Albert Barnes Commentary Romans 4

ROMANS Chapter 4

The main object of this chapter is to show that the doctrine of justification by faith, which the apostle was defending, was found in the Old Testament. The argument is to be regarded as addressed particularly to a Jew, to show him that no new doctrine was advanced. The argument is derived, first, from the fact that Abraham was so justified (Romans 4:1–5), secondly, from the fact that the same thing is declared by David (Romans 4:6–8).

A question might still be asked, whether this justification was not in consequence of their being circumcised, and thus grew out of conformity to the law? To answer this, the apostle shows (Romans 4:9–12) that Abraham was justified by faith before he was circumcised; and that even his circumcision was in consequence of his being justified by faith, and a public seal or attestation of that fact.

Still further, the apostle shows that if men were to be justified by works, faith would be of no use, and the promises of God would have no effect. The law works wrath (Romans 4:13–14), but the conferring of the favor by faith is a demonstration of the highest favor of God (Romans 4:16). Abraham, moreover, had demonstrated a strong faith; he had shown what it was; he was an example to all who should follow.

And he had thus shown that as he was justified before circumcision, and before the giving of the law, so the same thing might occur in regard to those who had never been circumcised. In chapters 2 and 3, the apostle had shown that all had failed of keeping the law, and that there was no other way of justification but by faith.

To the salvation of the Gentiles, the Jew would have strong objections. He supposed that none could be saved but those who had been circumcised, and who were Jews. This objection the apostle meets in this chapter, by showing that Abraham was justified in the very way in which he maintained the Gentiles might be; that Abraham was justified by faith without being circumcised.

If the father of the faithful, the ancestor on whom the Jews so much prided themselves, was thus justified, then Paul was advancing no new doctrine in maintaining that the same thing might occur now. He was keeping strictly within the spirit of their religion in maintaining that the Gentile world might also be justified by faith. This is the outline of the reasoning in this chapter. The reasoning is such as a serious Jew must feel and acknowledge. And keeping in mind the main object which the apostle had in it, there will be found little difficulty in its interpretation.

What shall we then say? . This is rather the objection of a Jew: "How does your doctrine of justification by faith agree with what the Scriptures say of Abraham? Was the law set aside in his case? Did he derive no advantage in justification from the rite of circumcision, and from the covenant which God made with him?" The object of the apostle now is to answer this inquiry.

That Abraham our father. Our ancestor, the father and founder of the nation. (See Barnes on Matthew 3:9).

The Jews valued themselves much on the fact that he was their father; and an argument drawn from his example or conduct, therefore, would be peculiarly compelling.

As pertaining to the flesh. This expression is one that has been much debated. In the original, it may refer either to Abraham as their father "according to the flesh"—that is, their natural father, or from whom they were descended—or it may be connected with "has found." "What shall we say that Abraham our father has found in respect to the flesh?" kata sarka.

The latter is doubtless the proper connection. Some refer the word flesh to external privileges and advantages; others to his own strength or power (Calvin and Grotius); and others make it refer to circumcision. This latter I take to be the correct interpretation. It agrees best with the connection, and equally well with the usual meaning of the word.

The idea is, "If men are justified by faith; if works are to have no place; if, therefore, all rites and ceremonies, all legal observances, are useless in justification, what is the advantage of circumcision? What benefit did Abraham derive from it? Why was it appointed? And why is such an importance attached to it in the history of his life?" A similar question was asked in Romans 3:1.

Hath found. Has obtained. What advantage has he derived from it?

For if Abraham, etc. This is the answer of the apostle. If Abraham was justified on the ground of his own merits, he would have reason to boast or to claim praise. He might regard himself as the author of it and take the praise for himself (Romans 4:4). Therefore, the inquiry was whether, in the account of Abraham's justification, any such statement giving a reason for self-confidence and boasting was to be found.

But not before God. In the sight of God. That is, in his recorded judgment, he had no ground of boasting on account of works. To show this, the apostle appeals at once to the Scriptures, to demonstrate that there was no such record indicating that Abraham could boast he was justified by his works. Since God judges rightly in all cases, it follows that Abraham had no just ground of boasting and, consequently, that he was not justified by his own works. The meaning of this verse is well expressed by Calvin: "If Abraham was justified by his works, he might boast of his own merits. But he has no ground of boasting before God. Therefore he was not justified by works."

For what says the Scripture? The inspired account of Abraham's justification. This account was final, and was to settle the question. This account is found in Genesis 15:6.

Abraham believed God. In the Hebrew, "Abraham believed Jehovah." The sense is substantially the same, as the argument turns on the act of believing. The faith which Abraham exercised was, that his posterity should be like the stars of heaven in number. This promise was made to him when he had no child, and of course when he had no prospect of such a posterity. See the strength and nature of this faith further illustrated in Romans 4:16-21. The reason why it was counted to him for righteousness was, that it was such a strong, direct, and unwavering act of confidence in the promise of God.

And it. The word "it" here evidently refers to the act of believing. It does not refer to the righteousness of another—of God, or of the Messiah; but the discussion is solely of the strong act of Abraham's faith, which in some sense was counted to him for righteousness.

In what sense this was, is explained directly after. All that is material to remark here is, that the act of Abraham, the strong confidence of his mind in the promises of God, his unwavering assurance that what God had promised he would perform, was reckoned for righteousness. The same thing is more fully expressed in Romans 4:18-22.

When, therefore, it is said that the righteousness of Christ is accounted or imputed to us; when it is said that his merits are transferred and reckoned as ours; whatever may be the truth of the doctrine, it cannot be defended by this passage of Scripture.

Faith is always an act of the mind.

It is not a created essence which is placed within the mind.

It is not a substance created independently of the soul, and placed within it by almighty power.

It is not a principle, for the expression a principle of faith is as unmeaning as a principle of joy, or a principle of sorrow, or a principle of remorse.

God promises; the man believes; and this is the whole of it. While the word faith is sometimes used to denote religious doctrine, or the system that is to be believed, (Acts 6:7; Acts 15:9; Romans 1:5; Romans 10:8; Romans 16:26; Ephesians 3:17; Ephesians 4:5; 1 Timothy 2:7, etc.) yet, when it is used to denote that which is required of men, it always denotes an acting of the mind exercised in relation to some object, or some promise, or threatening, or declaration of some other being. (See Barnes on Mark 16:16).

Was counted—(elogisthē.) The same word in Romans 4:22 is rendered "it was imputed." The word occurs frequently in the Scriptures. In the Old Testament, the verb

HEBREW, (hashab,) which is translated by the word logizomai, means, literally, to think, to intend, or purpose; to imagine, invent, or devise; to reckon, or account; to esteem; to impute, i.e., to impute to a man what belongs to himself, or what ought to be imputed to him. It occurs only in the following places: 1 Samuel 18:25; Esther 8:3; Esther 9:24–25; Isaiah 33:8; Jeremiah 49:20; Jeremiah 50:45; Lamentations 2:8; 2 Samuel 14:14; Jeremiah 49:30; Genesis 1:20; Job 35:2; 2 Samuel 14:13; Ezekiel 38:10; Jeremiah 18:8; Psalms 21:11; Psalms 140:2, 4; Jeremiah 11:19; Jeremiah 48:2; Amos 6:5; Psalms 10:2; Isaiah 53:3; Jeremiah 26:3; Micah 2:3; Nahum 1:11; Jeremiah 18:11; Job 13:24; Job 41:27, 29; Psalms 32:2; Psalms 35:5; Isaiah 10:7; Job 19:11; Job 33:10; Genesis 15:6; Genesis 38:15; 1 Samuel 1:13; Psalms 52:2; Jeremiah 18:18; Zechariah 7:10; Job 6:26; Job 19:11; Isaiah 13:17; 1 Kings 10:21; Numbers 18:27, 30; Psalms 88:4; Isaiah 40:17; Lamentations 4:2; Isaiah 40:17; Lamentations 4:2; Isaiah 40:15; Genesis 31:15.

I have examined all the passages, and, as the result of my examination, have come to the conclusion, that there is not one in which the word is used in the sense of reckoning or imputing to a man that which does not strictly belong to him; or of charging on him that which ought not to be charged on him as a matter of personal right.

The word is never used to denote imputing in the sense of transferring, or of charging that on one which does not properly belong to him. The same is the case in the New Testament. The word occurs about forty times, (see Schmidius' Concordance,) and in a similar signification. No doctrine of transferring, or of setting over to a man what does not properly belong to him, be it sin or holiness, can be derived, therefore, from this word. Whatever is meant by it here, it evidently is declared that the act of believing is that which is intended, both by Moses and by Paul.

For righteousness. In order to justification; or to regard and treat him in connection with this as a righteous man; as one who was admitted to the favour and friendship of God. In reference to this we may remark,

1. That it is evidently not intended that the act of believing, on the part of Abraham, was the meritorious ground of acceptance; for then it would have been a work. Faith was as much his own act, as any act of obedience to the law.
2. The design of the apostle was to show that by the law, or by works, man could not be justified (Romans 3:28; Romans 4:2).
3. Faith was not that which the law required. It demanded complete and perfect obedience; and if a man was justified by faith, it was in some other way than by the law.
4. As the law did not demand this, and as faith was something different from the demand of the law, so if a man were justified by that, it was on a principle altogether different from justification by works. It was not by personal merit. It was not by complying with the law. It was in a mode entirely different.
5. In being justified by faith, it is meant, therefore, that we are treated as righteous; that we are forgiven; that we are admitted to the favour of God, and treated as his friends.
6. In this act, faith is a mere instrument, an antecedent, a sine qua non, that which God has been pleased to appoint as a condition on which men may be treated as righteous. It expresses a state of mind which is demonstrative of love to God; of affection for his cause and character; of reconciliation and friendship; and is therefore that state to which he has been graciously pleased to promise pardon and acceptance.
7. As this is not a matter of law; as the law could not be said to demand it; as it is on a different principle; and as the acceptance of faith, or of a believer, cannot be a matter of merit or claim, so justification is of grace, or mere favour.

It is in no sense a matter of merit on our part, and thus stands distinguished entirely from justification by works, or by conformity to the law. From beginning to end, it is, so far as we are concerned, a matter of grace. The merit by which all this is obtained is the work of the Lord Jesus Christ, through whom this plan is proposed, and by whose atonement alone God can consistently pardon and treat as righteous those who are in themselves ungodly. See Romans 4:5.

In this place we have also evidence that faith is always substantially of the same character. In the case of Abraham it was confidence in God and his promises. All faith has the same nature, whether it be confidence in the Messiah, or in any of the Divine promises or truths. As this confidence evinces the same state of mind, so it was as consistent to justify Abraham by it, as it is to justify him who believes in the Lord Jesus Christ under the gospel. (See Hebrews 11:1 and following).

Now to him that worketh, etc. This passage is not to be understood as affirming that any actually have worked out their salvation by conformity to the law so as to be saved by their own merits; but it expresses a general truth regarding works. On that plan, if a man were justified by his works, it would be a matter due to him.

It is a general principle regarding contracts and obligations that when a man fulfills them, he is entitled to the reward as that which is due to him and which he can claim. This is well understood in all transactions among men. When a man has fulfilled the terms of a contract, to pay him is not a matter of favor; he has earned it, and we are bound to pay him.

So, says the apostle, it would be thus: if a man were justified by his works, he would have a claim on God. It would be wrong not to justify him. And this is an additional reason why the doctrine cannot be true .

The reward. The pay, or wages. The word is commonly applied to the pay of soldiers, day-laborers, etc. (Matthew 20:8; Luke 10:7; 1 Timothy 5:18; James 5:4). It has a similar meaning here.

Reckoned. Greek, Imputed. This is the same word which, in Romans 4:3, is rendered counted, and in Romans 4:22, imputed. It is used here in its strict and proper sense, to reckon that as belonging to a man which is his own, or which is due to him.

Of grace. Of favor; as a gift.

Of debt. As due; as a claim; as a fair compensation according to the contract.

But to him that works not: one who does not rely on his conformity to the law for his justification, who does not depend on his works, and who seeks to be justified in some other way. The reference here is to the Christian plan of justification.

But believes. (See the notes on Romans 3:26).

On him. On God. The connection thus requires this; for the discussion has immediate reference to Abraham, whose faith was in the promise of God.

That justifies the ungodly. This is a very important expression. It implies:

1. That men are sinners, or are ungodly.

2. That God regards them as such when they are justified. He does not justify them because He sees them to be, or regards them to be, righteous; rather, He does so knowing that they are in fact polluted. He does not first esteem them to be pure, contrary to fact. Instead, knowing that they are polluted and that they deserve no favor, He resolves to forgive them and to treat them as His friends.

3. In themselves they are equally undeserving, whether they are justified or not. Their souls have been defiled by sin, and that is known when they are pardoned. God judges things as they are. Sinners who are justified, He judges not as if they were pure, or as if they had a claim. Instead, He regards them as united by faith to the Lord Jesus; and in this relation, He judges that they should be treated as His friends, though they have been, are, and always will be, personally undeserving.

It is not meant that the righteousness of Christ is transferred to them so as to become personally theirs—for moral character cannot be transferred. Nor is it meant that it is infused into them, making them personally meritorious—for then they could not be spoken of as ungodly. Rather, it means that Christ died in their place to atone for their sins and is regarded and esteemed by God as having died; and that the results or benefits of His death are so reckoned or imputed to believers as to make it proper for God to regard and treat them as if they had themselves obeyed the law—that is, as righteous in His sight.