2. PROOF FROM THE CASE OF ABRAHAM, THAT RIGHTEOUSNESS IS BY FAITH. The principle of faith, as the universal one, does not make void the law. In the truest sense it is by this principle that ‘we establish the law' (chap. Romans 3:31). As regards Abraham himself, the ancestor of the Jews (Romans 4:1),... [ Continue Reading ]
Romans 4:1. What shall we say then! ‘Then' connects with what precedes, but the exact reference is open to discussion. Meyer and others take it as introducing a proof of chap. Romans 3:31, which they consider the proposition of chap. 4. The objection is that Paul is proving, not the agreement of the... [ Continue Reading ]
Romans 4:2. FOR IF ABRAHAM WAS JUSTIFIED BY WORKS. It is assumed that he was justified, but the Jews held the opinion that he was justified by works. Notice that even in their view, justification was a matter where God's verdict was concerned. GROUND OF GLORYING (not the same word as in chap. Roma... [ Continue Reading ]
Romans 4:3. FOR WHAT FAITH THE SCRIPTURE! This introduces the Scriptural proof of the fact that Abraham has no ground of glorying toward God, and hence of the main position that the Old Testament teaches that justification is by faith. The passage quoted is Genesis 15:6, cited also in Galatians 3:6;... [ Continue Reading ]
Romans 4:4. NOW TO HIM THAT WORKETH. ROMANS 4:4-5 illustrate Romans 4:3, by a general contrast of the two ways by which we can be accounted righteous. A workman whose business it is to labor for hire represents the legal method, the plan of making one's own moral character and doings the basis of ac... [ Continue Reading ]
Romans 4:5. BUT TO HIM THAT WORKETH NOT; to one who does not work for hire. The statement is general, including Abraham, but not specifically applied to him. BELIEVETH ON HIM. The idea of trustfully resting on is suggested by the original. THAT JUSTIFIETH. Here any other idea than that of accoun... [ Continue Reading ]
Romans 4:6. EVEN AS DAVID ALSO. The confirmatory illustration now introduced is from Psalms 32:1-2, here attributed to David. There is significance in the fact that David himself was a sinner who had been greatly forgiven. PRONOUNCETH THE BLESSEDNESS; speaks the congratulation, the pronouncing ble... [ Continue Reading ]
Romans 4:7. BLESSED ARE THEY, etc. The quotation is made exactly from the LXX. WHOSO SINS ARE COVERED. The idea of the first clause is repeated under another figure, according to the parallelism of Hebrew poetry. Their sins are hid by God Himself, which is the same as ‘forgiven,' ‘not reckoned.'... [ Continue Reading ]
Romans 4:8. WILL NOT RECKON SIN. The negation is very strong, ‘will in no wise reckon.' This may refer to the final judgment, but more probably points to the method of entire forgiveness (future to David's eye) revealed in the gospel.... [ Continue Reading ]
Romans 4:9. IS THIS BLESSEDNESS THEN, etc. ‘This pronouncing blessed, then, _is it_ upon,' etc. The reference is to David's words. The inference, in the form of a question, is, that this declaration of blessedness affects THE UNCIRCUMCISION ALSO, for an affirmative answer to this clause is implied i... [ Continue Reading ]
Romans 4:10. HOW THEN WAS IT RECKONED? Not, what was the mode in which it was reckoned, but, ‘how was he situated when this took place?' The rest of the verse makes this clear. NOT IN CIRCUMCISION, BUT IN UNCIRCUMCISION. The ‘reckoning' took place (Genesis 15:6) at least fourteen years before the... [ Continue Reading ]
Romans 4:11. AND HE RECEIVED THE SIGN OF CIRCUMCISION, A SEAL, etc. The ‘sign' was ‘circumcision,' which is described as ‘a seal,' etc. Meyer explains: a sign which was given him in the fact that he was circumcised, he received as seal, etc. In Genesis 17:11, circumcision is represented as ‘a token... [ Continue Reading ]
Romans 4:12. AND THE FATHER. ‘ Father' is repeated to take up the line of thought slightly interrupted by the final clause of Romans 4:11. The full idea is: that he might be the father, etc. OF CIRCUMCISION. Not of the circumcision as such, but of such as are afterward further defined. N OT ONLY A... [ Continue Reading ]
Romans 4:13. FOR NOT THROUGH THE LAW. This order is required by the emphasis indicated in the original. ‘Through law' is the literal rendering, but this verse (comp. Romans 4:15) overthrows the view that ‘law' without the article does not mean specifically _the_ Mosaic law. The argument is: The Mosa... [ Continue Reading ]
Romans 4:14. FOR IF, etc. The proof of Romans 4:13 is now given (Romans 4:14-17), from the nature of the law, and the consequent necessity of faith as the ground of inheritance. THEY THAT ARE OF THE LAW. Comp. the contrasted idea, chap. Romans 3:26; Galatians 3:7. Those who belong to the law are o... [ Continue Reading ]
Romans 4:15. FOR. The statement that faith and the promise would be ignored, if the inheritance is through the law, must be true, _for_ this reason. THE LAW, the Mosaic law, as in the entire discussion. WORKETH WRATH. The wrath of God is meant, else the next clause would have little pertinence;... [ Continue Reading ]
Romans 4:16. ON THIS ACCOUNT. An inference from Romans 4:14-15 (though some refer it to what follows). IT IS OF FAITH. What? Not the promise, but the inheritance, in view of the contrast in Romans 4:14. Strictly speaking, we should explain, supply ‘the heirs are of faith.' THAT IT MAY BE. The pr... [ Continue Reading ]
Romans 4:17. AS IT IS WRITTEN. GENESIS 17:5 is here quoted, from the LXX. In view of the connection the parenthesis is to be retained. A FATHER OF MANY NATIONS. Comp. the significant change of name (Abraham = father of a multitude) for which this phrase gives a reason. HAVE I SET THEE. ‘ _Appoin... [ Continue Reading ]
Romans 4:18. WHO. Abraham; ‘who' in Romans 4:17 (referring to God) has no equivalent in the Greek, which does not present the ambiguity of our version. Romans 4:18-22, which may constitute a separate paragraph, give a more detailed description of the faith of Abraham; grammatically this verse is par... [ Continue Reading ]
Romans 4:19. AND WITHOUT BEING MADE WEAK. This clause points to a result which might have been expected, but did not occur. IN FAITH; the article in the original points to ‘his faith.' HE CONSIDERED HIS OWN BODY. The best manuscripts omit ‘not' in connection with ‘considered.' This gives to the... [ Continue Reading ]
Romans 4:20. YET WITH REGARD TO THE PROMISE OF GOD. ‘ Yet,' in contrast with the facts he ‘considered.' (If ‘not' is retained in Romans 4:19, this verse is not in contrast with what precedes). DID NOT WAVER IN UNBELIEF. The form here is the same as in the phrase rendered ‘in faith.' The article po... [ Continue Reading ]
Romans 4:21. AND BEING FULLY PERSUADED, etc. This simple confidence in God's promise gave glory to God, and is the essence of faith (comp. Genesis 18:14, and Hebrews 11:1). ‘Many find it harder to believe that God can love them, notwithstanding their sinfulness, than the hundred-years-old patriarch... [ Continue Reading ]
Romans 4:22. WHEREFORE ALSO, etc. The whole discussion is here summed up, the last clause of Romans 4:3 being repeated. The immediate connection is with Romans 4:18-21; because Abraham had believed God in the way there described.... [ Continue Reading ]
Romans 4:23. HOW IT WAS NOT WRITTEN FOR HIS SAKE ALONE. The rest of the chapter states in plain language the application of the case of Abraham to the gospel believers. Thus Paul shows that God is the God of _all_ believers, and that we establish the law through faith (chap. Romans 3:28-31). The phr... [ Continue Reading ]
Romans 4:24. BUT FOR OUR SAKE ALSO. The design was not merely to show how Abraham was justified, but also to show how we should be justified. IT SHALL BE RECKONED. ‘Shall be' is not the simple future, but points the purpose of God with respect to what is continuous; the justification of each belie... [ Continue Reading ]
Romans 4:25. WHO WAS DELIVERED UP. ‘A standing designation for the divine surrender of Christ, surrender unto death (chap. Romans 8:32), perhaps after Isaiah 53:12. It is at the same time _self-surrender_ (Galatians 2:20; Ephesians 5:2), since Christ was obedient to His Father' (Meyer). FOR OUR TRE... [ Continue Reading ]