02.10. II. Gospel-Righteousness is not Contrary to the Old Testament (ch. 4.)
II. Gospel-Righteousness is not Contrary to the Old Testament (Rom 4:1-25)
1. What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found? (Rom 4:1). The force of the language here used is, What then shall we say was gained by Abraham our father after the flesh? What did Abraham gain, and how did he gain it? If his justification was by works, then he had ground for boasting.
2. But not before God (Rom 4:2). This word, before God, is the key to the seeming conflict between Paul and James (compare Jas 2:21-24). James speaks of justification in the sight of men, while Paul is considering justification before God. That no flesh is justified by works in the sight of God is Paul’s contention, and James supplements this by pointing out that the man of faith can show his faith only by his works. Faith is visible only to the eye of God; it manifests itself by its works. Faith, which only God can see, justifies in His sight; works justify in the sight of men.
3. For what saith the Scripture? (Rom 4:3). This appeal to the law and to the testimony is to prove that Abraham’s salvation was by faith: Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him for righteousness (Gen 15:6). This is righteousness by faith; it is not by-works righteousness; it is a by-faith righteousness— that is, gospel-righteousness. As James again points out, it took many years for this faith of Abraham’s to prove itself to outward observation, but God knew all about it when Abraham believed Him. The whole question, says Dean Alford, so much mooted between Protestants on the one hand, and Romanists, Arminianists and Socinians on the other, as to whether this righteousness was reckoned (1) by means of faith, being God’s righteousness imputed to the sinner; or (2) on account of faith, so that God made Abraham righteous on account of the merit of his faith, lies in fact in a small compass, if what has gone before be properly taken into account. The apostle has proved Jews and Gentiles to .be all under sin: utterly unable by works of their own to attain to righteousness. Now faith, in the second sense mentioned above, is strictly and entirely a work, and as such would be the efficient cause of man’s justification, — which, by what has preceded, it cannot be. It will therefore follow, that it was not the act of believing which was reckoned to him as a righteous act, or on account of which perfect righteousness was laid to his charge, but that the fact of his trusting God to perform His promise introduced him into the blessing promised. God declared His purpose (Gen 12:3) of blessing all the families of the earth in Abraham, and again (Gen 15:5) that his seed should be as the stars of heaven, when as yet he had no son. Abraham believed this promise, and became partaker of this blessing. But this blessing was, justification by faith in Christ. Now Abraham could not, in the strict sense of the words, be justified by faith in Christ,—nor is it necessary to suppose that he directed his faith forward to the promised Redeemer in Person; but in so far as God’s gracious purpose was revealed to him, he grasped it by faith, and that righteousness which was implied, so far, in it, was imputed to him. Some have said (for example, Tholuck) that the parallel is incomplete—Abraham’s faith having been reckoned to him for righteousness, whereas, in our case, the righteousness of Christ is reckoned to us as our righteousness, by faith. But the incompleteness lies in the nature of the respective cases. In his case, the righteousness itself was not yet manifested. He believed implicitly, taking the promise, with all it involved and implied, as true. This, then, was his way of entering into the promise, and by means of his faith was bestowed upon him that full justification which that faith never apprehended. Thus his faith itself, the mere fact of implicit trust in God, was counted to him for righteousness. But though the same righteousness is imputed to us who believe, and by means of faith also, it is no longer the mere fact of believing implicitly in God’s truth, but the reception of Christ Jesus the Lord by faith, which justifies us (see Rom 4:23-25). As it was then the realization of God’s words by faith, so now; but we have the Person of the Lord Jesus for the object of faith, explicitly revealed; he had not. In both cases justification is gratuitous and is by faith; and so far, which is as far as the argument here requires, the parallel is strict and complete (The New Testament for English Readers).
4. Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt (Rom 4:4). Now a worker has his wage counted to him as a due, not as a favour (Moffatts translation). It is no favour to a man to pay him what he is earning. It is a ‘debt’ due him (Stifler). Dr. Shedd quotes Coriolanus here:
Better it is to die, better to starve,
Than crave the hire which first we do deserve.
5. But to him that worketh not, but believeth, his faith is reckoned for righteousness (Rom 4:5). Here is a most explicit statement of justification by grace through faith. Justification is offered not to the worker but to the believer. Works indeed have their place in the believer’s life—he is created in Christ Jesus unto good works (Eph 2:10), but his salvation is not a reward for works: it is the gift of God through faith.
6. Even as David also (Rom 4:6-8). This quotation from Psa 32:1-11 is offered in further proof of the proposition of the chapter, namely, that gospel-righteousness is in keeping with the Old Testament. David was an Old Testament saint, and his justification was by faith. He describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God reckoneth righteousness apart from works, saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not reckon sin (1911 Bible). Blessed, indeed! Wonderful salvation!
7. Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only? (Rom 4:9-12). Justification in the Old Testament, as in the New, is independent of ordinances. It was not a reward of circumcision, for Abraham was justified twenty-five years before he was circumcised. Thus he is the father of all them that believe, whether from among the Jews or from among the Gentiles. So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham (Gal 3:9).
8. For the promise was not through the law (Rom 4:13-22). This justification, in the Old Testament, as in the New, is independent of the law of Sinai. Abraham never had the law, and without it he was justified. He was saved by promise, and the law which came 430 years afterward did not make void the older Covenant of Promise. The law was added to the promise only until the Seed to Whom the promise was made should come. He having come, the law—which was a schoolmaster to bring unto Him—is done away (2Co 3:1-18; Gal 3:19-29). The promise was not through the law, but through the righteousness of faith (Rom 4:13). There can be no mingling of the two covenants, for their fundamental principles are in sharpest contrast. The law worketh wrath, and not salvation (Rom 4:15). Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace (Rom 4:16). On no other basis could grace have manifested itself. Let the principle of works enter in, and grace is excluded. Abraham was given a promise which was opposed to nature. But because the Promiser was God, he considered neither his own dead body, nor the deadness of Sarah’s womb; he staggered not at the promise through unbelief; he believed God; and therefore—therefore; because he believed God—”it was reckoned to him for righteousness” (Rom 4:22, 1911 Bible).
9. Now it was not written for his sake alone, but for us also (Rom 4:23-25). Not for his sake alone, but for us also. The Old Testament and the New Testament are in perfect concord. To the Old Testament saint, faith was reckoned for righteousness; and not only to him, but to us also, to whom it shall be reckoned, if we believe on Him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead; Who was delivered up for our offences, and was raised again for our justification (Rom 4:24-25). Why was Rom 4:25 added? asks Dr. Stifler. Why did the story not close with Rom 4:24? To show that the faith that saves is not faith in the act of the resurrection, but in its import. He who is justified must believe not only that Jesus died and rose again, but why. He died ‘for our offences’ This word ‘offences’ brings to view again the whole somber picture of the first main division of the epistle, the division about sin. Sin was such that nothing but the blood of Jesus our Lord could atone for it. But His death does atone, and therefore no works of law find any place in justification. And so it comes to pass that he who believes in the resurrection believes first of all that his own personal sins sent Jesus to the cross and the tomb, that He was the all-sufficient sacrifice for sin. It is only painful conviction of sin that can believe in this way. But if faith stopped at the tomb it would be only an agony. It also sees that, while Jesus died for sins, that death was accepted as the ransom price (Rom 3:24), and so Jesus was raised again. He who became surety for the sinner’s debt could not have been released from the prison-house of the tomb unless the debt was paid. His appearance from the tomb is an everlasting proof of the sufficiency of His atonement for our sins; and he who really believes in the resurrection believes that the guilt of his sins is cancelled. Faith is no longer an agony, but a joy, and the believer’s heart is set, not merely on the historic (2Co 5:16), but on the raised Christ. That He was delivered for our offences is pain: that He was raised again for our justification is pure spiritual delight.