John Calvin Commentary Genesis 15:6

"And he believed in Jehovah; and he reckoned it to him for righteousness." — Genesis 15:6 (ASV)

And he believed in the Lord. None of us would be able to conceive the rich and hidden doctrine which this passage contains, unless Paul had carried his torch before us (Romans 4:3). But it is strange, and seems like a wonder, that when the Spirit of God has kindled so great a light, yet the greater part of interpreters wander with closed eyes, as in the darkness of night.

I omit the Jews, whose blindness is well known. But it is (as I have said) monstrous that those who have had Paul as their luminous expositor should so foolishly have corrupted this passage. However, it thus appears that in all ages, Satan has labored at nothing more assiduously than to extinguish, or to smother, the gratuitous justification of faith, which is here expressly asserted.

The words of Moses are, “He believed in the Lord, and he counted it to him for righteousness.” In the first place, Abram's faith is commended because by it he embraced the promise of God; it is commended, in the second place, because from this Abram obtained righteousness in the sight of God, and that by imputation.

For the word חשב (chashab), which Moses uses, is to be understood as relating to the judgment of God, just as in Psalm 106:31, where the zeal of Phinehas is said to have been counted to him for righteousness. The meaning of the expression will, however, more fully appear by comparison with its opposites. In Leviticus 7:18, it is said that when expiation has been made, iniquity ‘shall not be imputed’ to a man.

Again, in Leviticus 17:4, ‘Blood shall be imputed unto that man.’ So, in 2 Samuel 19:19, Shimei says, ‘Let not the king impute iniquity unto me.’ Nearly of the same import is the expression in 2 Kings 12:15, ‘They reckoned not with the man into whose hand they delivered the money for the work;’ that is, they required no account of the money, but allowed them to administer it, in perfect confidence.

Let us now return to Moses. Just as we understand that those to whom iniquity is imputed are guilty before God, so those to whom he imputes righteousness are approved by him as just persons; therefore Abram was received into the number and rank of just persons by the imputation of righteousness.

For Paul, to show us distinctly the force and nature, or quality of this righteousness, leads us to the celestial tribunal of God.

Therefore, those who apply this term to Abram's character as an honest man foolishly trifle, as if it meant that Abram was personally held to be a just and righteous man.

Others, just as unskillfully, corrupt the text, saying that Abram is here ascribing to God the glory of righteousness because he ventures to acquiesce confidently in His promises, acknowledging Him to be faithful and true. For although Moses does not expressly mention the name of God, yet the accustomed method of speaking in the Scriptures removes all ambiguity.

Lastly, it shows no less stupor than impudence, when this faith is said to have been imputed to him for righteousness, to mingle with it any meaning other than that Abram's faith was accepted by God in place of righteousness.

However, it seems absurd that Abram should be justified by believing that his seed would be as numerous as the stars of heaven, for this could be nothing but a particular faith, which would by no means suffice for the complete righteousness of man. Besides, what could an earthly and temporal promise avail for eternal salvation?

I answer:

1. The believing of which Moses speaks is not to be restricted to a single clause of the promise here referred to, but embraces the whole.
2. Abram did not form his estimate of the promised seed from this divine communication alone, but also from others, where a special benediction is added.

From this we infer that he did not expect some common or undefined seed, but that seed in which the world was to be blessed. Should anyone stubbornly insist that what is said in common of all Abram's children is forcibly distorted when applied to Christ, it must be said, in the first place, that it cannot be denied that God now again repeats the promise previously made to his servant, in order to answer his complaint.

But we have said—and the thing itself clearly proves—that Abram was so strongly impelled to desire seed out of regard for the promised benediction. From this it follows that this promise was not taken by him separately from others. But to pass all this over, we must, I say, consider what is being discussed here to form a judgment of Abram's faith.

God does not promise to his servant only this or that thing, as he sometimes grants special benefits to unbelievers, who are without the taste of his paternal love; but he declares that He will be propitious to him, and confirms him in the confidence of safety, as he relies upon His protection and His grace.

For he who has God for his inheritance does not exult in fading joy but, as one already elevated towards heaven, enjoys the solid happiness of eternal life. Indeed, it is to be maintained as an axiom that all the promises of God, made to the faithful, flow from the free mercy of God, and are evidences of that paternal love and of that gratuitous adoption on which their salvation is founded.

Therefore, we do not say that Abram was justified because he laid hold of a single word regarding the offspring to be born, but because he embraced God as his Father. And truly, faith does not justify us for any other reason than that it reconciles us to God; and it does so, not by its own merit, but because we receive the grace offered to us in the promises and have no doubt of eternal life, being fully persuaded that we are loved by God as sons.

Therefore, Paul reasons from contraries that he to whom faith is imputed for righteousness has not been justified by works (Romans 4:4). For whoever obtains righteousness by works, his merits come into the account before God. But we apprehend righteousness by faith when God freely reconciles us to himself. From this it follows that the merit of works ceases when righteousness is sought by faith, for it is necessary that this righteousness should be freely given by God and offered in his word, so that anyone may possess it by faith.

To make this more intelligible, when Moses says that faith was imputed to Abram for righteousness, he does not mean that faith was that first cause of righteousness which is called the efficient cause, but only the formal cause; as if he had said that Abram was therefore justified because, relying on the paternal loving-kindness of God, he trusted to His pure goodness, and not to himself, nor to his own merits.

For it is especially to be observed that faith borrows a righteousness from elsewhere, of which we, in ourselves, are destitute; otherwise, it would be in vain for Paul to set faith in opposition to works when speaking of the mode of obtaining righteousness. Besides, the mutual relation between the free promise and faith leaves no doubt on the subject.

We must now notice the circumstance of time. Abram was justified by faith many years after he had been called by God; after he had left his country as a voluntary exile, making himself a remarkable example of patience and of continence; after he had entirely dedicated himself to sanctity and after he had, by exercising himself in the spiritual and external service of God, aspired to an almost angelic life.

It therefore follows that, even to the end of life, we are led towards the eternal kingdom of God by the righteousness of faith. On this point, many are too grossly deceived. For they grant, indeed, that the righteousness which is freely bestowed on sinners and offered to the unworthy is received by faith alone; but they restrict this to a moment of time, so that he who first obtained justification by faith may afterwards be justified by good works.

By this method, faith is nothing other than the beginning of righteousness, whereas righteousness itself consists in a continual course of works. But those who trifle in this way must be altogether insane. For if the angelic uprightness of Abram, faithfully cultivated through so many years in one uniform course, did not prevent him from fleeing to faith to obtain righteousness, where else on earth will such perfection be found that can stand in God’s sight?

Therefore, by considering the time when this was said to Abram, we certainly gather that the righteousness of works is not to be substituted for the righteousness of faith in such a way that one perfects what the other has begun, but that holy men are only justified by faith as long as they live in the world.

If anyone objects that Abram previously believed God when he followed Him at His call and committed himself to His direction and guardianship, the solution is ready: we are not here told when Abram first began to be justified or to believe in God, but that in this one place it is declared, or related, how he had been justified through his whole life.

For if Moses had spoken thus immediately on Abram’s first vocation, the cavil of which I have spoken would have been more specious—namely, that the righteousness of faith was only initial (so to speak) and not perpetual. But now, since after such great progress he is still said to be justified by faith, it therefore easily appears that the saints are justified freely even until death.

I confess, indeed, that after the faithful are born again by the Spirit of God, the method of justifying differs, in some respect, from the former. For God reconciles to himself those who are born only of the flesh and who are destitute of all good; and since he finds nothing in them except a dreadful mass of evils, he counts them just by imputation.

But those to whom he has imparted the Spirit of holiness and righteousness, he embraces with his gifts. Nevertheless, so that their good works may please God, it is necessary that these works themselves should be justified by gratuitous imputation, for some evil is always inherent in them. Meanwhile, however, this is a settled point: that men are justified before God by believing, not by working, while they obtain grace by faith because they are unable to deserve a reward by works.

Paul also, in thus contending that Abram did not merit by works the righteousness which he had received before his circumcision, does not impugn the above doctrine. Paul's argument is of this kind: Abram's circumcision was posterior to his justification in the order of time and therefore could not be its cause, for of necessity the cause precedes its effect.

I also grant that Paul, for this reason, contends that works are not meritorious, except under the covenant of the law, of which covenant circumcision is put as the earnest and the symbol. But since Paul is not here defining the force and nature of circumcision, regarded as a pure and genuine institution of God, but is rather disputing the sense attached to it by those with whom he deals, he therefore does not allude to the covenant which God had previously made with Abram, because the mention of it was unnecessary for the present purpose.

Both arguments are therefore valid: first, that Abram's righteousness cannot be ascribed to the covenant of the law, because it preceded his circumcision; and, secondly, that the righteousness even of the most perfect individuals perpetually consists in faith, since Abram, with all the excellency of his virtues, after his daily and even remarkable service of God, was nevertheless justified by faith.

Finally, this also is worthy of observation: that what is related here concerning one man is applicable to all the sons of God. For since he was called the father of the faithful, not without reason, and since, furthermore, there is only one method of obtaining salvation, Paul properly teaches that a real and not merely personal righteousness is described in this passage.