Romans 4:3-5

“ For what saith the Scripture? Now Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. Now to him that worketh his reward is not reckoned as of grace, but as of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness; ”

By the words of Romans 4:2: “ But it is not so in relation to God,” the apostle gave it to be understood that he knew the judgment of God Himself on Abraham's works. Romans 4:3 explains how he can pronounce regarding a fact which seems to lie beyond the reach of human knowledge. Scripture contains a declaration in which there is revealed the judgment of God respecting the way in which Abraham was justified. This saying is to be found in Genesis 15:6. Called by God out of his tent by night, he is invited to contemplate the heavens, and to count, if he can, the myriads of stars; then he hears the promise: “so numerous shall thy seed be.” He is a centenarian, and has never had children. But it is God who speaks; that is enough for him: he believed God. Faith consists in holding the divine promise for the reality itself; and then it happens that what the believer has done in regard to the promise of God, God in turn does in regard to his faith: He holds it for righteousness itself.

The particle δέ, now, takes the place of the καί, and, which is found in the LXX., though their reading is not quite certain, as the Sinaït. and the Vatic. have a blank here. It is possible, therefore, that, as Tischendorf thinks, the generally received reading in Paul's time was δέ, now, and not καί. For it is evident that if the apostle preserves this particle, which is not demanded by the meaning of his own text, it is to establish the literal character of the quotation. It is not said: he believed the promise of God, but: God. The object of his faith, when he embraced the promise, was God Himself

His truth, His faithfulness, His holiness, His goodness, His wisdom, His power, His eternity. For God was wholly in the promise proceeding from Him. It little matters, indeed, what the particular object is to which the divine revelation refers at a given moment. All the parts of this revelation form but one whole. In laying hold of one promise, Abraham laid hold of all by anticipation; for he laid hold of the God of the promises, and henceforth he was in possession even of those which could only be revealed and realized in the most distant future.

The Hebrew says: “ and God counted it to him for righteousness.” The LXX. have translated by the passive: and it was counted to him; Paul follows them in quoting. The verb λογίζειν, λογίζεσθαι, signifies: to put to account; comp. 2 Samuel 19:19; 2 Corinthians 5:19; 2 Timothy 4:16; and Philemon 1:18 (where Paul uses the analogous term ἐλλογεῖν, because he is speaking of an account properly so called: “If he has done thee any wrong, put it to my account”). It is possible to put to one's account what he possesses or what he does not possess. In the first case it is a simple act of justice; in the second, it is a matter of grace. The latter is Abraham's case, since God reckons his faith to him for what it is not: for righteousness. This word righteousness here denotes perfect obedience to the will of God, in virtue of which Abraham would necessarily have been declared righteous by God as being so, if he had possessed it. As he did not possess it, God put his faith to his account as an equivalent. Why so? On what did this incomparable value which God attached to his faith rest? We need not answer: on the moral power of this faith itself. For faith is a simple receptivity, and it would be strange to fall back on the sphere of meritorious work when explaining the very word which ought to exclude all merit. The infinite worth of faith lies in its object, God and His manifestation. This object is moral perfection itself. To believe is therefore to lay hold of perfection at a stroke. It is not surprising that laying hold of perfection, it should be reckoned by God as righteousness. It has been happily said: Faith is at once the most moral and the most fortunate of strokes (coups de main). In Romans 4:4-5, the apostle analyzes the saying quoted. This analysis proves that Abraham was justified not in the way of a man who had done works (Romans 4:4), but in the way of a man who has not done them (Romans 4:5); which demonstrates the truth of the affirmation of Romans 4:2: “but it is not so in relation to God.”

The two expressions: ὁ ἐργαζόμενος, he that worketh, and ὁ μὴ ἐργαζόμενος, he that worketh not, are general and abstract, with this difference, that the first refers to any workman whatever in the domain of ordinary life, while the second applies only to a workman in the moral sense. To the hired workman who performs his task, his reward is reckoned not as a favor, but as a debt. Now, according to the declaration of Moses, Abraham was not treated on this footing; therefore he is not one of those who have fulfilled their task. On the other hand, to the workman (in the moral sense) who does not labor satisfactorily, and who nevertheless places his confidence in God who pardons, his faith is reckoned for righteousness. Now, according to Moses, it is on this footing that Abraham was treated; therefore he belongs to those who have not fulfilled their task. These two harmonious conclusions the one understood after Romans 4:4, the other after Romans 4:5 set forth the contents of the declaration of Moses: Abraham was treated on the footing not of a good, but of a bad workman.

The subjective negation μή before ἐργαζόμενος is the expression of the logical relation: because, between the participle and the principal verb: “ because he does not do his work, his faith is reckoned to him as work.”

Paul says: He who justifieth the ungodly. He might have said the sinner; but he chooses the more forcible term to designate the evil of sin, that no category of sinners, even the most criminal, may think itself excluded from the privilege of being justified by their faith. It has sometimes been supposed that by the word ungodly Paul meant to characterize Abraham himself, in the sense in which it is said (Jos 24:2) that “Terah, the father of Abraham, while he dwelt beyond the flood, had served other gods. ” But idolatry is not exactly equivalent to ungodliness (impiety), and Paul would certainly never have called Abraham ungodly (impious).

To impute to the believer righteousness which he does not possess, is at the same time not to impute to him sins of which he is guilty. Paul feels the need of completing on this negative side his exposition of the subject of justification. And hence, no doubt, the reason why, to the saying of Moses regarding Abraham, he adds one of David's, in which justification is specially celebrated in the form of the non-imputation of sin.