified His beloved from the womb, and put His ordinance upon his flesh, and sealed His offspring with the sign of a holy covenant. At the conclusion of the ceremony, the rabbi declared: The seal of circumcision is in your flesh as it was sealed in the flesh of Abraham. On a royal decree, the seal of the king was the certification of authenticity and the guarantee that all of the monarch's power and authority lay behind a decree which bore the royal seal. In the same way, circumcision carries with it the full power and authority of God, His seal of attestation upon the flesh of Abraham and all his house.

Luther points out that a distinction must be maintained between the significance of circumcision for Abraham, through whom God originally instituted the practice, and the significance of circumcision for all of Abraham's descendants. In a sense, Luther suggests, this distinction parallels the difference between the baptism of Jesus, through which the sacrament was instituted, and the subsequent baptisms of all of the followers of Christ: Christ is baptized not in order to be made righteous...but as an example, so to speak, for us in order that He may precede us and we may follow His example and also be baptized. So also Abraham, already justified on the basis of his faith in God's promise, is circumcised in order that his descendants may come to faith and be made righteous through circumcision. Luther writes:

Circumcision was given to Abraham in order that through him this sign of the covenant might be transmitted to his entire posterity. Therefore there was one reason for circumcision in the case of Abraham and another reason in the case of Abraham's descendants. God was the God of Abraham before this time, as Moses clearly testifies. Accordingly it was not through circumcision that Abraham began to be a son of God. Nevertheless, because God commanded that he be circumcised, he was in duty bound not to offer an resistance whatever to the will of God. But for the descendants of Abraham circumcision was a symbol that they were heirs of the promise which had been given to Abraham before he was circumcised...Thus circumcision was enjoined upon Abraham in order that for his descendants it might be a sacrament through which they would be made righteous if they would believe the promise which the Lord had attached to it. In the case of Abraham, who had already been made righteous, there was a different reason for this work, although for him it was also a seal of righteousness. (Luther, III, p.86-87)

Paul's point here, in regard to Abraham, is completely valid. The patriarch was justified by grace through faith long before the institution of circumcision. This truth, however, should not lead us to underestimate the importance of circumcision as a genuine means of grace for Abraham's posterity. Listen again to Luther's careful words:

Paul is an excellent definer and an expert dialectician; for he defines circumcision as a sign or a seal of the righteousness which Abraham had before he was circumcised, in fact, as a sign imprinted on the very flesh of Abraham and of all males who descended from him (Romans 4:11). But if someone calls circumcision a ceremony, he will concede in spite of this that it differs from the rest of the ceremonies in that it, like Baptism, is a passive ceremony. Furthermore, when it is determined that circumcision is a sign which did not make Abraham righteous, but indicates the righteousness that Abraham already has, the question arises whether this seal was an empty sign or something that was implemented with the seal. My answer to this question is that in Abraham's case circumcision is a mere sign without implementing anything; that is, it is a sign in such a way that it does not implement what it signifies, but merely signifies. For the argument with which Paul proves that Abraham was righteous before he was circumcised is irrefutable. Hence, circumcision is a sign which merely signifies righteousness but does not confer it, for it finds Abraham already righteous. It does not make him righteous. But the situation with Abraham's descendants was different. Circumcision does not find them righteous, like Abraham. Therefore it is a seal of righteousness in such a way that righteousness was implemented by it. (Luther, III, p.101-102)

Dr. David Scaer asserts the classic Lutheran understanding of circumcision as a means of conveying and offering the grace of God:

For the Old Testament people of God circumcision was a means of grace in the fullest sense of the term. Circumcision was the "locus," the effector, the causative instrument, of God's gracious covenant. Circumcision was an Old Testament sacrament, that is, and action commanded by God, involving visible means (a permanent mark at that!) and bestowing the blessing of God. For the Old Testament individual there was only one covenant God knew, the covenant of circumcision (cf. Acts 7:6)

Accordingly, Scaer contends, circumcision as a sacrament of the Old Testament closely parallels its New Testament counterpart, baptism. This parallel is so close that circumcision may properly be called the circumcision done by Christ (Colossians 2:11).

Both circumcision and baptism are means of grace...Circumcision is also an efficacious "sacrament." Both are commanded by God and employ visible means. Both are tied to the unilateral prevenient promises of God. Both bring to bear on individual people the saving acts of God in history...Both of them bundle up into one package the Word of God and the visible means...Both circumcision and baptism are the locus and vehicle of God's redemptive work...Both baptism and circumcision have to be performed only once. When God is the actor and is granting everything that pertains to salvation, it dare not be repeated...Both circumcision and baptism stress human passivity. In both God Himself is the one who is "doing the doing." Both acts involve receiving a new identity as the passive subject is received into the Name of God and all that it means...Both acts effect one's incorporation into the Church. Of course, God is the one doing the incorporating; neither circumcision nor baptism are merely the avenue by which a man "joins" the Church...Both circumcision and baptism confer the forgiveness of sins, forgiveness through Jesus Christ which is the only forgiveness there is...Circumcision and baptism stand in the same relationship to faith. Regarding baptism, Luther speaks of "faith which trusts such Word of God in the water;" accordingly, an unbelieving rejection of the blessings of circumcision deems the act as only a "circumcision of the flesh." (Scaer, p.16ff.)

In this way, the sacraments of the New Testament are both prefigured and reflected in the sacraments of the Old Testament: Holy Baptism in the rite of Circumcision, and Holy Communion in the great Feast of the Passover.

So then, he is the father of all who believe but have not been circumcised...- In an ironic way, Abraham was a Gentile when he was justified by grace through faith. He could not claim a racial heritage before God, nor had he yet participated in the rite of circumcision, for neither the Jewish nation nor circumcision had yet come to be. Thus, to the consternation of the proud, self-righteous Jew, Abraham is declared to be the spiritual father of all uncircumcised believers! As Paul contends in Galatians 3:7 - Understand, then, that those who believe are children of Abraham. Lenski concludes: Here is our charter of full spiritual relationship with Abraham; all of us Gentile believers today are his children in the fullest sense of the word, the same righteousness being reckoned to us as to him, foreskin notwithstanding. (Lenski, p.304, 305)

And he is also the father of the circumcised, who not only are circumcised but also walk in the footsteps of the faith...Circumcision is not decisive. It is faith that is decisive. Abraham is not the father of all those Jews who are circumcised, for this is not a matter of ethic descent or ritual observance. He is only the father of circumcised Jews who walk in the footsteps of faith. This interesting phrase does not simply mean to walk. Instead it means to stand in line in position like soldiers in ranks in a military formation. The language implies that faith can be empirically observed in the life of a believer, it leaves its tracks, so to speak. The paragraph concludes with a reminder of the basic fact that Abraham's faith preceded his circumcision - the faith that our father Abraham had before he was circumcised.

Verse 13
For it was not through the law that Abraham and his offspring received the promise that he would be heir of the world, but through the righteousness that comes by faith.

For it was not through the law... - The new paragraph begins with the word For (Greek - gar) which indicates that what follows serves to explain that which came before. Paul has clearly demonstrated that Abraham's status of justification before God did not depend upon his compliance with circumcision. He now broadens the argument to demonstrate that Abraham's status of justification before God did not depend upon his observance of the law in any way. The noun law lacks the definite article in this verse, indicating that Paul does not have the specific Law of Moses, the Law, in mind, but rather law in general, any kind of law by which man might seek to justify himself before God. Hence this rejection of legalism applies not only to the Jews but also to the Gentiles. The core component in this argument is the assertion of the complete incomparability of faith and works in the matter of justification - not through the law...but through the righteousness that comes by faith.

The reason that faith has no value if one is living by the law principle is that faith and law are opposites, and if a person is choosing one, he or she is inevitably rejecting the other. It is as impossible to be saved by both faith and works as it is to be setting out from Kansas in the direction of California and New York simultaneously...To put it another way: Law is man-directed (it points to human abilities), while faith is God-directed (it points to God's accomplishments). So if you are approaching salvation by trusting man, you cannot be trusting God - and vice versa. (Boice, I, p.472)

Abraham's fidelity to the law was axiomatic among the Jews. Without denying that faithfulness, Paul contends that law had nothing whatsoever to do with the patriarch's justification.

Abraham and his offspring received the promise...- Promise (Greek - epaggelia) is a key word in this passage. In classical Greek this word simply meant announcement. But in Biblical literature the word takes on the connotation of a promise or a pledge. This was a time of intense messianic expectation among the Jews and this is the word that is used in reference to the messianic prophecies of the Old Testament. Jesus uses this word to refer to the promised outpouring of the Holy Spirit (Acts 1:4), and it is used regularly by the apostles about the prophetic promises that were fulfilled in Christ (i.e. Acts 13:32). The content of the promise is that he would be heir of the world. There is no Old Testament prophecy with this specific wording but Paul's language is aptly reminiscent of Christ's words in the Sermon on the Mount: Blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the earth. (Matthew 5:5) God's promise to Abraham included three key provisions: that he would be the father of many nations, that he would possess the land of Palestine, and that all nations of the earth would be blessed through him (Genesis 12:1-2). The promise is not only to Abraham as an individual but to his offspring (Greek - spermati). In Galatians 3:16-18, Paul emphasizes the Christological significance of this term, but here the reference is more general, to all those who are sons and daughters of Abraham by faith.

Verses 14-15
For if those who live by the law are heirs, faith has no value and the promise is worthless, because law brings wrath. And where there is no law there is no transgression.

For if those who live by the law... - The concept of inheritance was a basic part of the Jewish understanding of their covenant relationship with God. Legalistic Jews (those who live by the law) make the proud claim that they are the children, the heirs of Abraham. But that cannot be. For is this is a matter of living by the law then faith has no value (literally - believing has been emptied of its meaning) and the promise is worthless (literally - the promise has been nullified). It cannot possibly be both/and. It must be either/or. Faith and the promise cannot be combined with law and works. They cancel out one another. On can hardly apply the word "promise" to something that a person has a right to; not is faith, in the Pauline sense of absolute trust in God, an appropriate word to use for one's birthright or wage. (Moo, p.275) Paul's colorful description those who live by the law (literally - the dependents of the law, the vassals of the legal system) says it well.

As the preceding chapters have indicated, law brings wrath. The verb is in the imperfect tense indicating continuously ongoing action - the law keeps on producing wrath. The righteous anger of God is being poured out from heaven upon a world full of sinners who have failed to measure up to the perfect obedience which the law demands. The law is not connected to the promise. It is connected only to the wrath and judgment of God. The law does not save. It can only condemn.

And where there is no law there is no transgression. - The word transgression (Greek - parabasis) means the direct violation of a written code, to deliberately step across a clearly defined line. When a man sins without the law, his wrongdoing is still sin. Paul has already shown that no one has any excuse before the judgment of God. However, when sinful man is confronted with the specific demands of the written law, and he still chooses to defiantly disobey, his sin escalates into transgression. Thus while all transgression is sin, not all sin is transgression. The rebellion inherent in deliberate disobedience compounds the spiritual damage of the action itself. John Calvin writes: He who is not instructed by the written law, when he sins, is not guilty of so great a transgression as he who knowingly breaks and transgresses the law of God. The law renders people even more accountable to God than they were without it.

Verses 16-17
Therefore, the promise comes by faith, so that it may be by grace and may be guaranteed to all of Abraham's offspring - not only to those who are of the law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham. He is the father of us all. As it is written: "I have made you a father of many nations." He is our father in the sight of God, in whom he believed - the God who gives life to the dead and calls things that are not as though they were.

Therefore the promise comes by faith... - Because the law's nature is such that it is only capable of producing wrath and judgement the promise comes by faith. Once again, the intimate connection between faith and grace is emphasized. From man's point of view the promise is a matter of faith, the trust which is solely the gift and work of God. From God's point of view the promise is a matter of grace, love that is absolutely unconditioned and unearned. Each necessitates the other. God's plan was made to rest upon faith on man's side in order that on God's side it might be a matter of grace. (Barrett) Because justification is by grace through faith it is guaranteed to all of Abraham's offspring. The benefit here is twofold. First of all, the promise is guaranteed (Greek - bebaios). The word is used in a technical sense to denote a legally guaranteed security. It means reliable, dependable, and certain. The promise is not dependant upon man or his works, but upon God and therefore the fulfillment of that promise is certain. Secondly, it is guaranteed to all, without restriction, limitation or exclusion.

Not only to those who are of the law... - The offspring of Abraham are to be determined by faith alone. Both Jewish believers (those who are of the law) and Gentile believers (those who are of the faith of Abraham) are included. It is faith, ethnic origin or possession of law, which is decisive here. Therefore no discrimination is permissible. The Gentiles enjoy full equality with the Jews for Abraham is the father of us all. He is the spiritual forefather of every believer. Stoeckhardt notes:

There is a great, holy family upon earth, at whose head stands Abraham, the father of faith. This is the congregation of all believers from the Jews and Gentiles, all sinners justified by faith. The patriarchs before Abraham also belonged to this congregation. The first believer was Adam. Nevertheless, since Scripture especially extols the faith and justification of Abraham, he is esteemed the father of believers. By natural descent, also according to circumcision, Abraham was the father of Israel, God's Old Testament people. However, God's true people, to whom also the believing Israelites belong, are all believers gathered from all people of the earth. It is a comforting and uplifting thought for every individual believer that he, through justification by faith, belongs to the great family of Abraham's children, of God's children on earth. (Stoeckhardt, p.55)

As it is written, "I have made you the father of many nations." - The quotation comes from Genesis 17:5. It is used to substantiate the preceding assertion that Abraham is the father of all believers. Scripture itself had prophesied that this would be the case. This is also clear from Genesis 12:3. As Paul declares in Galatians: Scripture, foreseeing that God would justify Gentiles through faith, preached the Gospel aforetime to Abraham, saying, "In you shall all nations be blessed. (Galatians 3:8).

He is our Father in the sight of God... - The family of faith is not a kinship which may empirically observed. In the eyes of men believers are separated from one another by countless barriers of race, gender, language, etc. But in the sight of God we are all one family of believers together and Abraham is our father.

The God who gives life to the dead... - Nothing is impossible for the God in whom we believe. There are no constraints upon His power. In the following verse Paul will explain this reference to the miracle of Isaac's conception and birth in greater detail. The mighty God alone is capable of creation, that is to make something from nothing (creatio ex nihilo). The NIV's translation of the second part of this phrase (who calls those things that are not as though they were) understates the wonder that is being described. The text literally reads and calls into being things that exist not. The allusion is to Genesis 1 and the creation of the universe by the power of God's almighty Word. This understanding of the text is completely consistent with the linguistic usage of the period. The 2 Apocrypha of Baruch, written during the Intertestamental Period asserts: From the beginning of the world, You have called into being things that did not previously exist...With a word, You call to life what was not, and with mighty power you hold back what has not yet come to be. This is the God, the Lord of Life and Death, the Almighty Creator, in whom Abraham placed his trust.

Verses 18-21
Against all hope, Abraham in hope believed and so became the father of many nations, just as it had been said to him, "So shall your offspring be." Without weakening in his faith, he faced the fact that his body was as good as dead - since he was about a hundred years old - and that Sarah's womb was also dead. Yet he did not waver through unbelief concerning the promise of God, but was strengthened in his faith and gave glory to God, being fully persuaded that God had the power to do what he had promised.

Against all hope, Abraham in hope believed... - The paradox is powerful indeed! The phrase literally reads; Against hope, on the basis of hope, Abraham believed. As St. John Chrysostom observes: It was against man's hope in the hope which is of God. Contrary to all human expectation, a one hundred year old man believed God's promise that he would yet father a son. He trusted in the divine promise when every circumstance denied that promise. His hope flew in the face of all the evidence of reason and common sense, but still he hoped. His faith was not an existential leap into the dark, some sort of personal irrationality without foundation. It was instead a leap from the evidence of his senses into the security of God's Word and promise (Moo, p.283). Paul's point is simply this: instead of relying upon himself, Abraham relied upon God by faith and that faith was not disappointed. When one believes, there is no room for self-reliance. (Fitzmyer, p. 387)

The promise was fulfilled, just as God had said, "So shall your offspring be." The citation is from Genesis 15:5 where God promised Abraham that his descendants would be as numerous as the stars in the heavens.

Without weakening in his faith.... - As the years passed, and Abraham grew older one might expect that his confidence would have been shaken. But that was not the case. As his biological clock continued to tick away and he aged passed the point of sexual potency, He faced the fact that his body was as good as dead. Sarah, his wife, was also well beyond her childbearing years, Sarah's womb was also dead. But the promise upon which he relied had come from the God who gives life to the dead (vs. 17). Genesis reports that not only Isaac was born to Abraham in his old age, but after Isaac's birth, he was further blessed with six other sons. (cf. Genesis 25:1-2) The writer to the Hebrews reports:

By faith, Abraham, even though he was past age - and Sarah herself was barren - was enabled to become a father because he considered Him faithful who had made the promise. And so from this one man, and he as good as dead, came descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky and countless as the sand on the seashore. (Heb.11:11-12)

Yet he did not waver... - Some commentators object that Paul's assertion of steadfast faith on the part of Abraham is contradicted by Genesis 17:17 - Abraham fell facedown; he laughed and said to himself, "Will a son be born to a man a hundred years old? Will Sarah bear a child at the age of ninety? Stoeckhardt replies:

The words of Abraham's reply to the Lord's promise are not those of one who doubts but of one who is astonished and leaps for joy. His laughter shows the boundless joy in his heart...And afterwards from this laughter and unspeakable spiritual joy he derived the name of Isaac, as an everlasting remembrance and sign of such a beautiful, steadfast, and certain faith. (Stoeckhardt, p.58)

The Intertestamental Book of Jubilees supports this view, indicating that after the Lord's visit and promise of Isaac's birth Both of them rejoiced very greatly. (16:19) John Calvin notes the similarity of Abraham's situation to ours:

Let us also remember that the condition of us all is the same with that of Abraham. All things around us are in opposition to the promises of God: He promises us immortality, we are surrounded with death and corruption. He declares that He counts us just, we are covered with sins. He testifies that He is propitious and kind to us, and yet outward judgments threaten His wrath. What then is to be done? We must with closed eyes pass by ourselves and all thing connected with us, that nothing may hinder or prevent us from believing that God is true. (Moo, p.284)

Faith is not the absence of all doubt and fear. It is, instead, the ultimate willingness to trust in God and believe even in the face of those doubts. Paul's choice of words in this phrase is helpful: literally - he did not doubt in the attitude of unbelief. The word unbelief (Greek - apistia) is more than the opposite of faith. It denotes the deliberate refusal to believe. In this specific instance it would mean the renunciation of the promise of God that had been given. Paul is not suggesting that Abraham was free of the momentary hesitations and fears that prey upon every believer, but that he avoided a deep seated and permanent attitude of distrust and denial toward the Word and promises of God.

But was strengthened in his faith... - This was true because Abraham did not trust in his own power, but in the power of God which strengthened him in his faith and enabled him to persevere through the long years of waiting. That reliance upon a strength greater than his own sustained him through many dark and difficult days. In grateful recognition of his dependance upon God's power, the patriarch gave glory to God. Abraham gave credit where credit was due; soli deo gloria! The base line for Abraham's faith is the confidence that His Word is sure. He has the power and ability to do all that He has said - being fully persuaded that God had the power to do what He had promised.

Verses 22-25
This is why it was credited to him as righteousness. The words "it was credited to him" were written not for him alone, but also for us to whom God will credit righteousness - for us who believe in him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead. He was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification.

This is why it was credited to him as righteousness. - Paul returns to the crucial words of Genesis 15:6 for the third time in this chapter to assert once more that a man can be justified before God only through faith. This verse is identified as the conclusion of that which precedes it with the Greek conjunction dio, That is why. Having summarized and concluded his discussion of Abraham's justification by faith, Paul is now ready to proceed to directly apply this truth to his Christian readers.

The words "it was credited to him" were not written for him alone - That which has been implicit in the text from the beginning of this discussion is now explicitly presented. It is Paul's consistent conviction is profoundly relevant for Christians. Later, in 15:4 he writes: For everything that was written in the past was written to teach us, so that through endurance and the encouragement of the Scriptures we might have hope. The examples and experiences of the saints of the Old Testament were recorded with us in mind. These things happened to them as examples and were written down as warnings for us, on whom the fulfillment of the ages has come. (1 Corinthians 10:11) Those who would consign the Old Testament to oblivion and irrelevance do so at their own peril. They are guilty of spurning and important spiritual resource which God has graciously provided.

Our justification is no different than that of Father Abraham. When Abraham's faith was booked to his credit he became the prototype, so to speak, of all those who would be justified by faith. His faith was credited to him as righteousness apart from circumcision, apart from the law, apart from sight. This reckoning was totally by grace! These carefully chosen words were not written for him alone. They also apply to us, for like Abraham we are also people to whom God will credit righteousness. Paul uses the first person plural pronoun in order to include himself along with the Roman Christians among those who have been justified.

Our faith and that of Abraham are the same. Abraham's faith rested in a God who give life to the dead (vs.17). So does ours in that we believe in Him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead. The faith of Abraham and the Old Testament was one of anticipation, eagerly looking forward to an event that had not yet taken place in time. Ours is a faith of affirmation, rejoicing in that which God has done for all believers in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

He was delivered over to death for our sins and was raised to life for our justification. - Paul has already plainly declared the doctrine of the vicarious atonement of Christ in 3:25. The lifeblood of Jesus, shed for us upon the cross, is the ransom price of our redemption. Christ's death and resurrection are here joined together in beautiful literary parallelism. The dual use of the Greek preposition dia (for, because of, or for the sake of ) makes this clear. The atonement was accomplished upon the cross. Forgiveness for the sins of mankind had been won, once for all. In the resurrection of Jesus, God declared that His death had fulfilled its purpose, that sin was atoned, and that the sacrifice of His own Son had been accepted. The resurrection is God's stamp of approval upon the crucifixion.

(continue)