Abraham – Justified By Faith – He Was Not Justified By His Works

Romans 4:1-2

1 What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh? 2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God.

(Verse 1-2) - Paul begins by asking, What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, has found? He was asking, in effect, “Because we agree that Abraham is the peerless example of a justified man in God’s sight, why don’t we look at him carefully in order to determine the basis of his justification?”  See Rom. 3:1. 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.

In this context what then is the equivalent of therefore, tying the discussion of Abraham to all that Paul has said in the preceding chapter. As noted above, after asserting that both Jew and Gentile are justified by faith (3:30), the apostle brings Abraham into the picture because he knew that this greatest of Jewish patriarchs, their forefather according to the flesh, was used by the rabbis as the ultimate example of man’s being justified by works. Paul will demonstrate that, to the contrary, Scripture clearly teaches that Abraham was saved by his faith alone.

We ought to take a brief note that Paul draws a legitimate and binding conclusion from the history recorded in the Bible.  The Scripture is not just a set of stories, but an accurate accounting of God’s dealings in the world.  It can be relied upon to tell us what and how we ought to believe.  Paul was confident in citing the OT as a support for his doctrine of justification by grace through faith in the imputed righteousness of Christ.  Many are “afraid” of the OT and see it as difficult and hard to figure out.  Some even see it as telling a completely different story and describing a completely different God!  This is most assuredly not so!  The Bible is a cohesive set of doctrines and accounts that are utterly reliable and completely accurate and can be relied upon to guide and direct one into the truth.

Further, it is very significant, as we will see, that Abraham was saved on the precisely the same basis as we are saved in this age.  There is no difference in the way that God has interacted with men in the matter of redemption.  It has always been by means of the imputed righteousness of Christ apprehended by Grace through faith.  Abraham was the father of the Christians every bit as much, and indeed in a far greater way than he was ever the father of the Jews to which Paul was speaking.  The physical lineage that these Jews shared with Abraham was insignificant in comparison. 

That Abraham our father - Our ancestor; the father and founder of the nation; (see Matt. 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 especially forcible.  Moreover, Abraham was the human forefather of God’s first covenant with His chosen people. He was therefore, according to the flesh, the human standard of a genuine Jew and of a man who is right before God. The whole Hebrew race came from his loins, and what was true regarding his relationship to God must therefore be true of all his descendants.

According to the flesh refers first of all to physical lineage. This expression is one that has been much disputed. 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 hath found in respect to the flesh?” The latter is doubtless the proper connection. Some refer the word “flesh” to external privileges and advantages; others to his own strength or power; 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 people 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 Rom. 3:1. But in this context it also suggests human effort in regard to justification. Paul has already asserted that Jew and Gentile alike are justified by faith (3:30) and in 4:2 he refers to the traditional Jewish idea of Abraham’s justifying himself by good works. Therefore, according to the flesh is most likely referring to reliance on human works.

In a hypothetical syllogism, Paul says, For if Abraham was justified by works, then he has something to boast about. 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 to himself; see Rom. 4:4. The inquiry, therefore, was, whether in the account of the justification of Abraham, there was to be found any such statement of a reason for self-confidence and boasting.  The major premise is that, if a man could be justified before God by his own human efforts, then he has ground for boasting in himself. The minor premise is that Abraham, as a man, was justified by works. The necessary conclusion would be that Abraham therefore has something to boast about.

The major premise is true: If a man could be justified by works, he would indeed have something to boast about, because he would have merited his own salvation. But, as Paul goes on to demonstrate, the minor premise is not true. Consequently, the conclusion is untrue. Abraham did not have anything in himself to boast about before God.

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 show that there was no such record as that Abraham could boast that he was justified by his works. As God judges right in all cases, so it follows that Abraham had no just ground of boasting, and of course that he was not justified by his own works. The sense 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.”