Whatever it is, it is illustrated by Abraham as the example for "all who are of faith" meaning, justification by faith for Abraham is the same for "all who are of faith" or else he is not "the father of all who are of faith with regard to this very subject - justification by faith. Hence, there are not two different kinds of justification by faith doctrines in the Bible, one for pre-cross saints as opposed to another for post-cross saints. Justification by faith with regard to Abraham IS imputation of righteousness to the "ungodly" without works, (Rom. 4:1-6) without ordinances (vv. 9-11) , without law (vv. 13-15) and without faith being defined as faithfulness(vv. 16-22). Justification by faith with regard to Abraham IS remission of sins (vv. 6-8) without divine ordinances (vv. 9-11). Justification by faith with regard to Abraham IS faith that has for its object the promised Christ or faith "on him" (Rom. 4:5) or "in him" (Rom. 3:24-26). Justification by faith with regard to Abraham is a completed action at the point of faith rather than an ongoing incompleted action that spans his life, as it was completed "in uncircumcision" not in the "circumcision" part of his life (Rom. 4:9-11). Therefore, it is "before the Lord" (Rom. 4:1) rather than before men as described in James 2:14-22. Justification by faith with regard to Abraham is not personal faithfulness or active involvement including works but is faith in the sufficiency of God to be faithful to what he has promised (Rom. 4:16-22). Hence, there are not two different doctrines of justification in the Bible, one by works of the Law and one without the works of the law as Paul does not give TWO different examples but only ONE example and it is for "All who are of faith" not merely just for pre-cross or for post-cross people are of faith. The Law was NEVER EVER given as a means for justification and "no flesh" has ever been justified by the law (Rom. 3:19-20) or ever will be because the law demands obedience to EVERY POINT of the Law (James 2:10-12) in order to avoid its condemnation and to obtain is approval (justification of your personal life) and none have ever satisfied that demand but one - Jesus Christ. Therefore he is "the end of the law to all that believe" in him. Some err in thinking that a few passages of Scripture where Jesus tells Pharisees to "do" the law to obtain eternal life means that was the way it was to be obtained prior to the cross. However, Jesus is responding in every case to those who ask what they must "DO" in order to obtain eternal life rather than who must they believe in. The Law is set forth to define what a person must "DO" if they are going to earn eternal life but in attempting to "DO" the law they will discover they cannot meet its demands and that my friend is the purpose of the law to reveal sin, or inability to meet its demands and thus turn them to something outside of themselves and their works to satisfy the law's demands - or justification by faith "on him" or Christ (Rom. 3:24-26; 4:22-25). Abraham is unquestionably a person living before the cross is he not? Yet he was not justified by personal obedience to God or faithfulness, but by faith "on him" and "without works" and without divine ordinances (Rom. 4:5-11) and without law keeping (vv. 13-15). So those who reject justification by faith in a Savior prior to the cross but demand justification by obedience to the Law plus faith must reject Abraham as the example at least for all pre-cross people if they are going to demand justification by personal obedience to the law. On the other hand if they accept him as the example of pre-cross persons with regard to justification by obedience, then they must reject him as the example for post-cross persons. Either way, they deny him as the "father OF ALL WHO ARE OF FAITH" and yet that is precisely how Paul is setting him forth with regard to the Pauline doctrine of justification by faith. He is the example of just ONE KIND of justification doctrine not two kinds. So which is it? Is this OLD TESTAMENT pre-cross person the illustration for "all who are of faith" with regard to justification by faith as an example of those who are justified by obedience to the Law plus faith? Or is he an example of justification by faith without works, without obedience to the Law?