Category: Understanding Romans
And the father of the circumcision to those not from circumcision alone, rather also to those who are in line with the footsteps of the belief of our father Abraham in uncircumcision. Because the promise to Abraham (or to his seed) himself to be heir of the cosmos was not by means of the Law, rather by means of the righteousness of belief. Because if the heirs are from Law, then belief has become empty and the promise has been rendered useless. Because the Law effects wrath, but where there is no Law, neither is there transgression. Because of this, it is from belief, in order that, according to grace, for the promise to be certain to all the seed, not to that which is from Law only, but rather to that which is from the belief of Abraham, who is the father of all of us. (Romans 4:12-16)
A seal of the righteousness of belief. In days gone by, official documents were sealed by placing hot wax over the opening and pressing the signet ring into it, at the same time securing the envelope (or scroll) and establishing its legitimacy. The king’s seal was the mark of royal authenticity.
Circumcision sealed Abraham’s justification, not because there was some innate power in the rite per se, but because it was the mark of God. Its validity was bound up in the One who gave it, just as the seal on Horas’ scroll (see previous post) was valid because it was made by the king himself. If the king was killed and replaced by one who captured Horas and enslaved him once again, Horas would find his sealed document to be a useless defense. But as long as the original king occupied the throne, the seal guaranteed Horas’ freedom because of the power and authority of the one whose seal it was. In the case of circumcision, Abraham’s righteousness was guaranteed because standing behind it was the everlasting King of kings whose declaration cannot fail.
This sign and seal would have been a tremendous reminder to Abraham of the grace of God and the One in whom true hope is found.
For him to be the father of all of those who trust by means of uncircumcision. Nothing happens by accident in a universe over which God is sovereign, thus the timing of Abraham's justification followed by his circumcision was purposeful: God was preparing for the inclusion of the Gentiles in His blessing. We, who trust four thousand years after the promise to Abraham and two thousand years after circumcision had become obsolete, were part of the reason why Abraham's justification preceded his circumcision.
12 And the father of the circumcision to those not from circumcision alone, rather also to those who are in line with the footsteps of the belief of our father Abraham in uncircumcision. Leaders in the Jewish community thought that flowing from Abraham's loins and following him in circumcision made them heirs of his blessing. However, physical incisions and parental lineage did not produce righteousness; the true beneficiaries were those who followed Abraham down the path of trusting God. Again, his belief began before he received the sign.
13 Because the promise to Abraham (or to his seed) himself to be heir of the cosmos. The promises to Abraham were never stated using terms of inheriting the world, but the concepts of occupying, ruling, and blessing the lands of the pagan nations amounted to the same thing. It was fitting for Paul to summarize the promise in this way.
Was not by means of the Law, rather by means of the righteousness of belief. God’s promised blessing upon Abraham and his descendants was not contingent on their adherence to the Mosaic Law. This would have been impossible, of course, because the Law was not revealed until four hundred years after Abraham's death. But another reason was…
14 Because if the heirs are from Law, then belief has become empty and the promise has been rendered useless. Paul is using a form of argumentation called reductio ad absurdum wherein the debater carries the assertion of his opponent to its logical conclusion. The Lord Jesus was a master at this technique. When the Pharisees accused Him of casting out demons by the power of Beelzebub, He adopted their position and reminded them of the stupidity of their claim: If demons are the agents of Beelzebub, and Beelzebub uses Jesus to destroy their work, then Beelzebub is attacking himself. If his house is divided against itself, then it will fall. This is the absurdity of the Pharisees accusation. Here Paul is showing that if the Jews' claim—that God's blessing comes to those who keep the Law—is correct, then the blessing cannot be based on belief. The blessing is either procured by trusting God or by keeping the Law. If the latter, then faith is empty; it goes as far as a car with a dry fuel tank.
15 Because the Law effects wrath. Not only is belief empty, but God's promise is futile if the blessing is based on the Law. Why? Because the Law provokes the rage of God, not His blessing. Just as the apostle proved earlier, those who are under the Law will be condemned by the Law; and condemnation is not blessing. God's promises are merely hot air if their fulfillment is dependent upon the heirs keeping the Law precisely because not a single one of them will meet the requirement. I could go to the grave of George Washington and promise him that he can be president again if he will just walk into the White House and sing "God Bless America," but no one would confuse this with a promise of real value.
But where there is no Law, neither is there transgression. If the promise does not depend on keeping the Law, then breaking the Law does not prevent its fulfillment.
16 Because of this, it is from belief. God made the fulfillment of His promise based upon belief rather than upon obedience for two reasons. First, to magnify His grace. Again, if blessing follows works, then it is obligatory; but God's goodness is presented solely because of His lovingkindness. Second, to grant assurance to the heirs. If a millionaire wills his estate to his son on the basis of specific achievements such as being accepted to Harvard, maintaining a 4.0 grade-point-average, graduating with honors, becoming an executive in a Fortune 500 company, marrying a woman from a “proper” family, and always using good manners, then there is no certainty that the boy will receive the wealth. But if the only requirement is for the son to believe the father’s promise, then the boy has every reason to be confident.
This assurance is just as much for the Gentiles as for the Jews since it is not rooted in the Law, but in belief.