Truth Magazine

By S. Leonard Tyler

Romans six is a beautiful, clarifying and reassuring chapter. It is, to me, the pivotal chapter – where change takes place. Paul has reached the point in his discussion of salvation by grace through faith which seems to naturally demand clarifying. He has shown that salvation is provided by God’s grace for all and is extended to all through the gospel – but must be accepted by faith. To offset unnecessary quibbling, prevent misunderstanding and emphasize some very important truths, Paul explains some difficulties surrounding his teaching.

The teaching of justification by grace through faith has always challenged man. Questions flood the subject of God’s grace providing and man’s faith appropriating the soul’s salvation. Mr. Charles R. Erdman observes such questions and concludes:

The common fallacy in all these objections, and in most criticism of the doctrine of justification by faith, consists in the failure to understand what is meant by faith (An Exposition, The Epistle of Paul To The Romans, p. 77.)

Paul recognizes the importance of the truth and the fact that it can and must be understood, believed and obeyed to result in the saving of the soul. Hence, he calls attention to and openly discusses the issues involved.

“What Shall We Say Then?”

Does this inquiry merely connect with what has been said, or does it anticipate valid pondering, or has some critic challenged the apostle’s message? Regardless, and notwithstanding, the explanation is clear, forceful and positive. Paul has taught that God’s grace is sufficient to save all and “where sin abounded, grace did much more abound” (Rom. 5:20). Questions about God’s vengeance (Rom. 3:5) and the doing of evil that good might come (Rom. 3:8) were also beclouding his message. He, however, was not one to whine and whisper, “I’m misunderstood and vilified, but I still love them,” and turn off as a “martyr”! Neither did he hide the true meaning in philosophical verbiage. He, recognizing the value and stability of God’s truth, arose to the occasion, confronted the questions and confounded the questioners by dealing positively with the problems (Jn. 8:31-32; 1 Pet. 1:22-25).

Shall We Continue In Sin, That Grace May Abound?”“

Paul quickly and emphatically replied, “God forbid” (other translations: “May it never be . . . Perish the thought . . . By no means! . . . What a ghastly thought! . . . No, no!”). The gospel is the same today and, if a similar question should be asked, “Will God’s brace extend to cover or forgive one who, ignorantly or otherwise, continues in sin?” “Perish the thought . . . By no means!” No way! Such is completely out of the bounds of faith. There is no basis for faith beyond the scope of God’s word; there can be no faith where there is no word to produce it (Rom. 10:17).

Jesus is the voice of God, the law Giver, Mediator, Advocate and Savior (Heb. 1:1; 2:3; James 4:12; 1 Tim. 2:5; 1 Jn. 2:1-2; 1 Tim. 4:10). He has spoken and His word will stand forever (Matt. 24:35; Ps. 119:89; Matt. 16:18-19). He is the Author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him (Heb. 5:9; Rom. 6:16) and will render the final judgment (Acts 17:31; Rev. 10:11-15; Jn. 5:28-29). Therefore, “See that you refuse not him that speaketh” (Heb. 12:25).

When Does One Die To Sin?

This is a very interesting approach to becoming a Christian. One must die to sin. Paul wrote, “How shall we, that are dead to sin (we who died to sin – ASV) live any longer therein?” Since his writing is applicable to all Christians, he places himself within its bounds. He said, “We who died to sin” (ASV). The Romans were dead to sin and Paul refreshed their memory to this fact. It was in the course of their acceptance of Jesus Christ that they died to sin. Thus, continuance in sin was diabolically opposed to their manner of life in Christ.

Does the apostle mean “dead in sin,” buried and raised, or “dead to sin,” buried and raised? Does he use “dead to sin” to circumscribe the whole action of conversion: died, buried and raised? Or, does he use the words “died, buried and raised” to specify definite action (steps) in conversion? There is no question about one being dead to God while practicing or living in sin (Eph. 2:2-1; Col. 2:13), but he is alive to (practicing) sin. One must stop loving and practicing (die to, in a figurative sense) sin before he can be forgiven. However, when one stops sinning, ceases to practice sin, the guilt of sin is still upon him. He is not dead to guilt. It must be forgiven. However, the practice must stop before forgiveness can be enjoyed.

If this be the meaning, and it surely looks applicable, then when does one “die” to sin, as used in this verse? When one understands and believes with all his heart that Jesus is the Son of God, it enables him to recognize the terribleness, sinfulness and damnableness of sin and conclude that forgiveness is in Christ. This conviction leads one to determine to stop sinning, forsake it, turn away from it (in a word, “die” to the love and practice of sin) and accept Jesus as both Lord and Christ. This is genuine repentance, which attitude must characterize every subject of baptism; it will lead to true action, obedience to Jesus from the heart, being buried in baptism and raised with Him a new creature. Moses E. Lard, in his Commentary On Romans, (pp. 195-196), stated:

We die to sin when we believe in Christ and repent of our sins. For the true conception of repentance is a determination to forsake sin, accompanied by the act. The best and only evidence we can give that we are truly dead to sin is our aversion to it, and cessation from it. None should be baptized till he has within himself a keen senge of this evidence. Baptism to one who is still alive to sin is as inconsistent as the literal burial of a man before he is dead. It is much to be feared that error is sometimes committed here.”

Paul proceeds with his discourse, “How shall we . . live any longer therein?” The argument advanced simply stated, “Since we died to sin, recognized it as sin and determined within our own heart never to sin any more, we turn to the Lord for forgiveness (being buried with Him in baptism and raised to a new life), direction and salvation. Therefore, no consideration should be given to the practice of sin.”

Furthermore, “Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? . . .buried with him be baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up. . .we also should walk in newness of life.” He impressed, “Are you not conscious (or, don’t you remember?) that we were baptized into Christ?” None questioned this truth, for it was upon this fact that they placed their claim to Christ.

Paul did not argue the meaning of baptism, baptize etc.; they understood that they were immersed, buried, submerged, for that is the meaning of the words used. It was upon the fact that they had been buried with Christ and shared in the benefits of His death, the very purpose for which He shed his blood, “for the remission of sins” (Matt. 26:28). This being true, they were “buried with him by baptism into death”. No other form (save a burial) can so dramatically represent the ending of a life of sin and the beginning of a life of righteousness. Thus, “like as Christ was raised . . . by the glory of the Father,” we are to walk in newness of life. As he also told the Corinthians, “If any man be in Christ he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new” (2 Cor. 5:17).

Consider also, “If we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection” (v. 5). In baptism, we are united with him in the likeness of his death and resurrection. (1) He died on the cross. We died to sin. (2) He was buried in Joseph’s new tomb. We are buried in baptism. (3) He was raised up by the glory (power) of the Father. We are raised up to a new life, “newness of life,” to live a righteous life (vs. 17-18).

We were united with Christ in the likeness of his death and resurrection in baptism. “Our old man was crucified with him, that the body of sin might be put away” (destroyed, v. 6). “The old man” must be our former manner of living given up, sacrificed; it is not as some claim, our old sinful, innate nature from Adam, nor the Adamic sin. One cannot inherit sin, sin is committed (Ezek. 18:19, 20; 1 John 3:4; James 1:13-15), and fleshly lust is still present. The Christian must “buffet,” keep his body under subjection, “mortify (put to death) your members which are upon this earth. . .” (Col. 3:4). One must not yield his members to sin (v. 13) but unto righteousness. The “old man” sacrificed the “body of sin;” all our sins are forgiven in baptism. “Henceforth we should not serve sin,” live in or practice sin.

In verses 7-14, Paul enforces his arguments to abstain from every evil inclination and cling to every good thing. To be “dead to” and “freed from” sin is reason sufficient to cause one to shun the very appearance of evil. But more, “We died with Christ . . . we shall also live with him” (ASV). Since we were baptized (died, buried and raised) with Christ, we shall also live with him. No one giving consideration to Romans six can degrade baptism and its relationship to salvation or the importance of living a righteous life. We died with Christ to the world of sin and were raised with Him to a new life, a spiritual life, Therefore, we are to live consistently with the new directions, Christ’s teaching.

Again, since Christ is raised from the dead, death has no more power over Him. The death He died, He died once (for the sins of all) and now He lives unto God. So Christians are to live to the honor and glory of God, being dead to sin “but alive unto God in Christ Jesus” (v. 11). “Seek those things which are above” (Col. 3:1).

Paul now pleads, “Let not sin reign in your mortal bodies.” Sin must not reign like a king over you and dictate your physical life. You must refrain your fleshly appetite from the temptations of lustful passions. Do not practice any such doings. Christ is your Master and King; He must reign over and direct your life.

He deals a little more specifically by saying, “Neither yield your members as instruments of unrighteousness unto sin: but yield yourselves unto God . . . and your members as instruments of righteousness unto God.” One must choose the manner of life to live: righteously of God or unrighteously of the world. “By their fruits, ye shall know them.” When one lives (v. 14) for Christ, he proves his freedom from sin. Sin does not dominate or rule his life. He has forgiveness in Christ, new directions for living, and should love every bit of it.

Another question in anticipation and to challenge their thinking. “What then? Shall we sin, because we are not under law, but under grace.” Does this mean one can sin freely at will and be forgiven? By no means! Neither can it mean that God has no law whatsoever to which man is subjected. “Sin is not imputed when there is no law” (Rom. 5:13). Sin is lawlessness, a transgression of law (1 Jn. 3:4). Therefore, we must look for the true meaning of the passage. God’s word does not contradict itself.

It must mean, then, that we are not under a law system which offers no pardon. This will not rule out the gospel because Paul called it, “The gospel of the grace of God” (Acts 20:24). It is God’s power unto salvation to all who believe (Rom. 1:16); it is the word of God’s grace and offers an inheritance (Acts 20:32), the grace of God that bringeth salvation teaching us (Tit. 2:11-12). Paul affirms that “the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death” (Rom. 8:2). Bro. R.L. Whiteside explains, “This verse is a figure of speech in which the less is denied so as to emphasize the greater. We are not merely under law, but under grace” (A New Commentary On Paul’s Letter To The Saints At Rome, p. 137). John said, “For the law was given through Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ” (Jn. 1:17). Also, he wrote that one might not sin, but if he did, he had access unto the Father – he could be forgiven (1 Jn. 2:12). Certainly neither God, Christ, The Spirit, nor the gospel encourage or allow sin. Sin separates from God and brings death (Isa. 59:2; v. 23). Faith leads to God through Jesus for justification, salvation.

Paul next uses an old axiomatic truth, to confirm the absolute necessity of obedience to the Lord, “To whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey.” He introduces verse sixteen with “know ye not” (do you not know) to wake them up to this fundamental truth: whom ye obey, you are his servants. This impresses: (1) you have a choice; (2) force is not used; (3) you are accountable; (4) you are classified by your manner of life. Paul says, “You know this truth,” then he applies it to sin and righteousness and gives the consequences which follows: sin unto death, “the wages of sin is death” (ver. 23); obedience unto righteousness unto holiness and eternal life through Christ (ver. 23). This describes a manner of life, not just a weakness manifested nor just an emotional outburst of good.

Paul makes application of his teaching which is a crucial place in preaching. He first expressed, “But God be thanked.” God made all things possible and is the one to receive the glory. “That ye were the servants of sin,” is not the reason for thanks. However, the statement, “Ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness” (vs. 17-18) is reason enough to thank God. These were made free from sin when they “obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you.” Note: (I) “From the heart,” prompted from a heart of faith; (2) “Obeyed,” acted upon command; (3) “that from of doctrine,” mould, pattern or model set forth in the doctrine. This does not specifically apply only to the baptismal form (death, burial and resurrection), but it certainly includes it. It means doctrinal pattern “which was delivered” – the gospel delivered it which these had fitted themselves into. This is not ritualistic nor formalistic action. It is more than that. It must come from the heart or else becomes vain and void. However, it mut also be true to the teaching. This is faith made perfect by works seasoned with love (James 2:22; Gal. 5:6).

It was through the obedience of the doctrinal form delivered that these were made “free from sin.” This is Paul’s proposition and I can understand it. Another thing, when one “obeys from his heart,” as taught here, he will receive forgiveness of sins, justification, and become a servant of righteousness.

Verse 19 simply speaks in a manner so man can understand. Because of the “infirmity of your flesh” (weakness) manifested to become negligent or careless in your endeavors as Christ’s servant, you should keep in mind that, as you gave your whole being unto uncleanness and iniquity in your former life, even so now yield your members unto righteousness. The thought is, when you were servants of sin, you had nothing to do with righteousness, even so now, have nothing to do with sin but “hunger and thirst after righteousness” (Matt. 5:6).

Consider the final consequences: when you lived in sin, what did you gain? Those things promise only death, nothing beyond – nothing gained. “But now being made free from sin, and become servants to God, ye have your fruit unto holiness, and the end everlasting life.. For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.”

What more can be said except “Amen”?

QUESTIONS

• What does “what shall we say then?” refer to?
• What does it mean “to continue in sin that grace may abound”?
• Think about “dead to sin” or “died in sin.” How is “dead” used? When does one “die” to sin?
• What is genuine repentance?
• Why did not Paul argue the meaning of “baptism”?
• Give at least three of Paul’s reasons for forsaking sin and living righteously.
• How are we united with Christ in baptism? What course of life shall one live who was so united with Christ?
• What is our “old man” and “body of sin”? When does one become alive, to walk in newness of life?
• What is meant by “not under law, but under grace”?
• How does “whom you obey, you are his servant” clarify the need of obedience to Christ?
• When did these Romans live in iniquity? When in righteousness?
• Give the results of each life.

Truth Magazine XXIII: 1, pp. 15-18
January 4, 1978

By Robert F. Turner

The righteousness of God through faith has been presented in the first four chapters of Paul’s letter to the Romans, and man’s individual responsibility for his sin, for his condemnation, and for his response to Christ has been emphasized. Now Paul sums up this thesis in two ways: (1) the “straight” prosaic condensing of matters found in verses one through eleven; and (2) a dramatic presentation of Adam and Christ in what might be called, “The Great Contrast,” verses twelve through twenty-one. You are urged to restudy the earlier chapters, for these summations state the same truths that have already been argued at length. Any questionable problem of the “Great Contrast” should be interpreted so as to conform to the previous material, and not used as a basis for reinterpretation of previous chapters.

“Therefore being justified by faith-” rather than by “law.” It has been established that all have sinned, hence none can claim “freedom from guilty” on the basis of law (cf. Gal. 3:10-12). “Faith” is used in the sense of trust, and the contrast is not between believing that Jesus is Christ and the works of faith, but between trusting in Christ for forgiveness and trusting in ones self to obey law perfectly, so as to need no forgiveness. God is just in condemning all (being no respecter of person, and rendering to every man according to his deeds); but Jesus Christ has satisfied both the justice and the mercy of God by dying on our behalf. We are justified (our sins being forgiven, we are pronounced “free of guilt”) if we individually demonstrate our faith, as did Abraham. (We must “believe . . . and diligently seek” – Heb. 11:6).

It is Christ’s self-sacrifice that appeases the judicial wrath of God. Hence, our “peace with God” is through Him, the object of our faith. God’s mercy, and gift of love, is available unto all; but we individually “have access” to this grace and its hope as we individually trust in Him. (Note: Christ is the means, forgiveness is the operation, and faith is the condition upon. which the individual is blessed.) (Background and vv. 1-2.)

With such hope in Christ, we can rejoice in tribulations also, for patience (endurance, for His sake) produces further approval on God’s part; and this, in its turn results again in hope. The Holy Spirit’s testimony to God’s love is by no means purely subjective. It is further explained by reference to the unselfish sacrifice of Christ for us, even while we were yet sinners (vs. 3-8).

Verses nine and ten are a rewording of the conclusion stated in chapter four, verse twenty-five. Christ was delivered for our offenses, raised again for our justification; we are justified by His blood, save through Him; reconciled by His death, saved by His life. In each case there was death, then life – the resurrected lie of Christ. It is pure fantasy to imagine that the “life” of verse ten refers to His perfect life before death, which is supposedly “imputed” to us. The Hebrew letter repeatedly puts the death and life of Christ, in this order, as the means of our redemption. It is in His resurrected life that Christ is our King, High Priest, Advocate, Mediator, etc. “Wherefore he is able to save them to the uttermost that come unto God by him, seeing he ever liveth to make intercession for them” (Heb. 7:25, emphasis mine). Man is reconciled to God through the death and resurrected life of Jesus Christ our Lord. (v. 11)

The sordid story of man’s sin has been told (1:18 3:18); proving the inadequacy of law alone to produce righteousness (3:19-23; see 7:10-24 and 8:3); and we have been told that all who manifest complete faith (trust) in Christ are “justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus” (3:24 – 4:25). This has been summarized in the first eleven verses of chapter five, with emphasis upon God’s love, and the blessings that love brings. to unworthy man. But Paul does not stop here. The awfulness of sin, and the magnitude of God’s grace is such that he again summarizes what has been said: this time by a dramatic presentation of the contrast in Adam and Christ. They appear upon the stage of inspiration in five sequences, each showing the overwhelming superiority of God’s grace to sin and its consequences. What Adam introduced, Christ countered and always victoriously. The details (complicated wording) of some scenes will continue to pose problems, but the message and conclusion of the drama is unmistakable. Keep this concept in mind as we study the script.

Verse twelve is the key to what follows, and must be carefully considered. “Therefore-” showing continued summation; “as through one man (Adam) sin entered into the world . . . .” The “as” anticipates a counterpart – the contrast with Christ which will be made in verse fifteen. Through (did) Adam, sin entered or was introduced into the world. Compare 2 John 7, where the gnostic deceivers “entered into the world.” Adam’s sin no more made (immediately) the people of the world sinners, than the gnostics made (immediately) early Christians to apostatize. Nor is the universal “death” of this verse the immediate consequence ~of Adam’s sin. Adam introduced sin into the world, but Adam did not produce the death. Death came through (dia) sin. Look carefully at the Greek text. It is “did one man, sin” but it is “did sin, death.” Adam was separated from God, (spiritual death) because, _Adam sinned. “And so . .” (hontos, in this manner; see Rom. 11:26) “death passed unto all men” (a reference to the degenerate condition of mankind, as shown in chapters one through three) “for that all sinned.” Each one’s sin is the ground (causative) for his spiritual death; thus individual responsibility is declared in the initial arguments, in the first summation, and in this preface to the dramatic summation: “The Great Contrast.” It is therefore to be understood in the interpretation of that which is to follow. Note: “all have sinned” (pastes harmartos) both here and in Romans 3:23.

“For” (v. 13) relates what follows to verse twelve. Before the Law of Moses sin was in the world, and death reigned because of sin (v. 14). This death is sin-related (spiritual), not flesh-related (physical). But no positive, codified law existed in the period under consideration. Therefore, (I) the sin of the period was not like Adam’s (it would have been identical if inherited) and (2) this is a repeat reference to the sins of Gentiles who violated their moral sense of “ought” (2:14-15) and stood justly condemned. In this summary, as in the initial presentation, Paul shows that both Jews (with codified law) and Gentiles (with no codified law) were sinners.

The first of the five contrasts (v. 15) was begun in verse twelve with “as through one man.” Now, “Not as the trespass, so also is the free gift;” contrasting the offense against heaven, with the charisma (free gift) of heaven. Individual responsibility, established in verse twelve, must prevail in this verse as well; so that one ignores the immediate context if he separates the later from the first part of the contrast. The many die – by participating in the offense against heaven; and the many live – only to the extent they participate (trust) in the free gift. The effect is secondary in this scene; emphasis being given to that which brings about spiritual death and life. The antagonistic spirit of the sinner (all sin is “against God,” Gen. 20:6; 39:9; 2 Sam. 12:13; Psm. 51:4; Lu. 15:21) is countered by the abounding grace of God.

The next contrast (v. 16) is that of the judicial sentence or decrees of God. Condemnation is contrasted with the decree for “an act of righteousness” (see footnote, A.S.) i.e., Christ on the Cross, as God’s plan for justification. Again, upon first reading it is easy to conclude that this justification is that of the sinners, considered subjectively. But the drama has not come to that yet. The means of justification is under consideration here. One man’s offense brought about the judgment “Condemnation;” and foreknowledge of the “many offenses” which would follow brought about the decree or award of a Savior. “God so loved the world that He gave . . . .” And it was the “many offenses” for which Christ would die – not one offense that would be “imputed” to the many.

In verse seventeen, the third contrast is death versus life; perhaps more accurately, the death and the life, considered abstractly. One sin of Adam introduced sin (abstractly) into the world, and “death through sin” (v. 12). But Christ “brought life and immortality to light through the gospel” (2 Tim. 1:10). With Adam’s sin “The Death” began its dominion over its subjects; but Christ is Life (Jn. 1:4; 14:6 and all who receive Him will reign in Life through Him. Death reigned in the first instance, but we may be more than conquerors in Christ Jesus. The future tense of “shall reign” (in Christ) contemplates ultimate glory (cf. 8:17, 21). “The Life” far exceeds “the Death” to which mankind has been subjected.

In the next contrast (v. 18), both the condemnation and the justification are universal; the first because “all have sinned,” and the second because the “one act of righteousness” (A.S., referring to Christ’s crucifixion) is the universal remedy for sin, available to “whosoever will.” Contrast is found in the terrible end of sin, and the marvelous and embodied in the righteous act of Christ on behalf of the world (See Rom. 6:23).

And the last contrast (v. 19) concerns the subjective and practical results of the two categories. Adam’s way was one of disobedience, while Christ’s way was that of obedience. “The many” (hoi po11ol, masses). who are caught up in the way of Adam are “made (constituted) sinners,” and “the many” who submit to the way of Christ will be “made (constituted) righteous.” Again, the future tense is used (cf. v. 17) regarding the righteous. Expositor’s Greek Testament comments, “It is because Paul conceives of this justification as conditioned in the case of each of the polloi by faith, and as in process of taking place in one after another that he uses the future.” If the last contrast seems anticlimactic it may:b .that Paul sees the application yet in process. Also, he had At to make a climactic summary outside the Adam-Christ contrasts, which binds this part of his letter to that which has gone before. The Adam-Christ contrasts, now ended, were dramatic illustrations in the midst of Paul’s arguments on Law versus Grace, so he now returns to that theme with a summary that reads almost like a doxology.

“The law entered” (v. 20) or came between that Abrahamic period of justification by faith (Ch. 4:) and the Christian dispensation – between the promise and its fulfillment (Gal. 3:16-f). Why? “That the offense might abound” i.e., be the more apparent (3:19-20; 7:13). Man sinned in the absence of a codified law, but specific, positive precepts clearly identified the transgression and emphasized the futility of seeking justification via law. It also made graphic the need for forgiveness (cf. “to bring us to Christ” Gal. 3:24). “But where sin abounded, grace did abound more exceedingly: that, as sin reigned in death, even so might grace reign through righteousness unto eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord” (v. 21).

In Romans And Corinthians

Throughout these comments on Romans Five we have considered the “death” of this text to be spiritual separation from God. We believe the context, including Paul’s closing statement, warrants that interpretation. But there are two Adam-Christ contrasts in Paul’s writings, and that of the Corinthian letter (t Cor. 15) is so clearly physical that a brief comparative study is in order. An Adam-Christ contrast or comparison in different letters, and on different subjects, does not warrant mixing the points or their application.

In Corinthians, the context is physical death and physical resurrection, from first to last. But in Romans the context is salvation from sin, and the only references to resurrection (1:5 and 4:17) are in relation to the soulredemption theme. In Corinthians, Adam represents mortal man: a natural body (v. 44) of the earth (v. 47, 49) with flesh and blood (v. 50). These things are not sinful within themselves, but would have been inherited from Adam had he never sinned (Gen. 2:7). Adam was to reproduce (Gen. 1:28), eat physical foods (Gen. 1:29), had natural appetites and desires (Gen. 2:9; 3:6), before the first sin. To partake of Adam’s nature as set forth in the Corinthians letter simply meant to be mortal. True, as a consequence of Adam’s sin we are separated from the “tree of life” which maintained life in Eden; hence, we die. But the Corinthian letter makes no reference to this, nor is it a part of the lesson there.

But the Roman letter deals with Adam as the first sinner, hence representative of sinful man. Here, to partake of Adam’s nature means to rebel against God, to be disobedient. As Adam was the primordial “father” of sin, Christ is the “Author of eternal salvation” (Heb. 5:9). The Romans and the Corinthian Adam-Christ comparison or contrasts are not only in different parks; they are distinctly different ball games. One partakes of Adam’s physical or mortal nature through no choice of his own, and can do nothing about it. But Paul makes it clear in Romans that to partake of the spirit of Adam is a responsible sin, for which we must give account.

In Corinthians, Christ is held forth as our hope for release from the bondage of physical death; but in Romans spiritual death is under consideration, and it is contrasted with eternal life in Christ Jesus.

QUESTIONS

• What characters are discussed in the Great Contrast?
• What is the “life” of verse 103 Prove your answer.
• What two things have broken into or entered the world against God’s original will and what impact have they had on humanity?
• What is contrasted inverse 15 and what does this have to do with free moral agancy or personal responsibility?
• What two decrees of God are contrasted inverse 16 and what is the ground or cause of each?
• What is contrasted in verse 17?
• If the last part of verse 19 means that the personal obedience of Christ is imputed to us, then by parallel the first part must mean what?
• By the obedience of Christ in death, God makes or declares men.
• Why did the law enter and how did this help in bringing men to obey the gospel?
• In what ways is 1 Cor. 15 like Romans 5, and in what ways unlike?

Truth Magazine XXIII: 1, pp. 12-15
January 4, 1979

By Ron Halbrook

The theme of Romans is “the gospel of Christ” as “the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth . . . . For therein is the righteousness of God revealed from faith to faith: as it is written, The just shall live by faith” (1:16-17). The letter is a polemic against Jewish Christians who taught that once a Gentile obeyed the gospel of Christ, he must then be circumcised and keep the law of Moses. Because Paul affirmed the all-sufficiency of faith in Jesus Christ for salvation, he has been called the great Apostle of faith and Romans the great epistle of faith. The fourth chapter helps to unfold the theme by showing that to the sinner who “believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness” (v. 5).

The first three chapters of Romans read like a legal brief, convicting all mankind of sin. Those who did not retain God in their minds but who turned to idolatry and immorality, had been cast off by God for their sins (1:18-32). Those who received and retained the oracles of God condemned the other nations, but were self-condemned because they were guilty of the same sins (2:1-3:20). Standing before God, the perfect and impartial Judge, all men were condemned because all had sinned (2:2, 12; 3:9, 19, 23). Jew and Gentile, alike needed the salvation which is in Jesus Christ by faith.

The conviction of sin is followed by a summary statement which reiterates the theme and sets the stage to further develop the theme (3:21-31). Since all have sinned, all have hope of justification only by the grace of God “through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.” A redemption is a deliverance or liberation obtained by payment of a ransom; the death of Jesus is the ransom price and, thus, “the ground of the whole remedial system . . . . The ransom is the meritorious means of the justification, or the valuable consideration which procures it . . . . Now when this blood is offered and accepted, when it takes effect as a ransom, which it does when we believe in, and obey Christ, then we are released from sin; and the sin is forgiven” (Moses E. Lard, Romans, pp. 116-18). Before turning to emphasis upon the condition of faith for justification, Paul emphasizes the only ground of merit upon which the gift is offered: the sacrificial death of Jesus Christ! Man’s helpless condition in sin and God’s matchless gift in Christ exclude all grounds of boasting. A perfect record in keeping the deeds of the law would establish, not exclude, boasting. Since all have sinned, boasting is to be excluded by a gift through “the law of faith. Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law” (vv. 27-28). Chapter four is a detailed defense of this conclusion.

Faith Counted for Righteousness: “What Abraham Hath Found” (Vv.. 1-8)

Abraham, father of the Jews, himself confirmed Paul’s argument. What had Abraham learned about justification before God? He found as all men find that his own works were sinful, that he had no record of perfection to offer God, and therefore that he was ungodly under the law of God. Finding himself in sin, “Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness” (v. 3).

The first eight verses picture God as though he were keeping a ledger or book of accounting. What He sees, this He reckons, counts, or imputes. That is, He marks down on the ledger “sin,” charging the debt to a man; this man has worked sin and the account thus shows him to be “ungodly:” God does not mark down the sin of one man onto the account of another man. Sin is put down to the account of the sinner himself and to no one else (cf. Ezek. 18). If a man never sinned, his ledger would be always clean and thus the account would show him to be innocent, just, righteous. If our works are all perfectly just, “the reward” must be given by right of a debt on God’s part; we could then boast of our doing. “What is owed as a debt cannot be reckoned as a favor” (Vine’s Dictionary of New Testament Words, III, p. 258). Reckon, count, or impute does not mean transfer. God does not juggle the accounts, marking down one man’s sin or righteousness on the account of. another. He marks down what He sees.

Abraham worked sin and was ungodly, so could not offer his own record of perfection nor demand the reward (3:23; 4:2, 4-5). The only way God could put down righteousness to the account of a sinner is by forgiving the sin, thus giving a gift of grace or unmerited favor. Such a favor could be bestowed universally and unconditionally upon all men, or conditionally and, therefore, only upon those meeting the condition. Abraham found that God justifies the ungodly by grace, upon the condition of faith. What must God see and record in order for His ledger to show us being innocent, just or righteous? Faith is regarded and recorded for righteousness (vv. 3, 5)! Upon the meritorious ground of the death of Jesus Christ, God records faith and the account shows righteous, just, innocent. The chart below illustrates what happens when the ransom price is applied to our need:

David learned the same lesson and exclaimed the blessedness, the wholeness, the happiness of the man who receives this gift:

Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven and whose sins are covered.

Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.

Though Paul does not discuss the nature of faith in the first few verses of Romans 4, his quotation of David from Psalm 32 reminds us that the nature of saving faith is an obedient faith. David’s exclamation followed upon his meeting the condition for forgiveness, the condition of an obedient faith expressed in the confession of sin and prayer for forgiveness (Psa. 32:1-5). In like manner, the faith of Abraham was an obedient faith from the first moment that we learn anything about his faith (see Gen. 12:1-4; cf. Heb. 11:8 – “by faith Abraham . . . obeyed”). Abraham, before the law of Moses, and David, under the law, both learned that not their record of perfection but rather their faith was “counted for righteousness.” The sinner throws himself upon the mercy of the court and obtains forgiveness upon the condition of obedient faith.

Faith Counted for Righteousness: “Upon the Uncircumcision Also” (Vv. 9-15)

Since certain Jewish Christians insisted that Gentile Christians be circumcised, Paul asked whether the blessing of forgiveness came “upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also?” The case of Abraham is conclusive. “Faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness” when he himself was still “in uncircumcision” (vv. 9-10). The statement, “Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness,” is a quotation from Genesis 15:6 and circumcision was not commanded until some time later in Genesis 17. When he did receive circumcision, it was a sign that God already recognized and approved his faith. Thus, God sealed Abraham as the father of all “who also walk in the steps of that faith,” whether they be uncircumcised Gentiles or circumcised Jews (vv. 11-12). To walk in those steps is “to believe what God says, and by reason of so believing, to do what he says . . . . They were being led away from the truth into a judaistic concept of their duty . . . . To keep the law and practice circumcision in order to be saved is not walking in those steps” (Bryan Vinson, Sr., Paul’s Letter to the Saints at Rome, p. 80). Neither can we walk in those faithful steps by keeping the commandments of men and by perverting the truth of God with human innovations.

The promise of salvation came not to Abraham through the law of Moses, but came before that law and through a “righteousness of faith” exemplified in Abraham (v. 13). (f the promised inheritance is “of the law, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect” (w. 14-15). Righteousness or salvation cannot be of the law, for “the law worketh wrath.” The law could make men conscious of sin (“for where no law is, there is no transgression”), but the law could not remove the sin. Paul’s conclusion that justification must be by faith, and that this justification is for us today, follows.

Faith Counted for Righteousness: “For Us Also” (Vv.16-25)

Paul concludes that the promise, then, indeed is “of faith, that it might be by grace.” This makes Abraham truly “the father of us all” truly “a father of many nations” spiritually (vv. 16-17). The very faith by which Abraham was justified before circumcision was the same faith which made him “the father of many nations” in the flesh (Gen. 12:1-2; 17:5). How embarrassing for Judaising teachers that Paul should make the fleshly seed in which they took pride dependent upon the continuity of a faith which justified Abraham before circumcision! He believed that god would multiply his seed; Abraham “against hope believed in hope” when in his old age he received the promise of a son. by the same faith excercised before the covenant of circumcision, Abraham later discounted the fleshly limitations which seemed to preclude the birth of this son (vv. 18-20). Abraham “had to decide whether to believe God against nature, or believe nature against God” (Lard, p. 148). He was “fully persuaded” that what God has promised, “he was able also to perform” (v. 21). All this transpired before and without the law of Moses.

Abraham’s faith was reckoned “to him for righteousness,” making him the father of all who are justified by faith – even of all in the gospel age.

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

Justification by faith is for us also!” To the sinner who “believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness” (v. 5). But Paul ends where he began this section of Romans: upon the only ground of merit for this marvellous gift. Jesus died as the sacrifice for sins and arose that as High Priest he might bear the blood into the Holy of Holies. Salvation by faith is truly of grace. “Oh to grace how great a debtor daily I’m constrained to be! Let thy goodness like a fetter bind my wandering heart to thee.”

Faith Counted for Righteousness: An Abused Doctrine

There are still religious groups today which refuse to accept what the Spirit taught through Paul, and who abuse justification by faith in an effort to make it fit their own doctrines. The doctrine of the Armstrong’s, Seventh-Day Adventists, and other Sabbatarians binds certain parts of the law of Moses. They separate Moses’ law into “moral” and “ceremonial,” keeping the former and rejecting the latter, in an effort to escape the law of animal sacrifices while retaining the law of the Sabbath. This does not break the identity of modern Sabbatarians with ancient Judaisers. There is no evidence that the Judaisers of Paul’s day required animal sacrifices. The common identity is in selecting certain parts of the Old Law to bind today. All such efforts undermine the all-sufficiency of justification by faith in Christ. Abraham was justified before and without the Sabbath law just as certainly as before and without the circumcision law. Such laws have nothing to do with justification by faith in Christ today because He has neither revealed nor required them within “the law of faith.” All those who attempt to defend polygamy, instrumental music in worship, infant baptism, or any other practice by an appeal to the Old Law abuse the all sufficiency of justification in Christ.

The term count, reckon, or impute has been abused. Some people insist that it implies the transfer of sin and righteousness from the account of one person to that of another. Calvinism argues that God transfers the sin of Adam to the account of every man, transfers the sin of every man to the account of Christ, and transfers the righteousness or obedience of Christ to the account of a penitent sinner. There is nothing at all about any transaction of transfer in Romans 4. God puts down righteousness to our account, on the condition of faith. The basis for this gift is forgiveness through the blood of Christ (3:25).

It was Abraham’s faith and “not the righteousness of God, nor the righteousness of Christ” which was marked down to him. “Indeed, the position that Christ’s righteousness, whether the attribute or the righteousness of perfect obedience, is ever imputed to human beings, is without even the semblance of countenance from the Bible” (Lard, p. 129). When Abraham complied with the condition of faith, “God, on the basis of the ransom which is in Christ, counted his belief to him, not instead of, nor as equivalent to, a life of perfect obedience; but that, by means of it, as a condition, he might attain to justification, or release from sin” (Lard, p. 138). Faith is the condition for merciful pardon and has nothing to do with a transfer or juggling of accounts.

It is also taught that when God does “not impute sin” (v. 8), He takes no account of the sin which we practice. This error grows out of the doctrine of transfers: God imputes or marks down (transfers) the perfect obedience of Christ to the account of the sinner, and consequently sees nothing but obedience even where there is disobedience. God marks down sin when we sin; to “not impute” is to forgive (v. 7). The doctrine of transfers creates a realm of unconditional and automatic grace in which sin practiced is never marked down at all. Romans 4 teaches that God imputes or marks down all sins; upon the condition of faith, He mercifully forgives them, clearing the ledger, and marks down righteousness.

Romans 3:21-4:25 does not teach the denominational doctrine of salvation by faith alone, or salvation at the point of faith before and without any other act of obedience. The passage establishes the essentiality of faith, with very little attention to the obedience of faith elsewhere discussed (1:5; ch. 6; 16:26). Where 3:28 says “justified by faith,” “Luther made his famous translation, ‘we are justified by faith only,’ which daring act gave rise to that doctrine” (Lard, p. 123). Paul again and again says “by faith” but never once “by belief only, thereby excluding other condition” (Lard, p. 131). The nature of saving faith is obedient faith. That does not mean we will never err or sin, but it means we are always humble and penitent for’ sin, willing to put it away, ready to implore divine forgiveness, and anxious to forsake our error that we may return to the divine standard of truth. This was the character of Abraham – not a character of perfection, but one of faithfulness.

The character of saving faith is obedient faith. Baptism in water for the remission of sins is justification by faith in the gospel age. The principle and purpose of faith declared in Romans 4:3 (faith counted “for – eis righteousness”) is identical to the call issued in Acts 2:38 (repent and be baptized “for – eis – remission of sins”). That which moves a sinner to obey the gospel and lay hold on eternal life is faith. Faith is the motivating power, and thus faith saves. “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.” In the absence of faith, there can be no salvation because no motivation to sumit, obey, and accept the gospel. He that believeth not shall be damned” (Mk. 16:16). Romans 4 shows “that works without faith would not justify,” and James 2 shows “that faith without works would not justify” (R.L. Whiteside, Romans, p. 95). Also, “the principle of justification is the same, whether the justification be that of the saint or the sinner. In both cases, it is by belief with other acts; and in neither case by belief without those acts” (Lard, p. 131). Saving faith is obedient faith.

Speaking where the Bible speaks, being silent where it is, we have a wonderful message to preach. It is the solution to man’s greatest problem! When the ungodly obeys the gospel of Christ, “his faith is counted for righteousness” by the grace of God.

QUESTIONS

• How does chapter 4 reflect the great theme of Romans?
• What is a “redemption” and what place does it have in the gospel plan?
• Read Ezekiel 18 and explain how it helps us to understand what God imputes to a person’s record (Rom. 4:1-8).
• On what ground of merit can God record our faith unto righteousness?
• Was Abraham justified by faith before he was circumcised? Prove your answer.
• Was Abraham justified by faith before and without any other act of obedience? Prove your answer.
• What are some practices which men attempt to justify today on the same principle used by ancient Judaisers?
• Denominational theories see transfer from one account to another in the Bible word “imputation;” what three transfers are claimed?
• How does the denominational doctrine of transfer create a realm of unconditional or automatic grace?
• Discuss the nature or character of saving faith.

Truth Magazine XXIII: 1, pp. 9-12
January 4, 1979

By James E. Cooper

The great theme of the book of Romans is briefly laid down in 1:16-17: “For I am not ashamed of the gospel: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth, to the Jew first, and also to the Greek. For therein is revealed the righteousness of God from faith unto faith: as it is written. But the righteous shall live by faith. ” The gospel is God’s power to save all believers. In it is revealed “a righteousness of God from faith unto faith.” God’s plan for making men righteous in His sight is contained in the gospel which was delivered “to the Jew first, and afterward to the Greek,” just as Jesus had instructed (cf. Luke 24:47-48; Acts 1:8).

Having laid down the fact that the gospel is a universal plan for obtaining a right relationship before God, Paul next developed the theme of the universal need of mankind for the gospel. God’s wrath is “revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hinder the truth in unrighteousness” (1:18). The rest of chapter one (1:18-32) is devoted to showing the ungodliness and unrighteousness of the Gentile world, and their need for the provisions of the gospel. Chapters two and three continue the argument, and show that the Jew needed the gospel just as much as the Gentile because he practiced the same ungodliness that condemned the Gentile.

The argument of 1:18-3:8 is summarized in 3:9: “For we have laid to the charge of both Jews and Greeks, that they are all under sin.” It is interesting to note in passing that he does not argue that all men need the gospel because they were born totally and hereditarily depraved as the Calvinists maintain, but because they have sinned against God. Thus, briefly stated, the gospel answers a universal need: all men need the gospel because they are all under sin.

Gentiles Need The Gospel

The Gentiles were (and are) desperately in need of the gospel because they hinder the truth by their ungodliness (1:18). The fact that they were not under the law (2:14), or that they have not already heard the gospel, does not excuse their sin: “they are without excuse” (1:20). God’s invisible attributes, “His everlasting power and divinity,” are (note the present tense, are) clearly seen in the material world. Evidence from the created world is continually available to all men everywhere; therefore, they are without excuse for failing to respond properly.

Deliberately ignoring their knowledge of God from “General Revelation,” the Gentile became “vain in their reasonings” (1:21), with the ultimate result being the worse kind of idolatry. They did not set out to become idolaters, but failing to give God the proper reverence and becoming puffed up on their own wisdom they made gods of their own imagination (1:22-23).

Rejecting the true nature of God and substituting gods of their own making, they stooped to the lowest forms of immorality (1:24-32). Forgetting God and allowing lust to have a free reign in their hearts caused them to “dishonor their own bodies between themselves” (1:24), practicing both lesbianism (1:26) and sodomy (1:27). Because they “refused to have God in their knowledge,” the Gentiles were abandoned by God, without further effort to restrain them. They had a “reprobate mind,” wholly given up to iniquity, and were “filled” with the catalog of sins mentioned in 1:29-31. Their degradation is further seen in that they not only engaged in these vices themselves, but encouraged others to do the same – all the while “knowing the ordinance of God, that they that practice such things are worthy of death” (1:32). A darker picture of human corruption would be difficult to conceive. When man cuts himself loose from God, his spiritual, physical, intellectual and moral degeneration inevitably follows.

Jews Need The Gospel

If the Gentiles need salvation from God because of their ungodliness, and the Jew would readily admit to that fact, then the Jew who practiced the same ungodliness would also need the gospel. by condemning the Gentile for his ungodliness, the Jew condemned himself and he, too, is “without excuse” (2:1). Paul does not directly state that his argument is directed toward the Jew until he comes to 2:17, but the argument is designed to get past the self-righteousness of the Jew and let him see for himself that he stands condemned as well as the Gentile.

The Jew understood that God’s wrath would be poured out against those who were engaged in wickedness. The judgment of God would be “according to truth” (2:2) and, “according to (Paul’s) gospel, by Jesus Christ” (2:16). If a man admitted that God’s judgment is against those who practice such vices as were characteristic of the Gentiles, how could he think he could escape that judgment if he practiced the same vices? Did he think that he would receive preferential treatment from God in judgment because he was a recipient of his “goodness and forbearance and longsuffering” (2:4) as a member of the Hebrew race? If so, he was treasuring up for himself “wrath in the day of wrath” (2:5). God will “render to every man according to his works” (2:6), not according to his ancestry. “There is no respect of persons with God” (2:11). There is no advantage in being a “hearer of the law” if one is not also a “doer of the law” (2:13).

The Jew took pride in his standing as a Jew, and Paul refers to their attitudes in 2:17-20. Because they were Jews and the stewards of the Law which had been revealed by God, they felt that they were possessors of superior knowledge which made them competent to be “a guide of the blind, and a light of them that are in darkness,” but they really needed to teach themselves. They did not practice what they preached!

A teacher should “teach himself” (2:21). He that “preaches that a man should not steal” should not steal. He that says “a man should not commit adultery” should not commit adultery. Such would be absurd. It would be inconsistent also for the Jew who professed to abhor idols to “rob temples.” But to “glory in the law” and then to “transgress the law” caused the name of God to be blasphemed among the Gentiles because of their inconsistencies.

Why this difference between teaching directed “toward the other fellow” and their own practices? It appears that the Jews felt that their circumcision gave them the edge. God would not use the same standard in judging them as he would with others. But they were mistaken about that. Those today who, like the Jews, feel they are under the covenant and, therefore, have a special edge with God should give some serious thought here. Paul does not deny that it was an advantage to be a Jew and to be circumcised, but this advantage becomes no ad if one becomes a “transgressor of the law” (2:25). The real “Jew” (meaning a true servant of God? is not one who is physically descended from Abraham, and one who has been circumcised in the flesh. Nor is he a real “Jew” who observes the formalities of the Jewish religion, but fails to keep its precepts from the heart. The real “Jew” is one who serves God from the heart. His circumcision is not that of the flesh, but of the heart (cf. Col. 2:11-12; Phil. 3:3).

Twice in the second chapter, Paul refers to the Gentiles as “doers of the law.” In 2:14-15, they are depicted as not having the law (of Moses), but doing “by nature the things of the law.” Evidencing that they have a concept of right and wrong in their own consciences, they are “the law unto themselves.” When they do right, their conscience approves them; when they do wrong, their conscience condemns them. This universal concept of right and wrong will be the standard by which they will be judged and “as many as have sinned without the law shall also perish without the law” (2:12). In 2:26-27, Paul raises two questions for the Jew to ponder. First, if the uncircumcised (Gentile) keeps the ordinances of the law, “shall not his uncircumcision be reckoned for circumcision?” Will he not be treated by God as if he were circumcised? Second, if the physically uncircumcised person fulfills (keeps) the law, shall he not “judge” (condemn) the Jew who transgresses the law?

The Jew would likely respond to this line of reasoning with the idea that Paul’s argument did not seem to give the Jew any advantage at all. If his position as a Jew did not give him favor in the judgment, where is the advantage in being a Jew? Paul’s response is this: “Much in every way; first of all, that they were intrusted with the oracles of God” (3:2). Other advantages are not discussed until he comes to 9:4. Having been the possessors of the oracles of God was a supreme advantage for the Jew. These scriptures contain God’s special revelation to the nation of Israel, teaching them precepts and statutes by which they could serve Him.

A second question that the Jew might ask is, “What if some were without faith; shall their want of faith make of none effect the faithfulness of God?” Paul’s answer: “Absolutely not!” If every Jew on earth were a liar it would not affect the truthfulness of God. Your righteousness, or lack of righteousness, does not affect the character of God. This conclusion is in perfect harmony with the scriptures, which the Jews so jealously guarded. David acknowledged that God was righteous and he was the sinner, justly condemned in His sight (3:4; cf. Psa. 51:4).

A third question arises out of Paul’s answer to the second. If our unrighteousness only serves to commend the righteousness of God, is He not unrighteous when he “visiteth with wrath”? Paul’s response: “God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world?” Paul then turns the question on the questioner, using the Jew’s attitude toward Paul as the subject. They judged Paul a liar when he preached that Jesus of Nazareth is the Messiah. If their argument removed the problem of sin, as they imagined, why did they still call Paul a liar? In fact, why do they not do the very thing they have been accusing him of saying: “Let us do evil that good may come”? The Jew would feel the force of this argument.

What is the conclusion? Are we (Jews) better than they (Gentiles)? Are the Gentiles guilty and justly condemned before God, while we stand in a privileged position? Do we feel no need for repentance, and at the same time feel that the Gentiles are lost and undone? Not at all. Paul had proven from their own experiences that they were just as guilty of sin and justly condemned of God as were the Gentiles (3:9). He now confirms this affirmation by an appeal to the scriptures to show it was true (3:10-18; cf. Psa. 14:1-3; Psa. 5:9; Psa. 10:7; Psa. 36:1; Isa. 59:7-8). Of these scriptural references he observes that the law “speaketh to them that are under the law” (3:19). The Jews are under the law, and having failed to keep the requirements of the law perfectly, they are also guilty before God. Any honest man reviewing his own life would admit that.

Hence, every mouth was stopped from its boasting. There was nothing that anyone could say in his own defense; the whole world is brought under the judgment of God. The Jew needs the gospel just as desperately as does the Gentile. The Jew could not be justified through the law. It formed the basis of judgment, but not of justification. To be justified through the law, absolute obedience would be required, and no Jew (except the Lord Jesus Christ) ever accomplished that. And, no Gentile ever kept the “law written in their hearts” perfectly. Both Jew and Gentile are, therefore, admitted to be sinners, guilty before God, and in need of the saving grace of God which is through Jesus Christ. “All have sinned, and fall short of the glory of God” (3:23).

None could be saved on the basis of perfect law-keeping. Hence, the “righteousness of God from faith unto faith” (1:17) is “a righteousness of God” which is “apart from the law” (3:21). It comes to us by faith as a condition, and is revealed in order to produce faith. It is “a righteousness through faith in Jesus Christ unto all them that believe” (3:22).

Justification is brought about through the grace of God which provided that the redemption price should be paid by Jesus Christ (3:24). His blood is the ransom price, and we receive the benefit of it “through faith” (3:25), not perfect law-keeping, but a faith that “works by love” (cf. Gal. 5:6). The “law of faith” (3:27) excludes all boasting. Justification is not a matter of merit, a matter of earning one’s salvation. No man can boast that he deserves to be saved on his own merit. Only the gospel gives us hope to be justified before God. This hope is shared by both Jew and Gentile and gives all the praise to God.

QUESTIONS

• Memorize the theme of Romans as stated in 1:16-17.
• How did the vain reasonings of the Gentiles affect the views of God (religion and man (morality)?
• Prove from chapter 2 either that God will or will not provide preferential treatment of certain men and nations in judgment.
• Though the Jews thought themselves guides to the blind, what effect did their lives often have on the Gentiles?
• Explain the difference between one who was a Jew only in the flesh and one who was a Jew in a deeper sense.
• Prove that chapter 2 does or does not teach: a. Jew who sinned would be saved because he had the true knowledge of God’s law, b. a Jew who sinned would be saved because he did not have the true knowledge of God’s law.
• 7. What three questions does Paul ask and answer for the Jew who sought to defend a hope of righteousness through Moses’ law during the gospel age?
• What Jew ever kept the law of God perfectly, so that he could offer nothing more or less than his own record for righteousness?
• What Gentile ever kept the law of God perfectly, so that he could offer nothing more or less than his own record for righteousness?
• On what basis, then, does either Jew or Gentile have hope of righteousness before God?

Truth Magazine XXIII: 1, pp. 6-8
January 4, 1979