Featured The Contextual definition of Faith in Romans 4:16-23

Getting back on track. In Romans 4:18-21 Paul contextually defines what he means by "faith" that justifies a man before God.

He elminates anything and everything Abraham could possibly do to assist, aide, contribute to the birth of Isaac as God purposely waited until all the faculties for reproduction were "dead......deadness" - thus eliminating any kind of active obedience by Abraham to procure the promised child.

19 And being not weak in faith, he considered not his own body now dead, when he was about an hundred years old, neither yet the deadness of Sara’s womb:

What was left was only "hope" that was founded upon a confirm conviction/persuasion in God and God's power to provide what God had promised.

Rom. 4:21 And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform.


It is this precise definition of faith found in verse 21 that Paul says is the kind that God imputed to him for righteousness as in verse 3 and in verse 11:

22 And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.

Consider what that means! This kind of faith has NOTHING TO OFFER FROM ABRAHAM because Abraham DID NOTHING to obtain the promise by God as that promise was obtained SOLELY BY GOD'S POWER alone. Hence, this "faith" is not "faithfulness" or "keeping commandments" or "doing good works."

Furthermore, it is this precise definition of faith that is directly applied to the meaning of believing in the gospel:

23 ¶ Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him;
24 But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;
25 Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.

Consider that God obtained the resurrection of Jesus Christ solely by His own power in keeping with His own promise that he would provide propitiation (complete satisfaction) of God's righteousness standards for us in the Person of Jesus Christ.

The resurrection is evidence that Christ satisfied all the demands of God righteousness both the righteousness demanded by the law and the penalty of sin demanded by the law. If he had not satisfied it completely death would not have been defeated and his body would still be in the grave to this day.

The promise of God is that this finished redemption provided soley by Christ and his own obedience satisifes God's demands for all who simply recieve and rest upon it as their only hope of salvation. That is what it means to believe in Jesus Christ for salvation. It means to reject our attempts to satisfy God's demands by accepting Christ's satisfaction for us. That and that alone is justifying faith.

 

Note Paul's words - "If we BELIEVE ON him." He is using the word "beleive" as just previously defined in verse 21 whereby the contextual definition it eliminates any kind of personal actions by Abraham to obtain the birth of Isaac. It means total trust in God alone and God's power alone to obtain God's promise.

Abraham nor Sarah could assist God in the birth of Isaac as they did in the birth of Ishmael. The ability to assist is "dead" and "deadness" - v. 19.

"IF we BELEIVE ON Him" means if we REST completely upon His power to perform His promise in the gospel. What is that promise? It is the promise of JUSTIFICATION by faith as introduced in Romans 3:24-26. It is the promise of complete satisfaction ("propitiation") of all the righteous demands of God against sinners. It is the promise of reconciliation and thus peace between God and the beleiver (Rom. 5:1). It is the promise of salvation.

What has he accomplished for those who believe in His promise by His own Power?

24.......we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;
25 Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification

We did nothing to aide/participate/contribute to raise up Jesus from the dead.

We did nothing to aide/participate/contribute deliver him FOR OUR OFFENCES!

We did nothing to aide/participate/contribute to raise up Jesus FOR OUR JUSTIFICATION!

God did all of this alone by His own power and it is His promise that all who simply believe/receive/rest upon the good news of what He did FOR US in Christ that we shall be saved. We can't add to it anything and we dare not subtract from it anything.

 

I am not wiggling out of anything. I am removing myself from this discussion where there will be less distraction between you and DHK so you can focus on each other.

We obviously are not able to commuicate with each other so why prolong it? It does no good to miscommunicate, misunderstand, misinterpret one another.

I most likely misjudged your intentions and I apologize for that.

 

Not only does Paul define justifying "faith" in the example of the birth of Isaac to exclude ALL ACTIONS by Abraham but he also defines it previously in this same chapter by a number of contrasts.

1. "To him that WORKETH NOT but BELIEVETH" - v. 5

Here is a contrast which means they mutually exclude one another. The term "worketh" is in reference to the word "works" first in verse 4 and then in verse 2. The works of Abraham BEFORE he believed and BEFORE he was circumcised.

There were no Jews or laws to become Jews when Abraham believed and so "works" cannot refer to that but rather refer to his own GOOD "deeds" or GOOD things he would do to appease God as an unbeliever.

However, as in the contextual definition in Romans 4:18-21 faith is here defined as excluding all good works or acts of personal obedience by Abraham at the time he was justified by faith BEFORE the revelation of circumcision.

2. "But believeth on him who justifieth the UNGODLY....without works" -vv. 5-6

The one believing is in his own person "UNGODLY" and therefore "without works" that would be able to justify him.

Paul does not say that God justifies the "Godly" but that is exactly what some on this forum demand by their interpretation of keeping God's commands so that God might save them. They are teaching that God only justifies the "GODLY" but Paul repudiates that idea here! Hence, the term "beleiveth" does not include actions that would render a person "GODLY" and thus deserve justification but rather it is the "UNGODLY" that God justifies.

This brings up a problem for those who interpret "imputed" and "counted" and "reckoned" as different concepts and who reject imputation of EXTERNAL righteousness to the believer. The one that God justifies is "UNGODLY" and therefore has no INTERNAL righteousness or works of righteousness as such a person would be regarded as "GODLY" rather than "UNGODLY."

Hence, the imputation is God LEGALLY applying the righteous of Christ POSITIONALLY rather than PERSONALLY to the beleiver. If he applied it PERSONALLY then the believer would not be "UNGODLY" but "GODLY" but the one that God justifieth "worketh not" and is "without works" and is "UNGODLY."

 

Those who pervert the gospel of Christ must interpret "faith" and "believing" in Romans 4 to mean "faithfulness" or personal commandment keeping obedience. They must do this in order to support the idea that their idea of "imputeth" refers to the "righteousness" of Abrahams own life of obedience rather than to the object of His faith - the righteousness of God through the promised provision in Christ.

They can be fairly successful in making their case that "faith" or "believing" means "faithfulness" as long as they are allowed to ISOLATE these terms from the other descriptive factors found in the text. When the other descriptive factors found in text are considered such an interpretation is intellectually dishonest and seen for what it is - pervertion of the term in its context.

For example, Romans 4:5-6 and the other descriptives in this text make it intellectually impossible to accept the term "believeth" to mean "faithfulness" or personal obedience.

1. "believeth" is placed in contrast to works - "worketh not BUT beleiveth" and "without works"

The "works" being discussed in Romans 4:1-6 are the "works" that characterized the life of Abraham BEFORE he either believed (v. 3) and BEFORE he was circumcised (vv. 9-11). There was no Mosaic ceremonialism in existence at the point in time he believed. There were no Jews. Hence, the term "works" can only refer to his own personal attempts to do what he thought might appease his gods (he was an idol worshipper).


2. "believeth" modifies "the ungodly."

It is the "ungodly" who is the one believing. However, one who practices obedience (faithfulness) cannot be called "the ungodly." Nor can one who IS "godly" be characterized as "ungodly." Therefore, "believeth" cannot possibly mean "faithfulness" or refer to the personal condition of godliness as Paul describes the one being justified as "ungodly" not "godly."


3. The Grammatical modifiers of "the ungodly" ("worketh.....believeth....justifieth.....imputeth")

All four verbs (1) "worketh"; (2) "beleiveth"; (3) "justifieth"; (4) imputeth all have the "eth" suffix ending demonstrating from the English view point they are all present tense and identical action.

Abraham "believed" (v. 3 - Aorist tense) and was righteousness was "counted" (v. 3 Aorist) as a completed action at a point in time when he believed that preceded being circumcised (v. 11 "had"). At that point in time all four of these present tense verbs were simeltaneous modifiers of his described personal condition as "ungodly."

a. "Worketh not" - is a simeltaneous action with believeth, justifieth and impueth that modifies "the ungodly" that denies works are involved in any of those actions.

b. "believeth" - is a simeltaneous action with "justifieth" and "imputeth" that modifes "the ungodly" showing they are inseparable actions.

That means grammatically, Justification, imputation all occur at the same time as believing and all three modify a person who is "ungodly" when this occurs. In verse 3 it occurs at specific point in time ("believed" - Aorist tense) BEFORE Abraham was circumcised (v. 11 "had").

The grammatical point here is that the PERSONAL CONDITION of Abraham at the point he believed is described as "ungodly" and that is precisely why justification by faith is "without works" because he is "ungodly" at the point of faith in regard to his own PERSONAL CONDITION.

These facts completely destroy the idea that imputation or counting here refers to Abraham's own righteousness or faithfulness. If that were true, he could NOT be called "ungodly" in connection with "imputeth" if it were his "faithfulness" that was in view. Neither, could he be denied "works" if faithfulness were in view if his own life of obedience were being counted or imputed as righteousness.

CONCLUSION: As long as the term "faith" or "believeth" is allowed to be ISOLATED from other contextual descriptives it can be perverted to mean "faithfulness" or the obedient personal life of the justified. However, when the other contextual descriptives are allowed into the conversation then it is clear that view is impossible.

His "faith" is imputed as righteousness due to the OBJECT of His faith or what His faith has RECEIVED or EMBRACED. The object of faith has previously been defined in Romans 3:24-26 and is again defined in Romans 3:21-25 in the context of justification. What is embraced by Faith is God and His provision of righteousness found in the Person and work of Jesus Christ as promised in the gospel and obtained by the power of God.

These facts also repudiate the idea that "faith" refers to "faithfulness" which is being

 

Why don't you rewrite Romans 4:5-6 to suit yourself then? I simply pointed out the grammar and grammar is grammar!

Even the ending "eth" shows the same thing from an English perspective as does the Greek verb tenses.

You cannot change facts. The fact is that all four verbs are present tense and they all modify "the ungodly." The fact is that all four verbs show IDENTICAL ACTION.

The falseness is your doctrine not the Word of God.

 

A. The justification event in Abraham's life was a completed point of action at the point of faith.

Proof for this is:

1. Aorist tense "believed" - v. 3

2. The Aorist tense "had" - v. 11

3. The Aorist and perfect tenses in Romans 5:1-2


B. Justication was contemperaneous with believing in the life of Abraham.

Proof for this is:

1. The term "justifieth" and "believeth" are both presnt tense in verse 5 showing contemporary/identical action.

2. Justification is explicitly said to be "by faith" - Rom. 3:28 "justified by faith"

3. The future tense is used for justification in connection with faith - Rom. 3:30 "shall justify.....by faith"

Both the present and future tense prove that justification in this context was not something prior to the conversion experience of Abraham - that is indisputable grammar.