Ver. 22. 86: because of this signal faith, evinced so triumphantly in spite of all there was to quell it. ἐλογίσθη: i.e., his faith was reckoned to him as
18—24.
ἐστι καὶ ποιῆσαι.
23. Οὖκ ἐγράφη δὲ δι αὐτὸν µόνον, ὅτι ἐλογίσθη αὐτῷ.
621
a 4 ’ > ~~ > , 22. 86 καὶ ἐλογίσθη αὐτῷ cis δικαιοσύνη».
24. ἀλλὰ
καὶ δι ἡμᾶς, ots μέλλει λογίζεσθαι, τοῖς πιστεύουσιν ἐπὶ τὸν ἐγεί-
righteousness. That which needs to be reckoned as righteousness is not in itself righteousness —on this the Apostle’s argument rests in vers. 1-8; yet it is not arbitrarily that faith is so reckoned. The spiritual attitude of a man, who is conscious that in himself he has no strength, and no hope of a future, and who nevertheless casts himself upon, and lives by, the word of God which assures him of a future, is the necessarily and eternally right attitude of all souls to God. He whose attitude it is, is at bottom right with God. Now this was the attitude of Abraham to God, and it is the attitude of all sinners who believe in God through Christ; and to him and them alike it is reckoned by God for righteousness. The Gospel does not subvert the religious order under which Abraham lived ; it illustrates, extends, and confirms it.
Vers. 23-25. Conclusion of the argu- ment. Οὐκ ἐγράφη δὲ δι αὐτὸν µόνον: Gf. αἲν- {τος ας. Lo,’ xs (6;\ 117i Gal: ΠΠ. 8. The formula for quoting Scripture is not ἐγράφη but γέγραπται;: 1.ε., Scripture conveys not a historical truth, relating to one person (as here, to Abraham), but a present eternal truth, with some univer- sal application. δι’ ἡμᾶς: to show the mode of our justification. ols μέλλει λογίζεσθαι: to whom it (the act of believing) is to be imputed as righteous- ness. µέλλει conveys the idea of a Divine order under which things proceed sO. τοῖς πιστεύουσιν is in apposition to οἷς: “believing as we do”. (Weiss.) The object of the Christian’s faith is the same as that of Abraham’s, God that giveth life to the dead. Only in this case it is specifically God as He who raised Jesus our Lord. Cf. 1 Pet. i. 21, where Christians are described as those who through Christ believe in God who raised Him from the dead. In Abra- ham’s case, ‘‘God that quickeneth the dead” is merely a synonym for God Omnipotent, who can do what man cannot. In Paul, on the other hand, while omnipotence is included in the description of God—for in Eph. i. το, in order to give an idea of the greatest con- ceivable power, the Apostle can do no more than say that it is according to that working of the strength of God’s might which He wrought in Christ
when He raised Him from the dead— omnipotence is not the sole object of the Christian’s faith. His spiritual atti- tude toward God is the same as Abra- ham’s, but God is revealed to him, and offered to his faith, in a character in which Abraham did not yet know Him. This is conveyed in the description of the Person in relation to whom the Omnipotence of God has been dis- played to Christians. That Person is ‘‘Jesus our Lord, who was delivered up for our offences, and raised for our justification”. The Resurrection of’ Fesus our Lord entitles us to conceive of God’s Omnipotence not as mere unquali- fied power, but as power no less than infinite engaged in the work of man’s salvation from sin. In the Resurrection of Jesus, omnipotence is exhibited as redeeming power: and in this omni- potence we, like Abraham, believe. παρεδόθη is used in LXX, Is. ΠΠ. το, and its N.T. use, whether God or Christ be the subject of the παραδιδόναι (Rom. vill. 32: Gal. ii. 20, Eph. v. 2), may be derived thence. There is considerable difficulty with the parallel clauses διὰ τὰ παραπτώματα ἡμῶν, and διὰ τὴν δικαί- ωσιν ἡμῶν. It is safe to assert that Paul did not make an abstract separa- tion between Christ’s Death and His Resurrection, as if the Death and the Resurrection either had different motives, or served ends separable from each other. There is a sort of mannerism in the expression here, as there is in xiv. 9, which puts us on our guard against over- precision. This granted, it seems sim- plest and best to adopt such an interpre- tation as maintains the same meaning for διὰ in both clauses. This has been done in two ways. (1) The διὰ has been taken retrospectively. ‘“*He was delivered up because we had sinned, and raised because we were justified ”— sc. by His death. But though Paul writes in ν. 9, δικαιωθέντες viv ἐν τῷ αἵματι αὐτοῦ, it is impossible to be- lieve that he would have written—as this interpretation requires him to do—that we were justified by Christ’s death, and that Christ was therefore raised from the dead by God. Justification is not only an act of God, but a spiritual experience ; it is dependent upon faith (iii. 25); and it is realised in men as one by one, in: