聖書注解書

では、私たちは何と言いましょうか——Romans 3:1 を参照せよ。これはむしろユダヤ人の反論である。「信仰による義認についてのあなたの教理は、聖書がアブラハムについて語っている事と、どのように一致するのか。彼の場合、律法は脇に置かれたのか。彼は割礼の儀式から、また神が彼と結ばれた契約から、義認において何の利益も得なかったのか」。今や使徒の目的は、この問いに答えることである。

私たちの父アブラハムが——私たちの先祖、国民の父また創設者という意味である。Matthew 3:9 の注解を参照せよ。ユダヤ人は、彼が自分たちの父であるという事実を大いに誇りとしていた。それゆえ、彼の模範や行いから引き出される論証は、特に力強いものとなったであろう。

肉に従って——この表現は、多くの論争の対象となってきたものである。原語では、これはアブラハムを「肉にしたがった」彼らの父、すなわち彼らの血統上の父、または彼らがそこから出た先祖として指すこともできれば、「見いだした」に結びつけることもできる。「私たちの父アブラハムが、肉に関して何を見いだしたと言えようか」κατὰ σάρκα kata sarka。後者が疑いなく正しい結びつけである。「肉」という語を外的な特権や利点とする者もあり、彼自身の力または能力とする者もいる(カルヴァンとグロティウス)。さらに、割礼を指すとする者たちもある。私はこの最後の解釈が正しいと考える。それは文脈に最もよく合致し、この語の通常の意味にも等しくよく適合する。その考えは次のとおりである。「もし人々が信仰によって義と認められ、行いが何の場所も持たないのなら、それゆえすべての儀式と礼式、すべての律法的遵守が義認において無用であるのなら、割礼の利点は何か。アブラハムはそこからどんな利益を得たのか。なぜそれが制定されたのか。そしてなぜ、彼の生涯の記録においてそれほどの重要性が付与されているのか」。同様の問いが Romans 3:1 でも提起された。

見いだしたのか——得たのか、という意味である。彼はそこからどんな利点を得たのか。

Jew. What shall we then say that Abraham, our father as pertaining to the flesh, hath found? - The κατα σαρκα, pertaining to the flesh, must here refer to the sign in Abraham's flesh, viz. his circumcision; on which the Jew would found his right to peculiar blessings. That this is the meaning of κατα σαρκα, according to the flesh, Dr. Taylor has proved by a collation of several parallel scriptures, which it is not necessary to produce here. We may, therefore, suppose the Jew arguing thus: But you set your argument on a wrong footing, viz. the corrupt state of our nation; whereas we hold our prerogative above the rest of mankind from Abraham, who is our father; and we have a right to the blessings of God's peculiar kingdom, in virtue of the promise made to him; his justification is the ground of ours. Now what shall we make of his case, on your principles? Of what use was his obedience to the law of circumcision, if it did not give him a right to the blessing of God? And if, by his obedience to that law, he obtained a grant of extraordinary blessings, then, according to your own concession, Romans 3:27, he might ascribe his justification to something in himself; and, consequently, so may we too, in his right; and if so, this will exclude all those who are not circumcised as we are.

What shall we say then,.... The apostle having proved that there is no justification by the works of the law; to make this appear more clear and evident to the Jews, he instances in the greatest person of their nation, and for whom they had the greatest value and esteem,

Abraham, our father; who was not a righteous and good man, but the head of the Jewish nation; and, as the Syriac version here styles him, , "the head", or "chief of the fathers"; and so the Alexandrian copy, "our forefather": and was the first of the circumcision, and is described here by his relation to the Jews, "our father"; that is,

as pertaining to the flesh; or according to carnal descent, or natural generation and relation; for in a spiritual sense, or with respect to faith and grace, he was the father of others, even of all that believe, whether Jews or Gentiles: now the question put concerning him is, "what he, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found?" for the phrase, "as pertaining to the flesh", may be connected with the word

found; and to find anything is by seeking to obtain, and enjoy it: and the sense of the whole is, did he find out the way of life, righteousness, and salvation by the mere hint of carnal reason? and did he obtain these things by his own strength? or were these acquired by his circumcision in the flesh, or by any other fleshly privilege he enjoyed? or was he justified before God by any services and performances of his, of whatsoever kind? There is indeed no express answer returned; but it is evident from what follows, that the meaning of the apostle is, that it should be understood in the negative.

Romans 4:1-8 Abraham himself was justified by faith,

Romans 4:9-12 which was imputed to him for righteousness before

circumcision, that he might be the common father of

believers, whether circumcised or not.

Romans 4:13-17 The promise was not given him through the law, else

had it been void from the very nature of the law; but

being of faith by grace is sure to all the destined

seed, and not to those of the law only.

Romans 4:18-22 The acceptableness of Abraham’s faith,

Romans 4:23-25 which stands recorded not for his sake only, but for

the sake of all who shall profess a like faith in God

through Christ.

The apostle proceeds to prove his main conclusion, Romans 3:28, which is, that a sinner is justified by faith without works, from the example of Abraham. He was a man that had faith and works both, yet he was justified by faith, and not by works; and who doubts but the children are justified after the same manner that their father was: there is but one way of justification; this is the connexion.

As pertaining to the flesh: these words may either be referred to father; and then they import no more but that Abraham was their father according to the flesh, Romans 9:5. Or else they may be referred to the following word found; and then the question is, What hath Abraham found, i.e. got or attained, according to the flesh? The sense is, What hath he got by his righteousness, which stands in works, and are done in the flesh? Abraham obtained not righteousness by any works, ceremonial or moral. So the word flesh is taken, {see Philippians 3:3,4} when under the word flesh came circumcision, our own righteousness, which is by the law, or whatsoever is or may be opposed to that righteousness which is by the faith of Christ.

Verses 1-25. - (5) Abraham himself shown to have been justified by faith, and not by works, believers being his true heirs. The main points of the argument may be summarized thus: When Abraham obtained a blessing to himself and to his seed for ever, it was by faith, and not by works, that he is declared to have been justified so as to obtain it. Thus the promise to his seed, as well as to himself, rested on the principle of justification by faith only. The Law, of which the principle was essentially different, could not, and did not, in itself fulfil that promise; and that its fulfilment was not dependent on circumcision, or confined to the circumcised, is further shown by the fact that it was before his own circumcision that he received the blessing and the promise, Hence the seed intended in the promise was his spiritual seed, who are of faith such as his was; and in Christ, offering justification through faith to all, the promise is now fulfilled. Verse 1. - What then shall we say that Abraham our father according to the flesh hath found? The connection, denoted by οῦν, with the preceding argument is rather with vers. 27, 28 of ch. 3, than with its concluding words, νόμον ἱστάνομεν. This appears, not only from the drift of ch. 4, but also from the word καύχημα in ver. 2, connecting the thought with ποῦ οῦν ἡ καύχησις; in Romans 3:27. The line of thought is, in the first place, this: We have said that all human glorying is shut out, and that no man can be justified except by faith: how, then (it is important to inquire), was it with Abraham our great progenitor? Did not he at least earn the blessing to his seed by the merit of his works? Had not he, on that ground, whereof to glory? No, not even he. Scripture, in what it says of him, distinctly asserts the contrary. There is uncertainty in this verse as to whether "according to the flesh" (κατὰ σάρκα) is to be connected with "our father" or with "hath found." Readings vary in their arrangement of the words. The Textus Receptus has Τί οῦν ἐροῦμεν Αβραὰμ τὸν πατέρα ἡμῶν εὐρηκέναι κατὰ σάρκα. But the great preponderance of authority is in favour of εὐρηκέναι Ἀβραὰμ τὸν προπάτορα ἡμῶν κατὰ σάρκα. The first of these readings requires the connection of κατὰ σάρκα with εὐρηκέναι; the second allows it, but suggests the other connection. Theodoret, among the ancients, connecting with εὐρηκέναι, explains κατὰ σάρκα thus: "What righteousness, of Abraham's, wrought before he believed God, did we ever hear of?" Calvin suggests, as the meaning of the phrase (though himself inclining to the connection with προπάτορα)," naturaliter vel ex seipso." Bull, similarly ('Harmonic Apostolica,' 'Disputatio Posterior,' c. 12:14-17), "by his natural powers, without the grace of God." Alford, following Meyer, says that κατὰ σάρκα is in contrast to κατὰ πνεύμα, and that it "refers to that department of our being from which spring works, in contrast with that in which is the exercise of faith." Difficulty is avoided if (as is the most natural inference from the best authenticated reading) we take κατὰ σάρκα in connection with πάτερα or προπάτορα, in the sense of our forefather in the way of natural descent, the question being put from the Jewish standpoint; and this in distinction from the other conception of descent from Abraham, according to which all the faithful are called his children (cl. Romans 1:3; Romans 9:3, 5, 8:1 Corinthians 10:18). Among the ancients Chrysostom and Theophylact take this view. For the import of εὐρηκέναι, cf. Luke 1:30 (εϋρες χάριν παρὰ τῷ Θεῷ) and Hebrews 9:12 (αἰωνίαν λύτρωσιν εὑράμενος᾿.

IV.

(1-25) The subject of the chapter is an application of the foregoing to the special (and crucial) case of Abraham, with particular reference to two ideas that are continually recurring throughout the last chapter: (1) the supposed superiority of Jew to Gentile (and, à fortiori, of the great progenitor of the Jews); (2) the idea of boasting or glorying based upon this superiority. Following out this the Apostle shows how even Abraham’s case tells, not against, but for the doctrine of justification by faith. Indeed, Abraham himself came under it. And not only so, but those who act upon this doctrine are spiritually descendants of Abraham. It is entirely a mistake to suppose that they of the circumcision only are Abraham’s seed. The true seed of Abraham are those who follow his example of faith. He put faith in the promise, they must put their faith in the fulfilment of the promise.

(1) To come back to the question of Romans 3:1, repeated in Romans 3:9, in what did the superiority of Abraham, the great representative of the Jewish race, really consist?

As pertaining to the flesh.—The construction of these words appears to be determined by their position in the sentence. According to the best MSS. they are distinctly separated from “hath found” and joined with “our father.” They would therefore mean simply “our father according to the flesh,” i.e., by natural descent, as in Romans 1:3.

Hath found.—Hath got, or gained, by way of advantage.

Ch. Romans 4:1-25. Abraham, an apparent exception to the rule of gratuitous acceptance, really the great example of it

1. What shall we say then? &c.] Here a new and independent objection is anticipated. Abraham, the great Head of the Old Covenant, would be appealed to by the Jew, as on the assumption that he at least was justified by its terms; and on him now the argument turns.—See Appendix B.

The reading of the Gr. varies in MSS.; but the most probable reading will be rendered thus, What therefore shall we say that Abraham our father hath found, according to the flesh?—“Therefore:”—this, in our view, refers to the general previous argument from Romans 3:21, not specially to Romans 3:31.—“Our father:”—i.e. of the Jews.—“Hath found:”—i.e., in the way of acceptance and privilege. The perfect tense suggests the permanence of Abraham’s position in men’s thoughts.—“According to the flesh:”—these words do not, as in E. V., belong to “our father,” but to “hath found.” To interpret them here we must remember (what will come out in the course of the Epistle) St Paul’s doctrine of “the flesh.” It is, briefly, that “the flesh” is human nature, in the Fall, as unrenewed and unassisted by Divine special grace. “According to the flesh” will thus mean here “in respect of his own independent works and merits.” Did Abraham win acceptance as meritoriously keeping the covenant of works, which demands obedience and provides no grace? In brief, was he justified by works?

What shall we say? (τι ἐροῦμεν)

See Romans 4:1; Romans 6:1; Romans 7:7; Romans 8:31; Romans 9:14, Romans 9:30. The phrase anticipates an objection or proposes an inference. It is used by Paul only, and by him only in this Epistle and in its argumentative portions. It is not found in the last five chapters, which are hortatory.

Our Father

The best texts read προπάτορα forefather.

Hath found

Westcott and Hort omit. Then the reading would be "what shall we say of Abraham," etc. Found signifies, attained by his own efforts apart from grace.

As pertaining to the flesh (κατὰ σάρκα)

Construe with found. The question is, Was Abraham justified by anything which pertained to the flesh? Some construe with Abraham: our father humanly speaking.