Paul’s Jewish audience probably wondered how all of this could be possible. If God is now declaring people righteous on the basis of grace through faith, is this a new and novel idea? Not at all. The Hebrew Scriptures affirm the idea of justification by grace through faith—even though OT believers didn’t know about the death and resurrection of Jesus yet.
In Romans 4, Paul argues that the grace of God is not new. In fact, it was how both Abraham and David were declared righteous before God. Abraham lived 2,000 years before Christ, and David lived 1,000 years before Christ. Since both Abraham and David had tremendous clout in the Jewish community, this would carry serious theological weight. These two men are the “founding fathers” of the nation of Israel: Did their experience align with Paul’s teaching on salvation by grace through faith and apart from works?
(4:1) “What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, has found?”
Paul continues his discussion of the gospel by appealing to Abraham. Ancient Jewish sources stated that Abraham followed all of God’s laws—even before God gave them to Moses! (Kiddushin 4:14; Jubiliees 23.10). Thus, in Paul’s day, observant Jewish people believed that Abraham was a paradigm for what it looked like to follow the Law. Yet, Paul asks, “What is it that Abraham discovered about justification? Was Abraham’s justification by works, or by grace through faith? What do the Hebrew Scriptures say?”
Later, Paul will reveal that Abraham is not simply the “forefather” of the Jewish people, but for all people: “He might be the father of all who believe without being circumcised” (v.12).
(4:2) “For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God.”
If Abraham was sinless, then he could boast before humans (since humans are sinful). But since God is already sinless, Abraham couldn’t boast before God. This aligns with our reading of James 2:14-26. Namely, this is a case where a person could be “justified” in the sight of people.
(4:3) “For what does the Scripture say? ‘Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.’”
Paul appeals to Genesis 15:6 to show that Abraham was justified by faith—not works. He builds his argument from the authority of “Scripture.” Incidentally, Genesis 15:6 is the first use of the word “believe” in the Bible, and it “is connected with the attaining of righteousness,” which is “one of the very few times in the OT that this connection is made.”[]
(4:4) “Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due.”
You don’t consider your paycheck a “favor” (charis) from your boss every two weeks. You earned that money. You could take your boss to court if she didn’t pay you for your work.
(4:5) “But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness.”
Faith is not a work. It isn’t that Abraham’s faith was a righteous act. Instead, his faith was the instrument that connected him with God’s righteous declaration. Similarly, even though we are “ungodly,” we can be “justified” (v.5).
“[God] justifies the ungodly.” Jewish readers would struggle with this concept. Throughout the OT, we read, “I will not acquit the guilty” (Ex. 23:7). Later we read, “He who justifies the wicked and he who condemns the righteous, both of them alike are an abomination to the LORD” (Prov. 17:15; cf. 24:14). Thus, F.F. Bruce states that God’s justification of sinful people “is the greatest of all his wonders.”[]
(4:6-8) “Just as David also speaks of the blessing on the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works: 7 Blessed are those whose lawless deeds have been forgiven, and whose sins have been covered. 8 Blessed is the man whose sin the Lord will not take into account.”
God made David righteous in the same way (“just as…”). Paul doesn’t mention David’s faith, but he cites Psalm 32 to show that righteousness is apart from works. David was an adulterer and a murderer (2 Sam. 11). Yet he says that these sins were forgiven by God.
It doesn’t say that the blessed man avoids “sin” or “lawless deeds.” It says that the blessed man has these sins “forgiven… covered… not [taken] into account” by God.
(4:9-10) “Is this blessing then on the circumcised, or on the uncircumcised also? For we say, ‘Faith was credited to Abraham as righteousness.’ 10 How then was it credited? While he was circumcised, or uncircumcised? Not while circumcised, but while uncircumcised.”
Paul’s Jewish readers probably figured circumcision gave them some merit with God (Rom. 2:25-29). Not so! Paul makes a historical argument that Abraham was granted righteousness before he was circumcised. Abraham was “credited as righteous” in Genesis 15, but he wasn’t circumcised until Genesis 17. The rabbis held that this was 29 years later,[] though we have no way of knowing if this is true.
(4:11) “And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while uncircumcised, so that he might be the father of all who believe without being circumcised, that righteousness might be credited to them.”
Abraham isn’t just the father of faith to the circumcised, but the uncircumcised too. He is “the father of us all” (v.16), and the “father of many nations” (v.17). He is the father of faith for the Gentiles—not just the Jews.
(4:12) “And the father of circumcision to those who not only are of the circumcision, but who also follow in the steps of the faith of our father Abraham which he had while uncircumcised.”
Paul doesn’t oppose circumcision. After all, he himself was circumcised. He merely states that circumcision does not bring about righteousness—only faith does.
In verses 13-22, the “promise” of God is mentioned five times, making this the theme of this section.
(4:13) “For the promise to Abraham or to his descendants that he would be heir of the world was not through the Law, but through the righteousness of faith.”
Paul’s Jewish readers probably figured that the Law gave someone forgiveness. But Paul makes the historical argument that Abraham received the promise (and righteousness) 500 years before the Law was given to Moses.
(4:14-15) “For if those who are of the Law are heirs, faith is made void and the promise is nullified. 15 For the Law brings about wrath, but where there is no law, there also is no violation.”
Paul’s logic in verses 14-15 can be explained in this way:
Either Law or Faith brings about the promise of forgiveness.
Law doesn’t bring about the promise—only wrath.
Indeed, if we can get rid of Law, then we can get rid of wrath (“violation”).
Therefore, Faith is the only option.
The Law was not introduced to bring forgiveness, but judgment. Moo writes, “Paul is countering the very positive, and sometimes even salvific, function given the law in Jewish theology.”[] Mounce writes, “Ironically, the very thing the Jews were counting on to make them acceptable to God turned out to emphasize their sinfulness.”[] Even in our legal system, we don’t have laws primarily to reward good actions, but to punish bad or evil actions. Paul might be lining up for the shot he’s going to take in Romans 5-8; namely, we need to get out from under the Law to be both justified and sanctified. The Law brings “wrath,” not spiritual life or spiritual growth.
(4:16) “For this reason it is by faith, in order that it may be in accordance with grace, so that the promise will be guaranteed to all the descendants, not only to those who are of the Law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all.”
Abraham received the promise to be a blessing to the nations (i.e. the Gentiles), and he received this by faith—not law. The consequence of grace is that God’s promise would be (1) “guaranteed” and not contingent on fallible human works and (2) available to “all” people even though we are all sinful (“all the descendants… the father of us all”).
(4:17) “(As it is written, ‘A father of many nations have I made you’) in the presence of Him whom he believed, even God, who gives life to the dead and calls into being that which does not exist.”
Paul cites Genesis 17:5. This is after Abraham receives the covenant of circumcision. However, even when the text is about Israel’s election, the focus was still on “many nations” (i.e. the Gentiles). Paul shows that Abraham is the paradigm of faith—not just for Jews but for all people.
“[God] gives life to the dead and calls into being that which does not exist.” This seems to be referring to Abraham’s body which was “as good as dead” (v.19). God “makes the dead alive and summons the things that do not yet exist as though they already do” (NET). Consequently, it refers to Abraham becoming the father of many nations that did not yet exist.
(4:18) “In hope against hope he believed, so that he might become a father of many nations according to that which had been spoken, ‘So shall your descendants be.’”
Paul cites Genesis 15:5 to show that Abraham’s descendants should be like him. Abraham wasn’t expecting this promise to come to fruition naturally, but supernaturally. He didn’t trust in the weakness of his body, but he expected it to come true through God’s power. This is the key teaching of faith: Not I, but Christ.
“Hope against hope.” Two types of “hope” are being pitted against each other. There was no natural hope, but there was a supernatural hope. The NLT renders this, “Even when there was no reason for hope, Abraham kept hoping.” He trusted the One who gave him the promise (“he believed”).
(4:19) “Without becoming weak in faith he contemplated his own body, now as good as dead since he was about a hundred years old, and the deadness of Sarah’s womb.”
Abraham’s body was “as good as dead,” being about a “hundred years old” (Gen. 17:1). Sarah’s body was also incapable of having children (Gen. 18:11). Keller writes, “Faith is not opposed to reason, but it is sometimes opposed to feelings and appearances. Abraham looked at his body and it looked hopeless. But he didn’t go on appearances. This shows us that faith is not simply an optimism about life in general, nor is it faith in oneself. It is the opposite. Faith begins with a kind of death to self-trust. Faith is going on something despite our weakness, despite our feelings and perceptions.”[] Mounce comments, “Can God? is not a valid question for the believer. Will God? is the question that drives us in prayer ever closer to his heart.”[]
(4:20-21) “Yet, with respect to the promise of God, he did not waver in unbelief but grew strong in faith, giving glory to God, 21 and being fully assured that what God had promised, He was able also to perform.”
Abraham was “fully convinced” (NET, NLT, ESV) or “fully persuaded” (NIV) that God was able to fulfill this promise. Faith is not antithetical to reason. Abraham faced the barriers squarely, but also reflected on God’s power.
Specifically, biblical faith is grounded upon “what God had promised” (v.21). He couldn’t have worked for this promise. Instead, he believed that God would fulfill it for him. Likewise, since Abraham is the father or paradigm of faith, he is a model to us regarding biblical faith.
(4:22) “Therefore it was also credited to him as righteousness.”
Once again, Paul alludes to Genesis 15:6.
(4:23-24) “Now not for his sake only was it written that it was credited to him, 24 but for our sake also, to whom it will be credited, as those who believe in Him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead.”
This historical account was not just for Abraham, but has application for us. If we didn’t see this already, Paul shows that Scripture has application throughout the centuries—not merely to the original audience.
(4:25) “He who was delivered over because of our transgressions, and was raised because of our justification.”
Paul seems to be alluding to Isaiah 53:11-12.
Did the resurrection cause our justification? Douglas Moo and the NET take the second dia (“because of”) as prospective, which would mean that Jesus’ resurrection caused our justification. Thus, this passage would be rendered in this way: “He was handed over because of our trespasses [e.g., because we are sinners], and was raised for the sake of our justification [e.g., in order to secure our justification].”[] Otherwise, Moo argues, our justification “was in some sense a cause of Jesus’ resurrection.”[]
However, we don’t see how this follows. After all, our sins didn’t cause Jesus to take up the Cross. After all, he could’ve chosen not to do so. In the same way, our justification didn’t cause Jesus to rise from the dead.
Since dia is used retrospectively in the first part of the verse (“delivered over because of our transgressions”), it seems more consistent to take it this way in the second part (“because of our justification”). Since dia can be rendered as “for the sake of” (BDAG), we could see that Paul is using this meaning in both clauses (“[Jesus was] delivered over for the sake of our transgressions… [and] for the sake of our justification”). Thus, Paul is simply stating that Jesus’ death and resurrection were a “package deal” that accomplished our justification. We consider this understanding to be the most consistent interpretation of the language and grammar.
Both figures were well respected in Judaism.
Both figures were guilty of serious sin, but also great faith.
Both were justified by faith—not works. Indeed, David was an adulterer and a murderer.
Abraham was not only a paradigm of justification through faith for Jews, but also for “many nations” (vv.16-17). This shows that all people should come to God through faith.
Faith is antithetical to boasting (vv.2-3, 20).
Faith is antithetical to cowering in fear (vv.6-8).
Faith gives us a new and marvelous identity (vv.12-17).
Faith brings about assurance (v.16).
Faith gives us hope when all hope seems gone (v.18).
Faith is the key that unlocks the door to all of these great virtues. We neither boast in arrogance—not cower in fear. Why? Because we have a new identity in Christ, boasting and fear are both inconsistent with this identity. We have meaning (i.e. identity), assurance (i.e. security), and perseverance for the future (i.e. hope when all hope seems gone). Do you want these qualities in your life? You need to stop minimizing God’s promises, and instead, trust in what he says about you. In a word, you need to grow your faith.
Douglas J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1996), 261.
F. F. Bruce, Romans: An Introduction and Commentary, vol. 6, Tyndale New Testament Commentaries (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1985), 117.
Douglas J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1996), 268.
Douglas J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1996), 276.
Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 127.
Timothy Keller, Romans 1-7 For You (The Good Book Co., 2014), 104.
Robert H. Mounce, Romans, vol. 27, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1995), 131.
Douglas J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1996), 289.
Douglas J. Moo, The Epistle to the Romans, The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1996), 289.
James is an elder at Dwell Community Church, where he teaches classes in theology, apologetics, and weekly Bible studies.
