Romans 4:3

Rom 4:3. For what saith the Scripture? — What is Moses’s account of this matter? Abraham believed God — Namely, that promise of God, recorded Gen 15:5, that he should have a seed numerous as the stars. As also the promise concerning Christ, mentioned Gen 12:3, through whom all nations should be blessed. “The apostle mentions only this one instance of Abraham’s faith, because Moses had said of it in particular, that it was counted to him for righteousness. But we must not, on that account, think it the only act of faith that was so counted to him. He had an habitual disposition to believe and obey God, founded on just conceptions of his being and attributes. And he began to exercise it when God first called him to leave his native country. For by faith he went out, not knowing whither he went, Heb 11:8. The same faith he exercised through the whole course of his life; acting on every occasion as one will do whose mind is filled with a present sense of Deity. Of this the instance mentioned by the apostle is a great example. For, in the eightieth year of his age, when Sarah was seventy years old, he believed what God told him concerning the numerousness of his seed, though it was at that time contrary to the ordinary course of nature: nay, he continued to believe it from that time forth, for the space of twenty years, during which no child was given him: see on Rom 4:17. At length, in the hundredth year of his age, the son so long promised was born. But mark what happened! When this son, to whom all the promises were limited, became fourteen years old, God commanded Abraham to offer him up as a burnt-offering; and he, without hesitation, obeyed; firmly believing that, after he was burnt to ashes on the altar, God would raise him from the dead, Heb 11:19. By this and other instances, Abraham became so remarkable for his faith, that God, by a covenant, constituted him the father of all believers.” And it was counted to him for righteousness — So our translators have very properly rendered the Greek phrase here, and Gal 3:6, for the original word, ελογισθη, signifies to state, and sum up an account; also, to put a value upon a thing, Rom 8:18. The word count includes both meanings. The sense is, God accepted Abraham as if he had been altogether righteous: or, this his faith was accounted by God his gospel righteousness, as being the performance of the condition the gospel requires, in order to justification. See on Rom 3:28. “But neither here, nor Gal 3:6, is it said that Christ’s righteousness was counted to Abraham. In both passages, the expression is, Abraham believed God, and it, namely, his believing God, was counted to him for righteousness; and Rom 4:9, of this chapter, we say that faith was counted to him for righteousness: so also Gen 15:6. Further, as it is nowhere said in Scripture that Christ’s righteousness was imputed to Abraham, so neither is it said anywhere that Christ’s righteousness is imputed to believers. In short, the uniform doctrine of the Scripture is, that the believer’s faith is counted to him for righteousness, by the mere grace or favour of God, through Jesus Christ; that is, on account of what Christ hath done to procure that favour for them. This is very different from the doctrine of those who hold that by having faith imputed, or accounted for righteousness, the believer becomes perfectly righteous; whether they mean thereby that faith is itself a perfect righteousness, or that it is the instrument of conveying to the believer the perfect righteousness of another. With respect to the first, it is not true that faith is a perfect righteousness; for if it were, justification would not be a free gift, but a debt. And with respect to the second supposition, although the perfect righteousness of another were conveyed to a sinner by faith, it would not make him perfectly righteous; because it is beyond the power of Omnipotence itself, by any means whatever, to make a person not to have sinned, who actually hath sinned. And yet, unless this is done, no believer can be perfectly righteous. On account of the perfect righteousness of another, God indeed may treat one as if he were perfectly righteous. But that is all. Nor does the Scripture carry the matter further.” — Macknight.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

4:3 Paul quotes Gen 15:6. In response to God’s promise that he would have descendants as numerous as the stars in the sky, Abraham believed God. It was faith that established Abraham’s relationship with God—not works (Rom 4:3-8), circumcision (4:9-12), the law (4:13-17), or the number of his descendants (4:18-21).

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Rom 4:3. Γὰρ, for) This word is to be referred to but not.—ἡ γραφή, the Scripture) The word Scripture is elegantly used. Moses does not speak in this passage, comp. ch. Rom 10:5.—ἐπίστευσε δὲ Ἀβραὰμ, κ.τ.λ.), Gen 15:6, lxx., καὶ ἐπίστευσεν Ἄβραμ, κ.τ.λ. believed in the promise of a numerous seed, and especially of the seed Christ, the seed of the woman, in whom all the promises are yea and amen, and on whose account a numerous seed had been desired.—ἐλογίσθη) λογιζεσθαι, to number, to estimate, to consider, to reckon, signifies here the act of a gracious will. It is repeated in this passage with great effect: ἐλογίσθη, the passive, as λογίζεται, Rom 4:4-5, is reckoned. Heb.; He reckoned it to him, namely, the fact [of his believing] or his faith; for this is to be supplied from the verb immediately preceding, believed.—εἰς) So ch. Rom 2:26 [counted for]; Act 19:27, notes.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom_4:3. I am right in saying: οὐ πρὸς τὸν Θεόν, for Scripture expressly derives the justification of Abraham from his faith, not from his works, and indeed as something received through imputation; so that he consequently possesses, not the previously supposed righteousness of works, but the righteousness of faith as a favour of God, and has ground for boasting of his righteousness in reference to God. That righteousness by works he would have earned himself. Comp Rom_4:4. The emphasis lies on ἘΠΊΣΤΕΥΣΕ and ἘΛΟΓΊΣΘΗ, not on Τῷ ΘΕῷ (Mehring). See Rom_4:4 f. The passage quoted is Gen_15:6, according to the LXX., which renders the active וְיַּחְשְׁבֶהָ by the passive Κ. ἘΛΟΓΊΣΘΗ. In the Hebrew what is spoken of is the faith which Abraham placed in the divine promise of a numerous posterity, and which God put to his account as righteousness, צְדָקָה, i.e. as full compliance with the divine will in act and life; comp on Gal_3:6. Paul however has not made an unwarrantable use of the passage for his purpose (Rückert), but has really understood δικαιοσύνη in the dogmatic sense, which he was justified in doing since the imputation of faith as צְדָקָה was essentially the same judicial act which takes place at the justification of Christians. This divine act began with Abraham, the father of the faithful, and was not essentially different in the case of later believers. Even in the πιστεύειν τῷ Θεῷ on the part of Abraham Paul has rightly discerned nothing substantially different from the Christian ΠΊΣΤΙς (compare Delitzsch on Gen. l.c[974]), since Abrahams faith had reference to the divine promise, and indeed to the promise which he, the man trusted by God and enlightened by God, recognised as that which embraced in it the future Messiah (Joh_8:56). Tholuck, because the promise was a promise of grace, comes merely to the unsatisfactory view of a virtual parallel also with the object of the justifying faith of Christians. Still less (in opposition to Neander and others) can the explanation of the subjective nature of faith in general, without the addition of its specific object (Christ), suffice for the conception of Abraham as the father of all believing in Christ; since in that case there would only have been present in him a pre-formation of faith as respects its psychological quality generally, and not also in respect of its subject-matter, which is nevertheless the specific and distinguishing point in the case of justifying faith.

We may add that our passage, since it expresses not a (mediate) issuing of righteousness from faith, but the imputation of the latter, serves as a proof of justification being an actus forensis; and what the Catholic expositors (including even Reithmayr and Maier) advance to the contrary is a pure subjective addition to the text.[975] It is well said by Erasmus: that is imputed, quod re persolutum non est, sed tamen ex imputantis benignitate pro soluto habetur. Comp also Philippi in loc[977], and Hoelemann, de justitiae ex fide ambabus in V. T. sedibus, 1867, p. 8 ff.

Instead of the καί in the LXX., Paul, in order to put the ἐπίστ. with all weight in the foreground, has used δέ, which does not otherwise belong to the connection of our passage.

εἰς δίκ.] Comp Rom_2:26.

On the passive ἐλογίσθη see Bernhardy, p. 341; Kühner, II. 1, p. 105.

[974] .c. loco citato or laudato.

[975] Not even with the exception of Döllinger (Christenth. u. K. p. 188, ed. 2), who says that God accounts the principle of the new free obedience (the faith) as already the whole service to be rendered, as the finished righteousness. Comp. however on Rom_1:17, note.

[977] n loc. refers to the note of the commentator or editor named on the particular passage.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Vv. 3-5. “For what saith the Scripture? Now Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. Now to him that worketh his reward is not reckoned as of grace, but as of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness;”

By the words of Rom 4:2 : “But it is not so in relation to God,” the apostle gave it to be understood that he knew the judgment of God Himself on Abraham’s works. Rom 4:3 explains how he can pronounce regarding a fact which seems to lie beyond the reach of human knowledge. Scripture contains a declaration in which there is revealed the judgment of God respecting the way in which Abraham was justified. This saying is to be found in Gen 15:6. Called by God out of his tent by night, he is invited to contemplate the heavens, and to count, if he can, the myriads of stars; then he hears the promise: “so numerous shall thy seed be.” He is a centenarian, and has never had children. But it is God who speaks; that is enough for him: he believed God. Faith consists in holding the divine promise for the reality itself; and then it happens that what the believer has done in regard to the promise of God, God in turn does in regard to his faith: He holds it for righteousness itself.

The particle δέ, now, takes the place of the καί, and, which is found in the LXX., though their reading is not quite certain, as the Sinaït. and the Vatic. have a blank here. It is possible, therefore, that, as Tischendorf thinks, the generally received reading in Paul’s time was δέ, now, and not καί. For it is evident that if the apostle preserves this particle, which is not demanded by the meaning of his own text, it is to establish the literal character of the quotation. It is not said: he believed the promise of God, but: God. The object of his faith, when he embraced the promise, was God Himself

His truth, His faithfulness, His holiness, His goodness, His wisdom, His power, His eternity. For God was wholly in the promise proceeding from Him. It little matters, indeed, what the particular object is to which the divine revelation refers at a given moment. All the parts of this revelation form but one whole. In laying hold of one promise, Abraham laid hold of all by anticipation; for he laid hold of the God of the promises, and henceforth he was in possession even of those which could only be revealed and realized in the most distant future.

The Hebrew says: “and God counted it to him for righteousness.” The LXX. have translated by the passive: and it was counted to him; Paul follows them in quoting. The verb λογίζειν, λογίζεσθαι, signifies: to put to account; comp. 2Sa 19:19; 2Co 5:19; 2Ti 4:16; and Phm 1:18 (where Paul uses the analogous term ἐλλογεῖν, because he is speaking of an account properly so called: “If he has done thee any wrong, put it to my account”). It is possible to put to one’s account what he possesses or what he does not possess. In the first case it is a simple act of justice; in the second, it is a matter of grace. The latter is Abraham’s case, since God reckons his faith to him for what it is not: for righteousness. This word righteousness here denotes perfect obedience to the will of God, in virtue of which Abraham would necessarily have been declared righteous by God as being so, if he had possessed it. As he did not possess it, God put his faith to his account as an equivalent. Why so? On what did this incomparable value which God attached to his faith rest? We need not answer: on the moral power of this faith itself. For faith is a simple receptivity, and it would be strange to fall back on the sphere of meritorious work when explaining the very word which ought to exclude all merit. The infinite worth of faith lies in its object, God and His manifestation. This object is moral perfection itself. To believe is therefore to lay hold of perfection at a stroke. It is not surprising that laying hold of perfection, it should be reckoned by God as righteousness. It has been happily said: Faith is at once the most moral and the most fortunate of strokes (coups de main). In Rom 4:4-5, the apostle analyzes the saying quoted. This analysis proves that Abraham was justified not in the way of a man who had done works (Rom 4:4), but in the way of a man who has not done them (Rom 4:5); which demonstrates the truth of the affirmation of Rom 4:2 : “but it is not so in relation to God.”

The two expressions: ὁ ἐργαζόμενος, he that worketh, and ὁ μὴ ἐργαζόμενος, he that worketh not, are general and abstract, with this difference, that the first refers to any workman whatever in the domain of ordinary life, while the second applies only to a workman in the moral sense. To the hired workman who performs his task, his reward is reckoned not as a favor, but as a debt. Now, according to the declaration of Moses, Abraham was not treated on this footing; therefore he is not one of those who have fulfilled their task. On the other hand, to the workman (in the moral sense) who does not labor satisfactorily, and who nevertheless places his confidence in God who pardons, his faith is reckoned for righteousness. Now, according to Moses, it is on this footing that Abraham was treated; therefore he belongs to those who have not fulfilled their task. These two harmonious conclusions—the one understood after Rom 4:4, the other after Rom 4:5—set forth the contents of the declaration of Moses: Abraham was treated on the footing not of a good, but of a bad workman.

The subjective negation μή before ἐργαζόμενος is the expression of the logical relation: because, between the participle and the principal verb: “because he does not do his work, his faith is reckoned to him as work.”

Paul says: He who justifieth the ungodly. He might have said the sinner; but he chooses the more forcible term to designate the evil of sin, that no category of sinners, even the most criminal, may think itself excluded from the privilege of being justified by their faith. It has sometimes been supposed that by the word ungodly Paul meant to characterize Abraham himself, in the sense in which it is said (Jos 24:2) that “Terah, the father of Abraham, while he dwelt beyond the flood, had served other gods.” But idolatry is not exactly equivalent to ungodliness (impiety), and Paul would certainly never have called Abraham ungodly (impious).

To impute to the believer righteousness which he does not possess, is at the same time not to impute to him sins of which he is guilty. Paul feels the need of completing on this negative side his exposition of the subject of justification. And hence, no doubt, the reason why, to the saying of Moses regarding Abraham, he adds one of David’s, in which justification is specially celebrated in the form of the non-imputation of sin.

Frédéric Louis Godet — Commentaries on Luke, John, Romans, and 1 Corinthians — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1870s–1890s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom_4:3

For what saith the Scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness. The connection of this verse with the preceding is this: Paul had just said that Abraham had no ground of boasting with God; for, what saith the scripture? Does it refer the ground of Abrahams justification to his works? By no means. It declares he was justified by faith; which Paul immediately shows is equivalent to saying that he was justified gratuitously. The passage quoted by the apostle is Gen_15:6, Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him (i.e., imputed to him) for righteousness. This is an important passage, as the phrase to impute faith for righteousness, occurs repeatedly in Pauls writings.

1. The primary meaning of the word λογίζομαι, here rendered to count to, or impute, is to reason, then to reckon, or number. 2Ch_5:6, Which could not be numbered for multitude; Mar_15:28, He was numbered with the transgressors; see Isa_53:12 etc.

2. It means to esteem, or regard as something, that is, to number as belonging to a certain class of things; Gen_31:15, Are we not counted of him strangers? Isa_40:17 etc.; compare Job_19:11, Job_33:10, in the Hebrew.

3. It is used in the more general sense of purposing, devising, considering, thinking, etc.

4. In strict connection with its primary meaning, it signifies to impute, to set to ones account; that is, to number among the things belonging to a man, or chargeable upon him.

It generally implies the accessory idea of treating one according to the nature of the thing imputed. Thus, in the frequent phrase, to impute sin, as 2Sa_19:19, Let not my Lord impute iniquity unto me, i.e., Let him not lay it to my charge, and treat me accordingly; compare 1Sa_22:15, in the Hebrew and Septuagint; Psa_32:2 (Septuagint, 31.) Blessed is the man to whom the Lord imputeth not iniquity, etc. And in the New Testament, 2Co_5:19, Not imputing unto men their trespasses; 2Ti_4:16, I pray God that it may not be laid to their charge, etc. These and numerous similar passages render the Scriptural idea of imputation perfectly clear. It is laying anything to ones charge, and treating him accordingly. It produces no change in the individual to whom the imputation is made; it simply alters his relation to the law. All those objections, therefore, to the doctrine expressed by this term, which are founded on the assumption that imputation alters the moral character of men; that it implies an infusion of either sin or holiness, rest on a misconception of its nature. It is, so far as the mere force of the term is concerned, a matter of perfect indifference whether the thing imputed belonged antecedently to the person to whom the imputation is made or not. It is just as common and correct to speak of laying to a mans charge what does not belong to him, as what does. That a thing can seldom be justly imputed to a person to whom it does not personally belong, is a matter of course. But that the word itself implies that the thing imputed must belong to the person concerned, is a singular misconception. These remarks have, of course, reference only to the meaning of the word. Whether the Bible actually teaches that there is an imputation of either sin or righteousness, to any to whom it does not personally belong, is another question. That the Bible does speak both of imputing to a man what does not actually belong to him, and of not imputing what does, is evident from the following, among other passages, Lev_17:3, Lev_17:4 : What man soever killeth than ox, and bringeth it not to the door of the tabernacle, etc., blood shall be imputed to that man; that is, blood-guiltiness or murder, a crime of which he was not actually guilty, should be laid to his charge, and he should be put to death. Sanguils hic est caedes, says Rosenmüller; perinde Deo displicebit, ac si ille hominem occidisset, et mortis reus judicabitur. Als Blutschuld soll es angerechnet werden diesem Manne. Gesenius. On the other hand, Lev_7:18, if any part of a sacrifice is eaten on the third day, the offering shall not be imputed to him that made it. Paul, speaking to Philemon of the debt of Onesimus, says, put that on my account, i.e., impute it to me. The word used in this case is the same as that which occurs in Rom_5:13, Sin is not imputed where there is no law; and is in its root and usage precisely synonymous with the word employed in the passage before us, when the latter is used in reference to imputation. No less than twice also, in this very chapter, Rom_4:6 and Rom_4:11, Paul speaks of imputing righteousness, not to those to whom it personally belongs, certainly, but to the ungodly, Rom_4:5; to those who have no works, Rom_4:6.

Professor Storr, of Tübingen, De vario sensu vocis δίκαιος, etc., in Nov. Test., in his Opuscula, Vol. 1., p. 224, says, Since innocence or probity (expressed by the word righteousness) does not belong to man himself, it must be ascribed or imputed to him. In this way the formula, righteousness which is of God, Phi_3:9, and especially the plainer expressions, to impute faith for righteousness, Rom_4:5, and to impute righteousness, are to be understood. We readily admit, he says, that things which actually belong to a man may also be said to be imputed to him, as was the case with Phineas, etc., and then adds, Nevertheless, as he is said not to impute an action really performed, Leviticus 7; 2 Samuel 19, etc., who does not so regard it as to decree the fruit and punishment of it; so, on the other hand, those things can be imputed, Lev_17:4, which are not, in fact, found in the man, but which are so far attributed to him, that he may be hence treated as though he had performed them. Thus righteousness may be said to be imputed, Rom_4:6, Rom_4:11, when not his own innocence and probity, which God determines to reward, is ascribed to the believer, but when God so ascribes and imputes righteousness, of which we are destitute, that we are treated as innocent and just. On page 233, he says, Verbum λογίζεσθαι monstrat gratiam, Rom_4:4, nam δικαιοσύνηn nostram negat.

This idea of imputation is one of the most familiar in all the Bible, and is expressed in a multitude of cases where the term is not used. When Stephen prayed, Act_7:60, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge, he expressed exactly the same idea that Paul did, when he said, 2Ti_4:16, I pray God it may not be laid to their charge, although the latter uses the word impute (λογισθείη,) and the former does not. So the expressions, his sin shall be upon him, he shall bear his iniquity, which occur so often, are perfectly synonymous with the formula, his sin shall be imputed to him; and, of course, to bear the sins of another, is equivalent to saying, those sins are imputed. The objection, therefore, that the word impute does not occur in reference to the imputation of the sin or righteousness of one man to another, even if well founded, which is not the tact, is of no more force than the objections against the doctrines of the Trinity, vicarious atonement, perseverance of the saints, etc., founded on the fact that these words do not occur in the Bible. The material point surely is, Do the ideas occur? The doctrine of the imputation of righteousness is not the doctrine of this or that school in theology. It is the possession of the Church. It was specially the glory and power of the Reformation. Those who differed most elsewhere, were perfectly agreed here. Lutherans and Reformed, alienated from each other by the sacramentarian controversy, were of one mind on this great doctrine. The testimony of the learned Rationalist, Bretschneider, if any testimony on so notorious a fact is necessary, may be here cited. Speaking with special reference to the Lutheran Church, he says, The symbolical books, in the first place, contradict the scholastic representation of justification, followed by the Romish Church, that is, that it is an act of God, by which he communicates to men an inherent righteousness (justitia habitualis, infusa), i.e. renders them virtuous. They described it as a forensic or judicial act of God, that is, an act by which merely the moral relation of the man to God, not the man himself (at least not immediately,) is changed. Hence, justification consists of three parts:

1. The imputation of the merit of Christ.

2. The remission of punishment.

3. The restoration of the favor and the blessedness forfeited by sin.

By the imputatio justitiae (or meriti) Christi, the symbolical books understand that judgment of God, according to which he treats us as though we had not sinned, but had fulfilled the law, or as though the merit of Christ was ours; see Apol., Art. 9, p. 226, Merita propitiatoris aliis donantur imputatione divina, ut per ea, tanquam propriis meritis justi reputemur, ut si quis amicus pro amico solvit aes alienum, debitor alieno merito tanquam proprio liberatur Bretschneiders Entwickelung aller in der Dog. vorkommenden Begriffe, pp. 631, 632, etc.

But to return to the phrase, Faith is imputed for righteousness. It is very common to understand faith here, to include its object, i.e., the righteousness of Christ; so that it is not faith considered as an act, which is imputed, but faith considered as including the merit which it apprehends and appropriates. Thus hope is often used for the thing hoped for, as Rom_8:24, Hope that is seen is not hope, etc.; and faith for the things believed, Gal_1:23, He preacheth the faith, etc. In illustration of this idea, Gerhard, the leading authority in the Lutheran Church, during the seventeenth century, says, Quemadmodum annulus, cui inclusa est gemma, dicitur valere aliquot coronatis, pretiosissima ita fides, quae apprehendit Christi justitiam, dicitur nohis imputari ad justitiam, quippe cujus est organum apprehendens, Loci Tom. 7. 238. Although there are difficulties attending this interpretation, it cannot, with any consistency, be exclaimed against by those who make faith to include the whole work of the Spirit on the heart, and its fruits in the life; as is done by the majority of those who reject this view of the passage. Besides this interpretation, there are three other explanations which deserve consideration. The first is that adopted by the Remonstrants, or Arminians. According to their view, δικαιοσύνη is to be taken in its ordinary sense of righteousness, that which constitutes a man righteous in the eye of the law. They understand the apostle, when he says, Faith was imputed for righteousness, as teaching that faith was regarded or counted as complete obedience to the law. As men are unable to render that perfect obedience which the law given to Adam required, God, under the gospel, according to this view, is pleased to accept of faith (a fides obsequiosa, as it is called, i.e., faith including evangelical obedience), instead of the righteousness which the law demands. Faith is thus made, not the instrument, but the ground of justification. It is imputed for righteousness in the sense of being regarded and treated as though it were complete obedience to the law. It must be admitted, that so far as this single form of statement is concerned, this interpretation is natural, and consistent with usage. Thus uncircumcision is said to be imputed for circumcision, that is, the former is regarded as though it were the latter. This, however, is not the only sense the words will naturally bear, and it is utterly inconsistent with what the Scriptures elsewhere teach.

1. It contradicts all those passages in which Paul and the other sacred writers deny that the ground of justification is anything in us, or done by us. These passages are too numerous to be cited; see Rom_3:20, where it is shown that the works which are excluded from the ground of justification are not ceremonial works merely, nor works performed with a legal spirit, but all works, without exception; works of righteousness, Tit_3:5, i.e., all right or good works. But faith considered as an act, is as much a work as prayer, repentance, almsgiving, or anything of the kind. And it is as much an act of obedience to the law, as the performance of any other duty; for the law requires us to do whatever is in itself right.

2. It contradicts all those passages in which the merit of Christ, in any form, is declared to be the ground of our acceptance. Thus in Rom_3:25, it is Christs propitiatory sacrifice; Rom_5:18, Rom_5:19, it is his obedience or righteousness; in many other places it is said to be his death, his cross, his blood. Faith must either be the ground of our acceptance, or the means or instrument of our becoming interested in the true meritorious ground, viz., the righteousness of Christ. It cannot stand in both relations to our justification.

3. It is inconsistent with the of office ascribed to faith. We are said to be saved by, or through faith, but never on account of our faith, or on the ground of it. (It is always διὰ πίστεως, or ἐκ πίστεως, but never διὰ πίστιν.) The expressions, through faith in his blood, Rom_3:25, by faith in Jesus Christ, etc., admit of no other interpretation than by means of faith in the blood of Christ, or in Christ himself, as the ground of confidence. The interpretation, therefore, under consideration is at variance with the very nature of faith, which necessarily includes the receiving and resting on Christ as the ground of acceptance with God; and, of course, implies that faith itself is not that ground.

4. We accordingly never find Paul, nor any other of the sacred writers, referring his readers to their faith, or anything in themselves, as the ground of their confidence. Even in reference to those most advanced in holiness, he directs them to what Christ has done for them, not to anything wrought in them, as the ground of their acceptance. See a beautiful passage to this effect in Neanders Gelegenheitschriften, p. 23. After stating that the believer can never rest his justification on his own spiritual life, or works, he adds, It would, indeed, fare badly with the Christian, if on such weak ground as this he had to build his justification, if he did not know that if he confesses his sins, and walks in the light, as he is in the light, the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanses from all sin. Paul, therefore, refers even the redeemed, disturbed by the reproaches of conscience, amidst the conflicts and trials of life, not to the work of Christ in themselves, but to what the love of God in Christ has done for them, and which, even notwithstanding their own continued sinfulness, remains ever sure.

5. Paul, by interchanging the ambiguous phrase, faith is imputed for righteousness, with the more definite expressions, justified through or by means of faith, justified through faith in his blood, fixes the sense in which the clause in question is to be understood. It must express the idea, that it was by means of faith that Abraham came to be treated as righteous, and not that faith was taken in lieu of perfect obedience. See this subject more fully discussed in Owen on Justification, chap. 18.

According to the second view, the word righteousness is taken in a much more limited sense, and the phrase to impute faith for righteousness, is understood to mean faith was regarded as right, it was approved. This interpretation also is perfectly consistent with usage. Thus, Psa_106:31, it is said of the zeal of Phineas, It was counted unto him for righteousness. This of course does not mean that it was regarded as complete obedience to the law, and taken in its stead as the ground of justification. It means simply that his zeal was approved of. It was regarded, says Dr. Owen, as a just and rewardable action. Divinitus approbatum erat, says Tuckney, Praelectiones, p. 212, tanquam juste factum. In like manner, Deu_24:13, it is said of returning a pledge, It shall be righteousness unto thee before the Lord thy God. Agreeably to the analogy of these passages, the meaning of this clause may be, his faith was regarded as right; it secured the approbation of God. How it did this, must be learned from other passages. The third interpretation agrees with the first, in taking δικαιοσύνη in its proper sense (righteousness), but gives a different force to the preposition εἰς: Faith was imputed to him unto righteousness, that is, in order to his being regarded and treated as righteous. In support of this view, reference is made to such frequently recurring expressions as εἰς σωτηρίαν (unto salvation), that they might be saved, Deu_10:1; εἰς μετάνοιαν (unto repentance), that they might repent, Mat_3:11. In Mat_10:10, of this epistle, the apostle says, With the heart man believeth unto righteousness (εἰς δικαιοσύνηn), i.e., in order to becoming righteous, or so as to become righteous. Faith secures their being righteous. According to this view of the passage, all it teaches is, that faith and not works secured Abrahams justification before God. And this is the object which the apostle has in view. The precise relation in which faith stands to justification, whether it is the instrument or the ground, however clearly taught elsewhere, this particular expression leaves undetermined. It simply asserts that Abraham was justified as a believer, and not as a worker (ἐργαζόμενος), as Paul expresses it in the next verse.

The Rationalistic theologians of modern times agree with the Sicilians in teaching that justification by faith, as distinguished from justification by works, is nothing more than the doctrine that moral character is determined more by the inward principle than by the outward act. By faith, in the case of Abraham, they understand confidence in God; a pious frame of mind, which is influenced by considerations drawn from the unseen and spiritual world, the region of truth and eternal principles, rather than by either mercenary feelings or outward objects. When, therefore, the Scriptures say, God imputed Abrahams faith for righteousness the meaning is, God accepted him for his inward piety, for the elevated principle by which his whole life was governed. If this is what Paul means, when he speaks of Abraham being justified by faith, it is what he means when he teaches that men are now justified by faith. Then the whole gospel sinks to the level of natural religion, and Christ is in no other sense a Savior, than as by his doctrines and example he leads men to cultivate piety. It is perfectly obvious that Paul means to teach that sinners are, now justified in the same way that Abraham was. He proves that we are justified by faith, because Abraham was justified by faith. If faith means inward piety in the one case, it must have the same meaning in the other. But as it is expressly said, over and over, in so many words, that men are now justified by faith in Christ, it follows of necessity that faith in Christ was the faith by which Abraham was justified. He believed the promise of redemption, which is the promise that we embrace when we receive and rest on Christ for salvation. Hence it is one principal object of the apostles argument in the latter part of this chapter, and in the third chapter of his Epistle to the Galatians, to show that we are heirs of the promise made to Abraham, because we have the same faith that he had; the same, that is, both in its nature and object.

It is further to be remarked, that λογίζεσθαι εἰς δικαιοσύνηn (to impute for righteousness), and dikaiou~sqai (to be justified), mean the same thing. Thus Calvin says, Tantum notemus, eos quibus justitia imputatur, justificari; quando haec duo a Paulo tanquam synonyma ponuntur. Yet, strange to say, Olshausen asserts that they are very different. To be justified (dikaiou~sqai) and to have righteousness imputed, he says, differ as the Romish and the Protestant doctrines of justification differ. The former means to be made subjectively righteous, the latter simply to be regarded as righteous. Was Jemandem angerechnet wird, das hat er nicht, er wird aber angesehen und behandelt, als hätte er es. What is imputed to a man, that he is not, but he is regarded and treated as though he had it. Abraham therefore was not justified, because before the coming of Christ, any true righteousness (δικαιοσύνη Qeou~, as Olshausen says), was impossible; he was only regarded as righteous.‹11› But as what is said of Abraham is said also of believers under the gospel, since to them as well as to him righteousness is said to be imputed, it follows that believers are not really justified in this life. This is the conclusion to which he is led by two principles. The first is, that the word δικαιόω means to make righteous inwardly (es bedeutet die göttliche Thätigkeit des Hervorrufens der δικαιοσύνη), and no man is perfectly holy in this life; the second is, that God cannot regard any one as being what he is not, and therefore he cannot regard the unrighteous as righteous. The former of these assumptions is utterly unfounded, as δικαιόω always means to declare just, and never to make just. The second principle, Olshausen, in his comment on this verse, modifies so far as to say that God can only regard as just those whom he purposes to render just; and as with God there are no distinctions of time, he regards as already possessed of righteousness those whom he has purposed to render so. (This would seem to imply external justification, or at least an imputation of righteousness from eternity to all whom God has purposed to save.) Without this modification, he says, the objection of Romanists to the Protestant doctrine would be unanswerable. There is a sense, however, in which the principle in question is perfectly sound. God must see things as they are, and pronounce them to be what they are. The Protestant doctrine does not suppose that God regards any person or thing as being other than he or it really is. When he pronounces the unjust to be just, the word is taken in different senses. He does not pronounce the unholy to be holy; he simply declares that the demands of justice have been satisfied in behalf of those who have no righteousness of their own. In sin there are the two elements of guilt and pollution the one expressing its relation to the justice, the other its relation to the holiness of God; or, what amounts to the same thing, the one expressing its relation to the penalty, and the other its relation to the precept of the law. These two elements are separable. The moral character or inward state of a man who has suffered the penalty of a crime, and thus expiated his offense, may remain unchanged. His guilt, in the eye of human law, is removed, but his pollution remains. It would be unjust to inflict any further punishment to him for that offense. Justice is satisfied, but the man is unchanged. There may therefore be guilt where there is no moral pollution, as in the case of our blessed Lord, who bore our sins; and there may be freedom from guilt, where moral pollution remains, as in the case of every justified similar. When, therefore, God justifies the ungodly, he does not regard him as being other than he really is. He only declares that justice is satisfied, and in that sense the man is just; he has a δικαιοσύνη which satisfies the demands of the law. His moral character is not the ground of that declaration, and is not affected by it. As to the distinction made by Olshausen between imputing righteousness and justifying, there is not the slightest ground for it. He himself makes them synonymous (p. 157). The two forms of expression are used synonymously in this very context. In Rom_4:3, it is said, faith is imputed for righteousness; in Rom_4:5, God justifies the ungodly; and in Rom_4:6, he imputes righteousness all in the same sense. Olshausen, although a representative man, exhibits his theology, in his commentary, in a very unsettled state. He not only retracts at times, in one volume, what he had said in another, but he modifies his doctrine from page to page. In his remarks on Rom_3:21, he himself asserts the principle (as quoted above), that by God nothing can ever be regarded or declared righteous, which is not righteous (p. 145); but in his comment on this verse, he pronounces the principle, das Gott nach seiner Wahrhaftigkeit nicht Jemanden für etwas ansehen kann, was er nicht ist falsch und über den Heilsweg durchaus irreleitend (p. 174). That is, he says that the principle that God, in virtue of his veracity, cannot regard one as being what he is not is false, and perverts the whole plan of salvation. On page 157 he says, The passing over of the nature (Wesen) of Christ upon the sinner, is expressed by saying righteousness is imputed to him; whereas, on pages 173-5, he labors to show that imputing righteousness is something very different from imparting righteousness. He prevailingly teaches the doctrine of subjective justification, to which his definition and system inevitably lead; but under the stress of some direct assertion of the apostle to the contrary, he for the time brings out the opposite doctrine. He exhibits similar fluctuations on many other points.

Charles Hodge — Commentary on Romans (1835), First Corinthians (1857), and Ephesians (1856) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

A confirmation of the proposition: Abraham was justified by imputation of faith, therefore freely without any respect of his works.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

For what saith the, Scripture? Abraham believed God, and it--his faith.

was counted to him for righteousness-- (Gen 15:6). Romish expositors and Arminian Protestants make this to mean that God accepted Abraham's act of believing as a substitute for complete obedience. But this is at variance with the whole spirit and letter of the apostle's teaching. Throughout this whole argument, faith is set in direct opposition to works, in the matter of justification--and even in Rom 4:4-5. The meaning, therefore, cannot possibly be that the mere act of believing--which is as much a work as any other piece of commanded duty (Joh 6:29; Jo1 3:23) --was counted to Abraham for all obedience. The meaning plainly is that Abraham believed in the promises which embraced Christ (Gen 12:3; Gen 15:5, &c.), as we believe in Christ Himself; and in both cases, faith is merely the instrument that puts us in possession of the blessing gratuitously bestowed.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 3. For, what saith the Scripture?] The Scriptural account of this transaction, Ge 15:6, is decisive; for there it is said, Abraham believed God, and it was counted, ελογισθη, it was reckoned to him for righteousness, ειςδικαιοσυνην, for justification.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

3. For what saith the Scripture? This is a proof of the minor proposition, or of what he assumed, when he denied that Abraham had any ground for glorying: for if Abraham was justified, because he embraced, by faith, the bountiful mercy of God, it follows, that he had nothing to glory in; for he brought nothing of his own, except a confession of his misery, which is a solicitation for mercy. He, indeed, takes it as granted, that the righteousness of faith is the refuge, and, as it were, the asylum of the sinner, who is destitute of works. For if there be any righteousness by the law or by works, it must be in men themselves; but by faith they derive from another what is wanting in themselves; and hence the righteousness of faith is rightly called imputative.

The passage, which is quoted, is taken from Genesis 15:6; in which the word believe is not to be confined to any particular expression, but it refers to the whole covenant of salvation, and the grace of adoption, which Abraham apprehended by faith. There is, indeed, mentioned there the promise of a future seed; but it was grounded on gratuitous adoption: and it ought to be observed, that salvation without the grace of God is not promised, nor God’s grace without salvation; and again, that we are not called to the grace of God nor to the hope of salvation, without having righteousness offered to us.

Taking this view, we cannot but see that those understand not the principles of theology, who think that this testimony recorded by Moses, is drawn aside from its obvious meaning by Paul: for as there is a particular promise there stated, they understand that he acted rightly and faithfully in believing it, and was so far approved by God. But they are in this mistaken; first, because they have not considered that believing extends to the whole context, and ought not to be confined to one clause. But the principal mistake is, that they begin not with the testimony of God’s favor. But God gave this, to make Abraham more assured of his adoption and paternal favor; and included in this was eternal salvation by Christ. Hence Abraham, by believing, embraced nothing but the favor offered to him, being persuaded that it would not be void. Since this was imputed to him for righteousness, it follows, that he was not otherwise just, than as one trusting in God’s goodness, and venturing to hope for all things from him. Moses does not, indeed, tell us what men thought of him, but how he was accounted before the tribunal of God. Abraham then laid hold on the benignity of God offered to him in the promise, through which he understood that righteousness was communicated to him. It is necessary, in order to form an opinion of righteousness, to understand this relation between the promise and faith; for there is in this respect the same connection between God and us, as there is, according to the lawyers, between the giver and the person to whom any thing is given, (datorem et donatarium — the donor and the donee:) for we can no otherwise attain righteousness, than as it is brought to us, as it were, by the promise of the gospel; and we realize its possession by faith.

How to reconcile what James says, which seems somewhat contrary to this view I have already explained, and intend to explain more fully, when I come, if the Lord will permit, to expound that Epistle.

Only let us remember this, — that those to whom righteousness is imputed, are justified; since these two things are mentioned by Paul as being the same. We hence conclude that the question is not, what men are in themselves, but how God regards them; not that purity of conscience and integrity of life are to be separated from the gratuitous favor of God; but that when the reason is asked, why God loves us and owns us as just, it is necessary that Christ should come forth as one who clothes us with his own righteousness.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(3) The Apostle gives a proof of this from Scripture. Abraham was not justified by works, and therefore had nothing to boast of in God’s sight. He was justified by faith. His righteousness was not real, but imputed. His faith was treated as if it had been equivalent to a righteousness of works. It met with the same acceptance in the sight of God that a righteousness of works would have done. But—the argument goes on—faith carries with it no such idea of merit or debt as works. It is met by a pure act of grace on the part of God.

Abraham believed God.—The quotation is taken from Gen_15:6, where it appears as a comment upon Abraham’s belief in the promise that he should have a numerous posterity. The same passage is elaborately commented upon by Philo and others, so that it would seem to have been a common topic in the Jewish schools. It should be noticed that the word “faith” is not used in quite the same sense in the original and in the application. In Abraham’s case it was trust in the fulfilment of the divine promise, in St. Paul’s sense it is rather enthusiastic adhesion to a person. This is part of the general enlargement and deepening of the Old Testament terminology by St. Paul. A writer of less profundity (though marked by striking and elevated qualities), the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews, applies the word more strictly. (See Heb_11:8 et seq.) In Jas_2:23 the word has the still thinner meaning of a merely intellectual assent. St Paul quotes the same passage in the same sense as here in Gal_3:6. (See Excursus B: On the Meaning of the word Faith.)

It was counted unto him.—It should be observed that the same words are translated by the Authorised version here, “it was counted unto him;” in Rom_4:9, “faith was reckoned to Abraham;” in Rom_4:22, “it was imputed unto him;” in Gal_3:6, “it was accounted to him;” in Jas_2:23, “it was imputed to him.” A defect in the translation, which, however, hardly obscures the true meaning.

The sense of imputation is not to be got rid of. It is distinctly a forensic act. The righteousness attributed to Abraham is not an actual righteousness, but something else that is considered and treated as if it were equivalent to such righteousness. It is so treated by God acting as the judge of men. (See Excursus E: On the Doctrine of Justification by Faith and Imputed Righteousness.)

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

3. what saith the scripture?] See on Rom_1:17.

Abraham believed, &c.] Lit. But Abraham believed, &c. The particle is, perhaps, significant; emphasizing the verb. The Gr. is verbatim from LXX. of Gen_15:6, save that “but” is “and” in LXX. See by all means Gen_15:5-6, as a leading illustration of what faith is in St Paul’s sense; personal trust in God; acceptance of His word absolutely, because it is His. (See further on Rom_4:22 below.)

it was counted] The same Gr. verb is rendered in this chapter “reckoned,” Rom_4:4; Rom_4:9-10; “counted,” Rom_4:5; “imputed,” Rom_4:11; Rom_4:22-24 : see too Rom_4:6; Rom_4:8. (In 2Ti_4:16 it is “laid to charge.”) Its plain meaning is (like that of the Lat. imputare) to put down on an account (whether as debt or credit the context decides). The reason why of the “imputation” does not lie in the word itself, which may equally be used where merit and grace, wages and gift, are in question.

for righteousness] i.e. “as if it were righteousness” (in respect of results) Same construction as Rom_2:26, a passage which illustrates this. There the (supposed) Gentile who keeps the law, is treated as if he were circumcised, though he is not. Here Abraham, because he believes, is treated as having personal (justifying) righteousness, though he has it not. In other words, he is justified on a ground which is not his own works. It is specially needful to notice (what this particular passage brings out) that faith is in no sense regarded as, in itself, righteousness. (See below, on Rom_4:25.) The statement is that, “by grace,” the same result, viz. acceptance before God, follows faith that would follow the possession of merit. Faith is the condition, but not the ground, of this acceptance. The ground is the Propitiation.

[In Psa_106:31 we have the very words used of Phinehas which are here used of Abraham. But comparing the Psalm with Num_25:11-13 we see the difference of application. In Phinehas, an act of holy zeal was honoured by a special temporal favour, the permanence of the priesthood in his family. It was no question of acceptance in respect of salvation; a matter which lies on a totally different level from that of temporal rewards. On that lower level, the act of Phinehas was one of merit, and was “reckoned” as such to him and his house. In Abraham’s case we have two notes of difference from that of Phinehas: (1) faith in God, not an act of zeal, is the occasion; (2) the “imputation” is mentioned absolutely and with peculiar solemnity, unconnected with any temporal results. And thus it is taken by St Paul here, as his whole reasoning shews, as a Divine intimation of the true conditions of the acceptance of man by God “without works.”]

On Jas_2:14, &c., see Appendix C.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

For what saith the Scripture?.... This answers to "what is that which is written" (c)? or what does the Scripture say? which is a way of speaking used by the Jews, when anything is proposed, which seems contrary to Scripture, as here justification by works does. A testimony from Scripture is here produced, proving that Abraham was justified by faith, and not by works: the place referred to is Gen 15:6;

Abraham believed God; the object of his faith and trust were not his riches, nor his righteousness, but Jehovah, the Son of God, the second person in the Trinity, styled in Gen 15:1, "the Word of the Lord", the essential Word of God, and called his "shield", and "exceeding great reward"; characters which are very applicable to Christ: and this faith of his in the Lord was not a mere assent to the promise of God, but a fiducial act of faith in him; and was not merely concerned with temporal, but with spiritual things, and particularly about Christ the promised seed:

and it was counted to him for righteousness, the meaning of which is not, that Abraham imputed righteousness to God, or celebrated his righteousness and faithfulness, as some; or that the world reckoned Abraham a righteous person, as others; but that God reckoned him righteous, or imputed it to him for righteousness: and the question is, what the it is which was counted to him for righteousness? and that this is to be understood, , "concerning faith", as R. Solomon Jarchi says, is out of question; for this is expressly said by the apostle, Rom 4:9. The only one is, whether it means the grace of faith by which he believed; or the object of faith on which he believed, and with which his faith was conversant: not the former, for that is not righteousness, nor accounted so; but is distinguished from it, and is that by which a person receives and lays hold on righteousness; besides, whatever may be alleged in favour of the imputation of Abraham's faith to himself for righteousness, it can never be thought to be imputed to others on that account; whereas the very selfsame it is imputed to others also; see Rom 4:24; it remains then that it was the promised seed, the Messiah, and his righteousness, which Abraham, by faith, looked unto, and believed in, that was made unto him righteousness by imputation. Now since so great and good a man as Abraham was not justified by works, but by faith in the righteousness of the Messiah, it follows, that none of his sons, nor any other person whatever, ought to seek for, or expect to be justified in any other way.

(c) T. Bab. Beracot, fol. 5. 1. & 15. 2. & passim.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.

Ver. 3. Abraham believed God] Latomus of Louvain was not ashamed to write that there was no other faith in Abraham than what was in Cicero. And yet our Saviour saith, Abraham saw my day and rejoiced; so did Cicero never. Another wrote an apology for Cicero, and would needs prove him to have been a pious and penitent person, because in one place he hath these words, Reprehendo peccata mea, quod Pompeio confisus, eiusque partes secutus fuerim. A poor proof: Hoc argumentum tam facile diluitur, quam vulpes comest pyrum. (Joh. Manl.)

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

For what saith the Scripture? - The inspired account of Abraham’s justification. This account was final, and was to settle the question. This account is found in Gen 15:6.

Abraham believed God - In the Hebrew, “Abraham believed Yahweh.” 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 Rom 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 Rom 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 uniformly 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 unmeaningful 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.

(A principle is the “element or original cause,” out of which certain consequences arise, and to which they may be traced. And if faith be the root of all acceptable obedience, then certainly, in this sense, it is a principle. But whatever faith be, it is not here asserted that it is imputed for, or instead of, righteousness. See the note above.)

While the word “faith” is sometimes used to denote religious doctrine, or the system that is to be believed (Act 6:7; Act 15:9; Rom 1:5; Rom 10:8; Rom 16:26; Eph 3:17; Eph 4:5; 1Ti 2:7, etc.); yet, when it is used to denote that which is required of people, 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 the note at Mar 16:16.

Was counted - ἐλογίσθη elogigisthē. The same word in Rom 4:22, is is rendered “it was imputed.” The word occurs frequently in the Scriptures. In the Old Testament, the verb חשׁב chaashab, which which is translated by the word λογίζομαι logizomai, means literally, “to think, to intend,” or “purpose; to imagine, invent,” or “devise; to reckon,” or “account; to esteem; to impute,” that is, to impute to a man what belongs to himself, or what “ought” to be imputed to him. It occurs only in the following places: Psa 32:2; Psa 35:4; Isa 10:7; Job 19:11; Job 33:10; Gen 16:6; Gen 38:15; 1Sa 1:13; Psa 52:4; Jer 18:18; Zec 7:10; Job 6:26; Job 19:16; Isa 13:17; 1Ki 10:21; Num 18:27, Num 18:30; Psa 88:4; Isa 40:17; Lam 4:2; Isa 40:15; Gen 31:16. 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 what does not strictly belong to him; or of charging on him what 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’ Concord),” 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 what 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 favor 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; Rom 3:28; Rom 4:2.

(3) Faith was not what 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 favor of God, and treated as his friends.

(6) In this act, faith, is a mere instrument, an antecedent, a “sine qua non,” what 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) Since this is not a matter of law; since 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 favor. 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 Rom 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 Heb. 11.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

For what saith the Scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was reputed to him unto justice.[1] The Scripture, therefore, teacheth us that he became just by his faith. And as he had this faith by the grace of God, grace was the cause of his justification, and not any works without grace. And when it is said, it was reputed to him, we must not understand an imputation of being just without a true and interior justice: for to be reputed just in the sight of God, who sees the heart, and sanctifies the soul by his interior grace, is the only true justice that can make a man acceptable to God. As not to have our sins imputed in the sight of God, is to have them forgiven, and to be free from our sins. (Witham) --- Reputed, &c. By God, who reputeth nothing otherwise than it is. However, we may gather from this word, that when we are justified, our justification preceedeth from God’s free grace and bounty; and not from any efficacy which any act of ours could have of its own nature, abstracting from God’s grace. (Challoner)

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Et reputatum est illi ad justitiam, Greek: kai elogisthe auto eis dikaiosunen. The Greek word is sometimes translated in the Vulgate Latin, by imputare, or accepto ferre.

====================

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

The scripture referred to is in Gen 15:6. The apostle a little varies the words; in Genesis it is he believed in God, but here he believed God: again, in Genesis it is expressed actively, he counted it to him for righteousness; but here passively, it was counted to him for righteousness. The answer is, That the apostle in both followed the Septuagint, which was then more in use than the Hebrew text; and both are capable of an easy reconciliation, the difference being more in sound than in sense.

Abraham believed God; i.e. the promises of God: that he would be his shield and exceeding great reward, Gen 15:1; that he would give him an heir of his body, Gen 15:4; that he would multiply his seed, Gen 15:5, whereby he understood not only his fleshly seed, but also the Messiah, the Saviour of the world, which was come of his loins; He took on him the seed of Abraham, Heb 2:16. And besides these promises in Gen 15:1-21, he believed that promise which was made him, Gen 12:3, That in him and his seed all families of the earth should be blessed. That in these promises the Messiah is understood, is evident from Gal 3:8,16; and that Abraham had an eye to him is evident, without exception, from Joh 8:56.

It was counted unto him for righteousness; i.e. he was justified thereby: to have faith imputed for righteousness, and to be justified by faith, is the same thing. Faith is not our righteousness materially, but objectively and organically, as it apprehends and implies the righteousness of Christ, which is the matter of our justification. Our adversaries the papists oppose the imputation of Christ’s righteousness to us; they cavil at the very word, and call it putative righteousness: and yet the apostle useth the word ten times in this chapter, and in the same sense that word ten times in this chapter, and in the same sense that we take it. But how shall we reconcile our apostle with St. James, about the manner of Abraham’s justification: he says expressly, Jam 2:21, that Abraham our father was justified by works, when he offered his son Isaac; and thence he infers, Rom 4:24, that by works a man is justified, and not by faith only. They are easily reconciled, forasmuch as the one discourseth of the cause of our justification before God; the other, of the signs of justification before men. The one speaks of the imputation of righteousness; the other, of the declaration of righteousness. The one speaks of the office of faith; the other, of the quality of faith. The one speaks of the justification of the person; the other, of the faith of that person. The one speaks of Abraham to be justified; the other, of Abraham already justified.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

3. For—He now proves from Scripture that Abraham was justified otherwise than by works before God.

Abraham believed God—In Ur of the Chaldees, (Note Act_7:3-4,) where Abraham dwelt, the true God, as an infinite, living and holy person was but dimly recognized. Jehovah had faded to the popular view into a thin and nebulous pantheism, far in the background of the upper sky. In that cold and colourless mist, neither warming man’s heart to love nor raising it to holiness, the dim figures of the nature gods, finite, elemental powers, were visibly nearer at hand as objects of worship. Or the sun, the moon, the stars presented themselves as the highest and most definite objects on which man, forgetting God and good, could fix his dependence and worship. It was the middle stage of that terrible apostacy described in Romans i, in which men, not liking to retain God in their thoughts, were being given over to vileness. In the midst of the process a single faithful one was found to whom the Infinite could unfold himself and be in faith received. God revealed himself in his reality to Abraham, and Abraham committed himself fully and absolutely to God. A covenant and compact was formed between them of mutual fidelity, ratified with all the forms, divinely prescribed, of a treaty between man and man. (Gen_15:9-21.) Repeatedly was the firmness of Abraham’s faith put to the test by God, and completely did he stand the ordeal. Thereby did he become the founder of the Church and the father of the faithful.

Abraham believed—Gen_15:6. In the passage of Genesis from which the quotation is made a particular act of faith exercised by Abraham is specified, but not his first justifying act of faith. Abraham believed God, surrendered himself in faith to God, as early at least as he obeyed the divine call to leave Ur of the Chaldees and migrate to the promised land. He was in a permanent state of active faith, living by faith, and of ever-flowing, consequent justification and approval from God. And this being his continuous history, any marked act of Abraham’s faith upon which the consequent justification is clearly apparent is conclusively sufficient for the apostle’s argument. The phraseology of Gen_15:6, thereby renders it a fit passage for his purpose.

For righteousness—As a sinner, Abraham’s faith, being an entire self-surrender to God, pregnant with holy obedience, was accepted in the lieu of past and perfect righteousness; so that he was accepted and held—just, as if he had never sinned.

And as of Abraham, so of every man. Acceptance, justification, the being held righteous, can be attained never by the righteousness of any one work or many works of ours; for our works benefit not God, confer nothing upon him, buy nothing of him. But it comes most freely and gratuitously upon us when we perform the unreserved act of self-surrendering faith unto God, not for the merit of that self-surrender, but because that is the only proper position for a subject of God’s mercy. (See note Rom_1:17; Rom_2:7; Rom_3:22; Rom_3:24.) And when such receptive position is assumed and maintained, God’s free and abounding mercy, consequent on the mediation of Christ, is ever ready to flow forth in a full stream of grace upon the soul. Like Abraham, we enter into compact with God, and will ever find the Holy One faithful to his covenant. Paul, therefore, reasons conclusively with the Jews when he bases justification by faith in the foundations of their history.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

For what saith the Scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned Unto him for righteousness. This notable text, (Gen_15:6) declaring the ground of Abraham"s acceptance, is similarly quoted in the cognate passage, Gal_3:6. It has a peculiar cogency in the general argument from being in connection with, and with reference to, one of the Divine promises to Abraham of an unnumbered seed; so that it may be understood with an extended application to those who were to inherit the blessing, as well as to the "father of the faithful," and so declaring the principle of justification for all the "children of the promise." Further, it would be peculiarly telling as addressed to the Jews, who made such a point of their descent from Abraham as the root of all their position of privilege. (cf. Psa_105:6 Isa_41:8 Isa_51:2 Mat_3:9 Luk_3:8 Joh_8:39) The two significant expressions in it are episteuse (denoting faith, not works) and elogisyh eiv . The whole phrase, the apostle proceeds to say, implies that the reward spoken of was not earned, but granted.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Abraham believed God - That promise of God concerning the numerousness of his seed, Gen. xv, 5, 7; but especially the promise concerning Christ, Gen. xii, 3, through whom all nations should be blessed. And it was imputed to him for righteousness - God accepted him as if he had been altogether righteous. Gen. xv, 6.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

God Jehovah. Gen 15:6.

counted Or, reckoned, or imputed, i.e. put to the account of. See Phm 1:18 same word:

righteousnesss See Rom 4:5; Rom 4:6; Rom 4:9; Rom 4:11; Rom 4:13; Rom 4:22. See Rom 3:21. (See Scofield "Rom 3:21").

The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Observe here, 1. The account which the scripture gives of Abraham’s justification; it was by faith alone; He believed God and was accounted to him for righteousness: That is, he firmly believed the promise of God, that he would give him a son, in whom all the families of the earth should be blessed. And by means of his faith, he was reckoned or esteemed righteous before God, and not by means of his works.

Observe, 2. The apostle’s argument, to prove that Abraham was justified by faith, and not by works; had he works of perfect holiness, then in strict justice a reward might have been expected by him as a due debt, and not given him in a way of grace and favour. For to him that worketh, that is, with a design and intent to obtain justification by his works, is the reward reckoned not of grace, but of debt; he having performed all that was required, in order to his being righteous before God. But to him that worketh not; that is, who worketh not to the intent and end forementioned; namely to procure justification by working, but seeks that in a way of believing; his faith is counted for righteousness. To him that worketh not, but believeth, &c. We must not understand it absolutely; for he that believeth, worketh: But, secundum quid, after a sort, he is said not to work; because he worketh not with a design to stand righteous before God by his works.

Again, by him that worketh not, we are not to understand an idle, lazy believer that takes no care of he duties of obedience; no, an idle faith is an ineffectual faith, and can never be a saving faith: But the meaning is, he worketh not in a law sense, to the ends and intentions of the first covenant, to make up a righteousness by the law, and seeing all his endeavours to obey the law-sense not to work, because he doth not work so as to answer the purpose and end of the law, which accepts of nothing short of perfect and complete obedience. And whereas it is here said, That God justifieth the ungodly; the meaning is, such as have been ungodly, not such as continue so.

The apostle describes the temper and frame of their hearts and lives before justification, and not after it; as it found them, not as it leaves them. True, Christ justifies the ungodly, yet such as continue ungodly are not justified by him: We must bring credential from our sanctification, to bear witness to the truth of our justification.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

For what saith the scripture? [ Gen_15:6 ] And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him for righteousness . [Now, of course, Abraham was some way justified. If he was justified by works, as you Jews suppose, he has ground for glorying toward God, for he can claim his justification from God as a debt due to him; but we hear of no such glorying toward God, and hence he was not justified by works. On the contrary, we hear that he was justified by faith, for the Scripture says that he believed God and his belief was counted unto him for righteousness.]

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

3. What saith the Scripture? The passage quoted is found in Genesis 15:6, and is quoted three times in the New Testament—here, and in Gal. 3:6 and in James 2:23. God promised an heir to Abraham, and, although it seemed contrary to nature, he believed the promise. His faith in the promise was reckoned as righteousness. It was the ground of his acceptance with God. His faith was a trusting faith, which contained in it the element of obedience. No other faith justifies (see James 2:23).

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

3. τί γὰρ ἡ γρ. λ. Gen 15:6; Gal 3:6; Jas 2:23.

ἐπίστευσεν. Here primarily of belief in GOD’s word: but this belief implied trust in the faithfulness and power of GOD, and was therefore essentially faith in the full sense.

ἐλογίσθη, was reckoned for something more than it actually was because it contained the seed, was the necessary precedent, of that more. For the word in LXX[116] cf. Lev 7:8; Lev 17:4, with the legal sense of imputation familiar to the Jews; cf. S. H. ref., Weber, Altsyn. Theol., p. 233; cf. above Rom 2:26, Rom 9:8; 2Co 5:19.

[116] LXX. the Septuagint Version of the Old Testament

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

3. ἐλογίσθη: metaphor from accounts, ‘was set down,’ here ‘on the credit side.’ Frequently in LXX with legal sense of imputation or non-imputation of guilt, e.g. Lev 7:8 ἐὰν δὲ φαγὼν φάγῃ … οὐ λογισθήσεται αὐτῷ, 17:4 λογισθήσεται τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ ἐκείνῳ αἷμα, &c. The notion arises from that of the ‘book of remembrance’ (Mal 3:16) in which men’s good or evil deeds, the wrongs and sufferings of the saints, are entered (Psa 56:8; Isa 65:6). Oriental monarchs had such a record by which they were reminded of the merit or demerit of their subjects (Est 6:1 ff.), and in like manner on the judgement day Jehovah would have the ‘books’ brought out before Him (Dan 7:10; Rev 20:12; comp. also ‘the books of the living,’ ‘the heavenly tablets,’ a common expression in the Books of Enoch, Jubilees, and Test. XII Patr., on which see Charles on Enoch xlvii. 3; and in more modern times, Cowper’s sonnet ‘There is a book … wherein the eyes of God not rarely look’).

The idea of imputation in this sense was familiar to the Jews (Weber, Altsyn. Theol. p. 233). They had also the idea of the transference of merit and demerit from one person to another (ibid. p. 280 ff.; Eze 18:2; Joh 9:2). That however is not in question here; the point is that one quality faith is set down, or credited, to the individual (here to Abraham) in place of another quality—righteousness.

ἐλογίσθη αὐτῷ εἰς δικαιοσύνην: was reckoned as equivalent to, as standing in the place of, ‘righteousness.’ The construction is common in LXX: cf. 1 Reg. (Sam.) 1:13; Job 61:23 (24); Isa 29:17 ( = 32:15); Lam 4:2; Hos 8:12. The exact phrase ἐλογίσθη αὐτῷ εἰς δικαιος. recurs in Psa 105 [106]. 31 of the zeal of Phinehas. On the grammar cf. Win. § xxix. 3 a. (p. 229, ed. Moulton).

On the righteousness of Abraham see esp. Weber, Altsyn. Paläst. Theologie, p. 255 ff. Abraham was the only righteous man of his generation; therefore he was chosen to be ancestor of the holy People. He kept all the precepts of the Law which he knew beforehand by a kind of intuition. He was the first of seven righteous men whose merit brought back the Shekinah which had retired into the seventh heaven, so that in the days of Moses it could take up its abode in the Tabernacle (ibid. p. 183). According to the Jews the original righteousness of Abraham, who began to serve God at the age of three (ibid. p. 118) was perfected (1) by his circumcision, (2) by his anticipatory fulfilment of the Law. But the Jews also (on the strength of Gen 15:6) attached a special importance to Abraham’s faith, as constituting merit (see Mechilta on Exo 14:31, quoted by Delitzsch ad loc. and by Lightfoot in the extract given below).

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The Scripture [η γραφη] . The scripture passage. See on Joh 2:22; and foot - note on Joh 5:47.

It was counted for righteousness [ελογισθη εις δικαιοσυνην] . For the phrase logizesqai eijv to reckon unto, compare ch. Rom 2:26; Rom 9:8, where eijv is rendered for. The verb is also used with wJv as. So ch. 8 36; 1Co 4:1. So in Sept., eijv, Psa 56:31; Isa 29:17; Isa 32:15; Isa 40:17; wJv. Gen 31:15; Job 41:20; Psa 43:22; Isa 5:28; Isa 29:16. The phrases ejlogisqh eijv and ejl. wJv are thus shown to be substantially equivalent. See further on ver. 5.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.