Romans 4

Romans 4:1

Ambrosiaster: After showing that no one can be justified before God by the works of the law, Paul goes on to say that Abraham could not merit anything according to the flesh either. In saying “the flesh,” Paul meant circumcision, because Abraham sought nothing on the basis of his circumcision. For he was already justified before he was circumcised. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Apollinaris of Laodicea: Paul shows from the example of Abraham that faith is not given only to those who are under the law and the circumcision, but also to those who are not circumcised. For Abraham was not justified by his works either, nor did he have any reason to boast, for he was imperfect and apart from God he could do nothing.… Abraham our father was justified by faith. Paul calls him the “forefather according to the flesh” of those Israelites who have become sons of God by the Spirit. For Christ was made like them in his birth according to the flesh, and now he has made them like him through his birth by grace in the Spirit. — PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH

John Chrysostom: He had said that the world had become guilty before God, and that all had sinned, and that boasting was excluded and that it was impossible to be saved otherwise than by faith. He is now intent upon showing that this salvation, so far from being matter of shame, was even the cause of a bright glory, and a greater than that through works. For since the being saved, yet with shame, had somewhat of dejection in it, he next takes away this suspicion too. And indeed he has hinted at the same already, by calling it not barely salvation, but “righteousness. Therein” (he says) “is the righteousness of God revealed.” For he that is saved as a righteous man has a confidence accompanying his salvation. And he calls it not “righteousness” only, but also the setting forth of the righteousness of God. But God is set forth in things which are glorious and shining, and great.

And he calls him “father, as pertaining to the flesh,” to throw them out of the genuine relationship to him, and to pave the Gentiles’ way to kinsmanship with him. And then he says, “For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory: but not before God.” After saying that God “justified the circumcision by faith and the uncircumcision through faith,” and making the same sufficiently sure in what he said before, he now proves it by Abraham more clearly than he promised, and pitches the battle for faith against works, and makes this righteous man the subject of the whole struggle.

For the great power of Paul is especially displayed in this, that he turns what is objected to the other side, and shows that what seemed rather to be on the side of salvation by works, viz. glorying or boldness of claim belonged much more truly to that by faith. For he that glorieth in his works has his own labors to put forward: but he that finds his honor in having faith in God, has a much greater ground for glorying to show, in that it is God that he glorifieth and magnifieth. — Homily on Romans VIII

Origen of Alexandria: These things having thus been explained according to our ability, it also seems by no means to be passed over that he named Abraham “our father according to the flesh.” For Abraham is seen to be the father of the Gentiles according to faith, not according to the flesh. For of the Apostle himself he can indeed be called father even according to the flesh: for being of the race of Israel, he could name Abraham father even according to the flesh; but the other nations will name him father in spirit, not in flesh — unless, in passages so constricted, we turn to the breadth of allegorical understanding, where “father according to the flesh” can be taken as he who has handed on the first elements of carnal teaching, that is, of the law according to the letter, and has stood forth as a teacher of the first instruction in the divine law. But that teachers too are called fathers, the apostle Paul also says, that “in Christ Jesus through the Gospel I have begotten you.” But you also who read, gather for yourself from the divine Volumes the testimonies bearing on this. — COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

Pelagius: Paul calls the Jews back to the beginning of circumcision, so that what it originally stood for might be fully understood. — PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

Romans 4:2

Ambrosiaster: This is a rhetorical argument. For Abraham indeed does have glory before God, but because of the faith by which he was justified, because nobody is justified by the works of the law in a way which would give him glory before God. And because those who keep the law are still being justified, Paul adds: “If Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God.” — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Augustine of Hippo: Since Abraham without the law obtained glory not by the works of the law (as if he could fulfill the law in his own strength), since the law had not yet been given, the glory belongs to God, not to him. For he was justified not by his own merit, as if by works, but by the grace of God through faith. — AUGUSTINE ON Romans 20

Cyril of Alexandria: What can we say to those who insist that Abraham was justified by works because he was ready to sacrifice his son Isaac on the altar? Abraham was already an old man when God promised him that he would have a son and that his descendants would be as countless as the stars of the sky. Abraham piously believed that all things are possible with God and so exercised this faith. God reckoned him to be righteous on this account and gave Abraham a reward worthy of such a godly mind, viz., the forgiveness of his previous sins.… So even if Abraham was also justified by his willingness to sacrifice Isaac, this must be regarded as an evident demonstration of a faith which was already very strong. — EXPLANATION OF THE LETTER TO THE ROMANS

Origen of Alexandria: Since above he had set forth two laws, one of which he named the law of works and the other the law of faith, and says that by the law of faith the boasting of those who glory in the works of the law is excluded; and since he had pronounced that a person is justified by faith apart from the works of the law: consequently he now, in order that these things may be established from the Scriptures, brings forward the example of Abraham, and says that “Abraham, if he was justified by works, has glory, but not before God.” And this indeed he argues not without dialectical skill. For if he who is justified by works does not have glory before God, but it is agreed that Abraham does have glory before God, then Abraham was justified not by works but by faith, so that he necessarily has glory before God. For thus the Scripture declares: that “Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him unto righteousness.” But if God reckoned it to him unto righteousness, without doubt his glory too is before God. For this reason, therefore, the Apostle joins to this testimony which he took from the book of Genesis also a word of his own, and says that “to him who works, the reward is not imputed according to grace, but according to debt; but to him who does not work, yet believes in him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is reckoned unto righteousness.” Throughout this whole passage, then, the Apostle seems to show this: that there are two justifications, one of which he calls that from works, the other that from faith. And the one which is from works he says indeed has glory, but in itself, and not before God; whereas the one which is from faith has glory before God, inasmuch as it is before him who inspects the hearts of men and knows who it is that believes in secret and who it is that does not believe. And therefore it rightly has glory before God alone, who sees through the disposition of a person’s faith in what is hidden; but he who hopes for justification from works — it may happen that his works are approved even by men. For whatever is manifest in deed is open and can be seen with the eyes; and if faith is in secret, while works are in the open, it will be fitting to take up here what is written: “The things that are hidden belong to the Lord your God, but the things that are manifest, to you and to your sons.” But it will also be fitting to apply to these matters what is written, that “the just shall live by my faith.” Fittingly, therefore, we say that those who are circumcised according to the inner man and are Jews in secret, in spirit and not in letter — their praise and glory is not before men, but before God. But those who are justified from works, since their works are open and manifest, their glory can be either before any of the saints and just who receive from God the power of judging concerning visible human works, or even before the angels and the other powers of the heavenly virtues, who certainly are able to glorify him whose works they have approved. But since to know the hidden things of the heart belongs to God alone, he himself sees through whether in each one there dwells some disposition of faith; and therefore he who is justified from faith has glory before God alone, who has knowledge of hidden things and is alone the inspector of faith. Therefore also “Abraham,” he says, “if he was justified by works, has” indeed “glory” coming from works, “but not” that which is “before God” alone; yet it is certain that Abraham has glory before God alone: it follows, then, that he was justified not from works, but from faith. But do not suppose that if anyone has such a faith by which, being justified, he has glory before God, he can at the same time have injustice along with it. For there is no share of faith together with unbelief, no fellowship of righteousness with iniquity, just as there can be no association of light with darkness. For if “he who believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God,” and “he who is born of God does not sin,” it is manifest that he who believes in Jesus Christ does not sin; but if he sins, it is certain that he does not believe in him. The mark, therefore, of true faith is where there is no transgression, just as, on the contrary, where there is transgression it is a mark of unbelief. For this reason, then, it is also said of Abraham in another passage of Scripture that he was justified from the works of faith: because it is certain that he who truly believes works the work of faith and of righteousness and of all goodness, and becomes capable of both glories — both that which is before God in secret, and also that which is in the open and is not before God alone. — COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

Pelagius: If Abraham was justified because of his circumcision, then God gave him nothing and he could have gloried in what he did to himself. Or it may mean that if Abraham carried out the ordinances, he had glory in his own eyes but not in God’s. — PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

Theodoret of Cyrus: The accomplishment of good works honors those who do them, but it does not reveal the kindness of God. Faith, on the other hand, reveals both the love for God of the one who believes and God’s kindness. — INTERPRETATION OF THE LETTER TO THE ROMANS

Romans 4:3

Ambrose of Milan: I do not demand a reason from Christ. If I am convinced by reason, I deny faith. Abraham believed God. Let us also believe, so that we who are the heirs of his race may likewise be heirs of his faith. — On the Death of Satyrus 2.89

Ambrosiaster: Paul revealed that Abraham had glory before God not because he was circumcised nor because he abstained from evil, but because he believed in God. For that reason he was justified, and he would receive the reward of praise in the future. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Clement of Alexandria: Abraham, accordingly, who through hearing believed the voice, which promised under the oak in Mamre, “I will give this land to thee, and to thy seed,” was either elect or not. But if he was not, how did he straightway believe, as it were naturally? And if he was elect, their hypothesis is done away with, in as much as even previous to the coming of the Lord an election was found, and that saved: “For it was reckoned to him for righteousness.” — The Stromata Book 5

Clement of Alexandria: And on learning the way of truth, let us walk on the right way, without turning till we attain to what we desire. It was therefore with reason that the king of the Romans (his name was Numa), being a Pythagorean, first of all men, erected a temple to Faith and Peace. “And to Abraham, on believing, righteousness was reckoned.” — The Stromata Book 5

Irenaeus: And teaching this very thing, He said to the Jews: “Your father Abraham rejoiced that he should see my day; and he saw it, and was glad.” What is intended? “Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness.” In the first place, [he believed] that He was the maker of heaven and earth, the only God; and in the next place, that He would make his seed as the stars of heaven. This is what is meant by Paul, [when he says,] “as lights in the world.” Righteously, therefore, having left his earthly kindred, he followed the Word of God, walking as a pilgrim with the Word, that he might [afterwards] have his abode with the Word. — Against Heresies Book IV

John Chrysostom: The Master proclaimed that Abraham was just because he outran the weakness of his human nature. He strained with his whole mind toward the power of him who had made the promise. — BAPTISMAL INSTRUCTIONS 8.7

John Chrysostom: “For what saith the Scripture? Abraham believed in God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.”

After mentioning the Scripture above he goes on to secure also the judgment of the speakers, and shows that justification took place in the uncircumcision. Then from these grounds he solves another objection which is starting up. For if when in uncircumcision, one might say he was justified, to what purpose was the circumcision brought in? “He received it,” he says, “a sign and seal of the righteousness that was by the faith, which he had being yet uncircumcised.” — Homily on Romans 8

Origen of Alexandria: There is added in what follows: “Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him unto righteousness.” This saying is taken from the book of Genesis, from that place where not Abraham, but Abram says to the Lord: “Since you have given me no seed, this house-born servant of mine will be my heir. And the Lord said to him: This man shall not be your heir, but he who shall come forth from you, he shall be your heir. And he led him,” it says, “outside, and said to him: Look up to heaven, and number the stars, if you are able to count them. And he said to him: So shall your seed be. And he believed God, and it was reckoned to him unto righteousness.” We have gone back over these very passages from the book of Genesis at some length, by way of example, so that we might learn what the cause of this justification was. And therefore we must attend the more keenly to this: whether it is on this account alone — that he believed a son was to be given him, and from him an offspring to be propagated to the multitude of the stars — that his faith is said to have been reckoned unto righteousness; or whether it is for this and for all the things he had already believed before. For it must not be supposed that it was without faith that he went out from his own land and from his father’s kindred and came into the land which God had shown him; or that other occasion, when, after Lot had been separated from him, the Lord says to him: “Lift up your eyes and look from this place where you stand, and gaze toward the north and the south and toward the west and the east, for all this land which you see I will give to you and to your seed forever.” And who would say that this too was done without faith, that Abraham came and dwelt by the oak of Mamre in Hebron and built there an altar to the Lord? And how was that also not a work of faith, when Melchizedek blessed Abraham and said: “Blessed be Abraham of the most high God, who created heaven and earth; and blessed be the most high God, who delivered his enemies into his hands”? From all of which it is gathered that in each of these there was indeed faith in Abraham, but in part; whereas in that place where it is said that his faith was reckoned unto righteousness, a perfect faith is declared. For just as the Apostle says that knowledge and prophecy are in part — and again says that there is a perfect state, when he writes: “We know in part and we prophesy in part; but when that which is perfect has come, those things which are in part shall be done away” — so also we can understand that faith is sometimes in part and sometimes perfect. But that what we say may be further fortified by other testimonies of holy Scripture, hear the apostles saying to the Lord in the Gospel: “Lord, increase our faith.” Do they not plainly show by these words that they indeed have faith, but such faith as needed increase? Moreover the apostle Paul himself, when he says, “If I should have all faith, so that I might remove mountains,” by saying “all” teaches that the whole is composed of parts. For a thing cannot be called “all” where there is no diversity either of quality or of quantity. It seems therefore that in the present passage also, since many acts of faith on Abraham’s part had gone before, through each of the several things which we recalled above as being in part, in this present instance the whole of his faith is gathered together, and so was reckoned to him unto righteousness. Now indeed you will consider whether, just as it was said of faith that it was reckoned to him unto righteousness, so it may also be said of the other virtues that, for example, mercy can be reckoned to anyone unto righteousness, or wisdom, or knowledge, or gentleness and humility; or at any rate whether faith is reckoned unto righteousness for every believer. But when I return to the Scriptures, I do not find that faith is reckoned unto righteousness for all believers. For it is written of the sons of Israel that “they believed the Lord and his servant Moses,” and yet there is not added what is written of Abraham, that it was reckoned to them unto righteousness. On this account I judge that they did not have, as we have shown in Abraham’s case, that perfection heaped up into one out of many parts of faith, which would deserve to be reckoned unto righteousness. — COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

Pelagius: Abraham’s faith was so great that his earlier sins were all forgiven him, and righteousness was counted as credit for every one of them by faith alone. Later he was on fire with such love for God that he piled one good work on top of another. Therefore he has glory in God’s eyes. — PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

Tertullian: Accordingly it is patience which is both subsequent and antecedent to faith. In short, Abraham believed God, and was accredited by Him with righteousness; but it was patience which proved his faith, when he was bidden to immolate his son, with a view to (I would not say the temptation, but) the typical attestation of his faith. — Of Patience

Romans 4:4

Ambrosiaster: No merit is imputed for reward to the man who is subject to the law—either to the law of works, i.e., of Moses, or to the law of nature. For he who is obliged to keep the law is a debtor. A necessity is imposed upon him by the law to keep it whether he wants to or not, so as not to be guilty, as Paul says in another passage: “Those who resist will incur judgment.” On the other hand, to believe or not to believe is a matter of choice. No one can be required to accept something which is offered as a gift. But he is invited to receive it. He is not forced but persuaded. He believes what he does not see but hopes for. This is what glorifies God. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Augustine of Hippo: Paul was speaking here of the way wages are given. But God gave by grace, because he gave to sinners so that by faith they might live justly, that is, do good works. Thus the good works which we do after we have received grace are not to be attributed to us but rather to him who has justified us by his grace. For if God had wanted to give us our due reward, he would have given us the punishment due to sinners. — AUGUSTINE ON Romans 21

John Chrysostom: Then is not this last the greatest? he means. By no means: for it is to the believer that it is reckoned. But it would not have been reckoned, unless there were something that he contributed himself. And so he too hath God for his debtor, and debtor too for no common things, but great and high ones. For to show his high-mindedness and spiritual understanding, he does not say “to him that believeth” merely. — Homily on Romans VIII

Origen of Alexandria: But as to what he says: “To him who works, the wage is not imputed according to grace but according to debt; but to him who believes in him who justifies the ungodly, faith is reckoned unto righteousness” — he seems to show that in faith there is, as it were, the grace of him who justifies, but in work the justice of him who repays. Yet when I consider the force of the phrase by which he says that it is rendered to the worker according to debt, I can scarcely persuade myself that there can be any work which demands God’s recompense as a debt, since even this very thing — that we are able to do anything, or to think, or to speak — we do by his own gift and bounty. What then will be owed by him whose loan to us came first? And therefore we must rather see whether perhaps what he said, “But to him who works, the wage shall be reckoned according to debt,” is to be understood of the debt of an evil work. For you will often find sins called debts in the divine volumes, as the Lord himself taught us to say in the prayer: “Forgive us our debts, as we also forgive our debtors”; and again when the Lord himself says: “A certain householder had two debtors: one owed five hundred denarii, and the other fifty” — and he himself interpreted this as being said of sins. Perhaps then in this place too the Apostle has drawn the wage of work which is rendered according to debt toward that sense which we spoke of above, concerning those who work as Cain also worked the earth; and as he says elsewhere: “Depart from me, you workers of iniquity” — to whom assuredly punishment is paid out as a debt, in place of a wage for iniquity. Whence the Apostle also says in another place: “The wages of sin is death”; and he did not add, so as to say correspondingly, But the wages of righteousness is eternal life. Rather he says: “But the grace of God is eternal life” — so that he might teach that wages, which is certainly like a debt and a payment, is the recompense of punishment and of death, while he assigned eternal life to grace alone. According to this sense I think that what is written in the Gospel too, “With what measure you have measured, with the same it shall be measured back to you,” is to be taken of evil works. For God has set no measure to his grace, since it is written: “For God does not give the Spirit by measure.” — COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

Theodoret of Cyrus: The doer of righteousness expects a reward, but justification by faith is the gift of the God of all. — INTERPRETATION OF THE LETTER TO THE ROMANS

Romans 4:5

Ambrosiaster: This refers to somebody who is bound by sin and who therefore does not do what the law commands. Paul says this because to an ungodly person, that is, to a Gentile, who believes in Christ without doing the works of the law, his faith is reckoned for righteousness just as Abraham’s was. How then can the Jews think that they have been justified by the works of the law in the same way as Abraham, when they see that Abraham was not justified by the works of the law but by faith alone? Therefore there is no need of the law when the ungodly is justified before God by faith alone. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Augustine of Hippo: God makes the ungodly man godly, in order that he might persevere in this godliness and righteousness. For a man is justified in order that he might be just, not so that he might think it is all right to go on sinning. — AUGUSTINE ON Romans 22

Augustine of Hippo: The life of the soul is changeable. And when the soul lives in unrighteousness, that is its death; when again it becomes righteous, it becomes partaker of another life, which is not what itself is, inasmuch as by rising up to God, and cleaving to God, of Him it is justified. For it is said, “To him that believeth on Him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.” By forsaking God, it becomes unrighteous; by coming to Him, it is made righteous. — Tractates on John 19

John Chrysostom: For reflect how great a thing it is to be persuaded and have full confidence that God is able on a sudden not to free a man who has lived in impiety from punishment only, but even to make him just, and to count him worthy of those immortal honors. Do not then suppose that this one is lowered in that it is not reckoned unto the former of grace. For this is the very thing that makes the believer glorious; the fact of his enjoying so great grace, of his displaying so great faith. And note too that the recompense is greater. For to the former a reward is given, to the latter righteousness. Now righteousness is much greater than a reward. For righteousness is a recompense which most fully comprehends several rewards. Therefore after proving this from Abraham, he introduces David also as giving his suffrage in favor of the statement made. What then doth David say? and whom doth he pronounce blessed? is it him that triumphs in works, or him that hath enjoyed grace? him that hath obtained pardon and a gift? And when I speak of blessedness, I mean the chiefest of all good things; for as righteousness is greater than a reward, so is blessedness greater than righteousness. — Homily on Romans VIII

Origen of Alexandria: Faith, which believes in the justifier, is the beginning of justification before God. And this faith, when it is justified, is like a root in the soil of the soul, which the rain has watered, so that as it begins to grow by the law of God, branches appear, which bring forth fruit. The root of righteousness does not spring from works; rather, the fruit of works grows from the root of righteousness, viz., by that root of righteousness by which God brings righteousness to the one whom he has accepted apart from works. — COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

Origen of Alexandria: If then these things are thought to have been rightly discussed, consequently the things that hang together with them will surely be seen to be understood thus: that to the one who works the works of iniquity a wage is repaid according to the debt of sin; but to the one who believes in him who justifies the ungodly, faith is reckoned unto righteousness — provided we well remember what was said above, in which we showed that faith can be reckoned unto righteousness not for him who believes in part, but for him who believes entirely and perfectly; which faith is so great that it justifies even one who has been ungodly, so that he is no longer ungodly — not like that thief who hung on the cross and blasphemed, but like the one who confessed and said: “Lord Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.” — COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

Pelagius: When an ungodly person is converted, God justifies him by faith alone, not for good works which he does not have. On that basis he would have been punished for his ungodly works. But note that Paul does not say one who remains in sin is justified by faith but rather the ungodly, i.e., one who has just come to believe. — PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

Romans 4:6

Ambrosiaster: Paul backs this up by the example of the prophet David, who says that those are blessed of whom God has decreed that, without work or any keeping of the law, they are justified before God by faith alone. Therefore he foretells the blessedness of the time when Christ was born, just as the Lord himself said: “Many prophets and righteous men longed to see what you see and to hear what you hear and did not hear it.” — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

John Chrysostom: And after proving this from Abraham, he introduces David also as giving his suffrage in favor of the statement made. What then doth David say? and whom doth he pronounce blessed? is it him that triumphs in works, or him that hath enjoyed grace? him that hath obtained pardon and a gift? And when I speak of blessedness, I mean the chiefest of all good things; for as righteousness is greater than a reward, so is blessedness greater than righteousness. Having then shown that the righteousness is better, not owing to Abraham’s having received it only but also from reasonings (for he hath whereof to boast, he says, before God); he again uses another mode of showing that it is more dignified, by bringing David in to give his suffrage this way. For he also, he says, pronounces him blessed who is so made righteous. — Homily on Romans 8

Origen of Alexandria: After these things, as if for the confirmation of his statement which he had made — “But to him who does not work, yet believes in him who justifies the ungodly, faith is reckoned unto righteousness” — he takes up a testimony from the Psalms and says: “As David also declares the blessedness of the man to whom God accounts righteousness without works: Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered; blessed is the man to whom the Lord has not imputed sin.” You see that through these words it can consistently be proved that righteousness is reckoned to a man without works. — COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

Origen of Alexandria: Hence it seems to me that the Apostle understood this: that it is impossible for a person in whom, by reason of age, the understanding that discerns between good and evil is already present, to have neither injustice nor justice in him. And if this is so, the soul cannot be found without one of these two; and it is certain that if it has ceased from evils, it is henceforth found among good things. But that soul is not among evils “whose iniquities are forgiven,” and “whose sins are covered,” and “to whom the Lord has not imputed sin”; it is fitting, therefore, that it be among good things. Suitably, then, in connection with the remission of iniquities and the covering over of sins, and with the fact that the Lord does not impute sin, the Apostle says that justice is reckoned to a person, although he has not yet performed works of justice, but solely because he believed in him who justifies the ungodly. For the beginning of being justified by God is the faith that believes in the one who justifies. And this faith, when it has been justified, clings like a root that has taken in rain within the soil of the soul, so that when it has begun to be cultivated by the law of God, branches rise up in it that bear the fruit of works. Therefore the root of justice does not come from works, but from the root of justice the fruit of works grows — namely from that root of justice by which God credits justice apart from works. — COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

Pelagius: It is a great blessing to obtain the Lord’s grace without the work of the law and penance, as if one were receiving some public honor without having earned it. — PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

Theodoret of Cyrus: After demonstrating by the example of the patriarch Abraham that faith is older than the law, Paul quotes a further witness in support of his position, viz., David the prophet and king. — INTERPRETATION OF THE LETTER TO THE ROMANS

Romans 4:7

Ambrosiaster: Obviously they are blessed, whose iniquities are forgiven without labor or work of any kind and whose sins are covered without any work of penitence being required of them, as long as they believe.How can these words apply to a penitent, when we know that penitents obtain the forgiveness of sin with much struggle and groaning? How can they be applied to a martyr, when we know that the glory of martyrdom is obtained by sufferings and pressures? But the prophet, foreseeing a happy time when the Savior comes, calls them blessed because their sins are forgiven, covered and not reckoned to them, and this without labor or work of any kind. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

John Chrysostom: And he seems to be bringing a testimony beside his purpose. For it does not say, Blessed are they whose faith is reckoned for righteousness. But he does so on purpose, not through inadvertency, to show the greater superiority. For if he be blessed that by grace received forgiveness, much more is he that is made just, and that exhibits faith. For where blessedness is, there all shame is removed, and there is much glory, since blessedness is a greater degree both of reward and of glory. And for this cause what is the advantage of the other he states as unwritten, “Now to him that worketh is the reward reckoned not of grace;” but what the advantage of the faithful is, he brings Scriptural testimony to prove, saying, As David saith, “Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.” What, he means, is it that you say? Is it that “it is not of debt but of grace that he receives forgiveness?” But see it is this person who is pronounced blessed. For he would not have pronounced him so, unless he saw him in the enjoyment of great glory. — Homily on Romans VIII

Origen of Alexandria: Whence I think that David too, in the thirty-first psalm, which he entitled “Of the understanding of David,” gave this beginning, admonishing by the very superscription that a deeper understanding must be sought in the things he was about to say, namely that “blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven”: concerning which we have spoken, as far as we were able, when we dictated on the Psalms in order. But the difference of the very order prompts us, in that he said first, “Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven”; second, “Whose sins are covered”; third, “To whom the Lord has not imputed sin.” And consider whether perhaps this order can be understood as taking place in one and the same soul: so that, because the beginning of the soul’s conversion is to abandon evils, for this it may deserve to receive the remission of iniquities; but when it has begun to do good things, covering over, as it were, each single evil that had gone before with fresh good deeds, and bringing in a more abundant number of goods than there had previously been of evils, it is said to cover its sins; but when it has now come to perfection, so that every root of malice is utterly cut away from it, to the point that no trace of wickedness can be found in it, then at last the summit of perfect blessedness is promised, when the Lord can impute no sin. Iniquity, indeed, has this difference from sin, that iniquity is spoken of in those matters which are committed against the law; whence the Greek term calls iniquity anomian (lawlessness), that is, what is committed without law; but that too can be called sin, if the offense is committed against what nature teaches and conscience reproves. — COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

Pelagius: What is forgiven is not retained in the mind, and what is covered does not come to light, and for that reason it is not counted against us. — PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

Tertullian: And concerning the happiness of the man who has partaken of these, David says: “Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.” For, strictly speaking, there cannot any longer be reckoned ought against the martyrs, by whom in the baptism (of blood) life itself is laid down. — Scorpiace

Romans 4:8

Ambrosiaster: “Forgive,” “cover,” “not reckon”—all amount to one and the same thing. For all three are given and received in the same way.Paul has three categories to cover the different types of sin. The first category is that of wickedness or ungodliness, in that the Creator is not acknowledged. The second category is that of the more serious sins, and the third is that of the less serious ones. All of these are wiped out in baptism. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

John Chrysostom: “Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered. Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.”

And he does not say this “forgiveness” then comes upon the circumcision; but what saith he? “Cometh this blessedness then” (which is the greater thing) “upon the circumcision or upon the uncircumcision?” For now the subject of enquiry is, With whom is this good and great thing to be found; is it with the circumcision or with the uncircumcision? And notice its superiority! For he shows that it is so far from shunning the uncircumcision, that it even dwelt gladly with it before the circumcision. — Homily on Romans 8

Pelagius: Some people say that sin is forgiven in baptism, covered by penitential works and through martyrdom not counted against us. But others say that when sins have been forgiven in baptism, love for God is increased, which covers a multitude of sins and keeps them from being counted against us as long as daily good works surpass past misdeeds. — PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

Theodore of Mopsuestia: Sinful works are not counted against the faithful. God’s love of humanity is the greatest thing that has happened. — PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH

Romans 4:9

Ambrosiaster: Is this blessedness given to the children of Abraham only or to the Gentiles also? If in those days the Gentiles were not forbidden to come under the law and the promise made to Abraham, how could it be that in the time of Christ they should be prevented from coming to grace, when God has clearly invited them? — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

John Chrysostom: For now the subject of enquiry is, With whom is this good and great thing to be found; is it with the circumcision or with the uncircumcision? And notice its superiority! For he shows that it is so far from shunning the uncircumcision, that it even dwelt gladly with it before the circumcision. For since he that pronounced it blessed was David, who was himself also in a state of circumcision, and he was speaking to those in that state, see how eagerly Paul contends for applying what he said to the uncircumcised. For after joining the ascription of blessedness to righteousness, and showing that they are one and the same thing, he enquires how Abraham came to be righteous. For if the ascription of blessedness belong to the righteous, and Abraham was made righteous, let us see how he was made righteous, as uncircumcised or circumcised? Uncircumcised, he says.

“For we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness.”

After mentioning the Scripture above (for he said, “What saith the Scripture? Abraham believed in God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness,”) here he goes on to secure also the judgment of the speakers, and shows that justification took place in the uncircumcision. Then from these grounds he solves another objection which is starting up. For if when in uncircumcision, one might say he was justified, to what purpose was the circumcision brought in? — Homily on Romans VIII

Origen of Alexandria: “Is this blessedness then upon the circumcision, or also upon the uncircumcision? For we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham unto justice. How then was it reckoned? When he was in circumcision, or when he was in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. And he received circumcision as a sign, a seal of the justice of the faith which is in uncircumcision: that he might be the father of all who believe through uncircumcision, so that it might be reckoned to them also unto justice, and that he might be the father of circumcision, not only to those who are of the circumcision, but also to those who follow the footsteps of the faith of our father Abraham, which he had in uncircumcision.” Having said above that “Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him unto justice,” and having shown from the things written in the thirty-first psalm what blessedness a faith of this kind possesses — namely that to one who so believes the Lord would not reckon sin — he now puts forward a question, from the answer to which he may teach, and from the very reckoning of the times, that the blessedness of Abraham’s justification was given not in circumcision, but while he was still placed in uncircumcision. But if Abraham, while he was still in uncircumcision, was justified by faith, then everyone also who believes God can be justified through faith, even if he be in uncircumcision, and this blessedness of which it is said, “Blessed is he to whom the Lord has not imputed sin,” can pertain to him also. He shows, therefore, that the Lord does not refrain from imputing sin to just anyone, but that to him who has believed he does not reckon sins on account of his faith. For just as faith was reckoned to Abraham unto justice, so also to every believer to whom faith is reckoned unto justice, sins are assuredly not imputed. For he does not say of the just that faith is reckoned to them unto justice. And if it were so supposed, what grace would there appear to be in reckoning it to a just man? Justice unto justice? But surely he says that faith was reckoned unto justice to him who, before he had this faith, did not have justice; and this is assuredly the blessed man, to whom God credits justice apart from works, and to whom sin is not imputed, to whom also iniquities are forgiven, and covered over are whatever sins there previously were. And at the same time he also teaches us to attend more diligently to the reading, since he expounds so vigilantly the things written concerning Abraham, that “faith was reckoned to him unto justice.” He wants us to consider also when it was reckoned, so that from what is written the reckoning of the time may also be gathered, whether he was still in uncircumcision when these things were said, or whether he had already passed over to circumcision; and he says: “How then was his faith reckoned unto justice? When he was in circumcision, or when he was in uncircumcision?” For if at that time he had been in circumcision, uncircumcision would certainly have seemed to be excluded from the grace of this faith. But as it is, he shows that faith was reckoned unto justice while he was still placed in uncircumcision, and therefore he declares that, since Abraham was justified through faith while placed in uncircumcision, he is without doubt rightly called the chief and father of all who believe through uncircumcision. — COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

Pelagius: Paul means that the blessing is to be found in each of the three periods of nature, circumcision and Christian faith. Everyone agrees that faith was reckoned to Abraham as righteousness. Therefore, what reason discovers about Abraham, we will heed with regard to the rest. — PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

Romans 4:10

Ambrosiaster: What did Abraham believe? He believed that he would have a descendant, a son, in whom all the nations would be justified by faith while they were still uncircumcised, as Abraham then was. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

John Chrysostom: “How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision?”

For since he that pronounced it blessed was David, who was himself also in a state of circumcision, and he was speaking to those in that state, see how eagerly Paul contends for applying what he said to the uncircumcised. For after joining the ascription of blessedness to righteousness, and showing that they are one and the same thing, he enquires how Abraham came to be righteous. For if the ascription of blessedness belong to the righteous, and Abraham was made righteous, let us see how he was made righteous, as uncircumcised or circumcised? Uncircumcised, he says. — Homily on Romans 8

Pelagius: Now we must see whether circumcision is born of righteousness or righteousness of circumcision. It must be the former, because Abraham was righteous before he was circumcised. — PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

Theodoret of Cyrus: Paul demonstrates that faith was not only older than the law, it was older than circumcision as well. — INTERPRETATION OF THE LETTER TO THE ROMANS

Romans 4:11

Ambrosiaster: Abraham received circumcision as a sign of the righteousness of faith. For believing that he would have a son, he received the sign of the thing which he believed, that it might be known that he was justified because of what he believed. Circumcision has no special value; it is just a sign. The children of Abraham received this sign so that it would be known that they were the children of him who had received this sign because he believed in God and so that they would imitate their father’s faith and believe in Jesus, who was promised to Abraham. Isaac was born as a type of Christ, for the nations are not blessed in Isaac but in Christ, “for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved,” says the apostle Peter. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

John Chrysostom: Paul taught us both that Abraham received circumcision as a sign and that while he was still uncircumcised he gave evidence of righteousness arising from faith. — HOMILIES ON Genesis 39.18

John Chrysostom: See you how he shows the Jews to be as it were of the class of parasites (i.e. guests), rather than those in uncircumcision, and that these were added to the others? For if he was justified and crowned while in uncircumcision, the Jews came in afterwards, Abraham is then the father first of the uncircumcised, which through faith appertain to him, and then of those in the circumcision. For he is a forefather of two lines. See you faith lightening up? for till it came the patriarch was not justified. See you the uncircumcision offering no hindrance? for he was uncircumcised, yet was not hindered from being justified. The circumcision therefore is behind the faith. And why wonder that it is behind the faith, when it is even behind the uncircumcision. Nor is it behind faith only, but very far inferior to it, even so far as the sign is to the reality of which it is the sign; for instance, as the seal is to the soldier. And why, he says, did he want a seal then? He did not want it himself. For what purpose then did he receive it? With a view to his being the father alike of them that believe in uncircumcision and in circumcision. But not of those in circumcision absolutely: wherefore he goes on to say, “To them who are not of the circumcision only.” For if to the uncircumcised, it is not in that he is uncircumcised that he is their father, although justified in uncircumcision; but in that they imitated his faith; much less is it owing to circumcision that he is the forefather of those in the state of circumcision, unless faith also be added. — Homily on Romans VIII

Origen of Alexandria: But as to the fact that after the faith which he had in uncircumcision he received circumcision, he consequently sets forth the reason for which circumcision was given him. It was, he says, that it might be the seal of that faith which he had while placed in uncircumcision, so that through this “he might be the father of all who believe through uncircumcision, that it might be reckoned to them unto justice, and that he might be the father of circumcision, not only to those who are of the circumcision, but also to those who follow the footsteps of the faith of our father Abraham, which he had in uncircumcision.” But if Abraham, while he was still in uncircumcision, was justified by faith, he can become also the father of those who are born in circumcision, provided that they belong to that faith which justified him while placed in uncircumcision. And since it justified Abraham while placed in uncircumcision, he is therefore made the father of both kinds: of those who are in uncircumcision through faith, and of those who are in circumcision through the flesh; and after circumcision he begets first Isaac, and from him takes the beginning of the ogdoad, that is, in him the first mysteries of the eighth day are consecrated, and from that point the posterity of Abraham begins to run by a twofold sacrament. For just as faith is understood by its own nature to be one thing, and the justice which was reckoned to him through faith another; so also his posterity in uncircumcision is one thing, and his posterity in circumcision another. For those who are uncircumcised, these I think are the stones of which God is said to be able to raise up sons of Abraham, in whom that also is fulfilled which is written: that “in you shall all the tribes of the earth be blessed.” But let us take up again what he says: “And he received circumcision as a sign, a seal of the justice of the faith which is in uncircumcision,” and let us contemplate Paul’s profound wisdom in these words. For perhaps to some he may seem to say the same word twice, that is, “sign” and “seal.” But to me the two words seem to have much difference between them. For a thing is called a sign when through what is seen something else is indicated: as when, for example, the Lord says in the Gospel: “This generation seeks a sign, and a sign shall not be given it, except the sign of Jonah the prophet. For as Jonah was in the belly of the whale three days and three nights, so must the Son of Man be in the heart of the earth three days and three nights.” This, then, is a sign, where Jonah was seen and Christ was understood. Similarly it is said of the Lord himself in the Gospel: “Behold, this one is set for the fall and the rising of many, and for a sign that shall be contradicted.” For the sign in which Christ had come was contradicted, because one thing was seen in him and another understood. Flesh was discerned, and God was believed. So then Abraham also received a sign; and what the sign was he states in what follows: “Circumcision,” he says — which circumcision was “the seal of the justice of the faith” which he had before he was circumcised. Rightly then did he call circumcision a sign in Abraham, because in it too one thing was seen and another understood; and he shows that even then that fleshly circumcision was a sign of the spiritual circumcision, “which is not received in the flesh, but in the heart.” But as to his saying “seal,” I think it is to be understood thus. A seal is spoken of when a guard is imposed for a time upon something to be kept safe, which no one else but the very one who impressed it ought to unseal. Through this seal, then, as the Apostle expounds, there is indicated the justice of the faith which Abraham, placed in uncircumcision, deserved to receive, and that he is the father of many nations: which we believe will then be unsealed when the fullness of the Gentiles has come in, and all Israel shall be saved. For then shall come about what the Apostle says, that Abraham is the father not only of the Gentiles, but also of the circumcision through faith.

And let us discuss the sign and the seal still more plainly. Since a sign, as we have said, is where something is indicated by that which is seen, whereas a seal is where something is enclosed for a time and does not lie open, it can also be understood in this way: that the mysteries which were foreshadowed in the law and in the patriarchs were of such a kind that they had both to be indicated by signs and to be kept guarded by seals. Therefore, inasmuch as they were to be indicated by signs among those who would believe from the Gentiles, Abraham is said to have received a sign; but inasmuch as, for those in the circumcision who were not going to believe, they had to be kept guarded and covered over, he is said to have received a seal. And that seal will assuredly be unsealed at that time when, in the last days — after the fullness of the Gentiles, as we have said, has come in — all Israel shall be saved. And this, finally, is why Abraham is first justified in faith while he was still uncircumcised, and afterward is circumcised: so that he might be shown to be first the father of many nations, and afterward of those who were to believe from the circumcision. For those who are born of Abraham according to the flesh are not to be called sons of Abraham unless they have the faith and the works of Abraham. Hence, finally, the Lord too says in the Gospel to the Jews who were boasting that they were sons of Abraham: “If you were sons of Abraham, you would surely do the works of Abraham.” But do you wish to be fully taught from the Old Scripture as well that a person is called the son not only of him from whose carnal seed he is descended, but also of him whose deeds and works he imitates? Hear what Daniel says to one of those elders whom he convicts of adultery: “O seed,” he says, “of Canaan, and not of Judah, beauty has seduced you, and lust has overturned your heart.” You see that he who according to the flesh was descended from the race of Judah is denied to be a son of Judah, but is called a son of Canaan — of him, namely, whose deeds and works he was following. So therefore those also who trace their descent from the seed of Abraham according to the flesh are not called sons of Abraham, if they do not have his faith. So too, finally, the prophet says to them: “Your father was an Amorite, and your mother a Hittite” — to whom assuredly it was not kinship of race that joined them, but likeness of character. “That he might be,” he says, “the father of all who believe through uncircumcision, that it might be reckoned to them unto righteousness; and that he might be the father of circumcision, not only to those who are of the circumcision, but also to those who follow the footsteps of the faith of our father Abraham which he had in uncircumcision.” In which he plainly declares, with regard to each people, as we said above, that it is not origin of flesh but distinction of faith that is to be sought. But concerning the sacrament of circumcision we have already spoken more fully in the passages above, and we have also expounded it in several other places as the matter and the occasion seemed to require. Yet the diligent reader, “whom not one iota or one tittle of the law escapes,” ought not to be unaware of this either: that as regards what the Apostle said, “His faith was reckoned to Abraham unto righteousness,” at that time when it was written of him that he believed God and it was reckoned to him unto righteousness, he was not yet called Abraham, but Abram was his name. For he still remained uncircumcised, as the Apostle explains. On which point it will perhaps seem to some that there is an error in the copies, since “Abraham” could easily have been written for “Abram.” But since this supposition is uncertain rather than a firm proof, let us answer more concisely: that the Apostle, observing the sentence of God who said, “No longer shall Abram, but Abraham shall be your name,” now called him not as it is written in the passage of Genesis, but as God pronounced concerning him. For what is divinely established, it is fitting should be observed thereafter. These things, brought forward as best we could in passages so steep and so difficult, anyone will be able to accept if he considers the earnestness of our purpose; but if he wishes to mark the weakness of our understanding, we ask pardon, and we gladly yield to one who may be able to discuss or explain these things better. But we, with however sluggish a step, turn our foot toward what follows. — COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

Pelagius: In case anyone says that Abraham was circumcised unnecessarily, Paul argues that it is the sign or seal of an existing righteousness, not of growth in an unfolding righteousness. This righteousness was so perfect that it deserved a seal, for something that is full is always sealed. — PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

Severian of Gabala: Circumcision was given for these three reasons: First, to be a sign of faith; second, to mark out the race of Abraham, and third, to be a sign and symbol of good and wise behavior. It was not given in order to produce righteousness but as a sign and seal of the righteousness which was Abraham’s by faith. — PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH

Tertullian: But Abraham, (you say,) was circumcised. Yes, but he pleased God before his circumcision; nor yet did he observe the Sabbath. For he had “accepted” circumcision; but such as was to be for “a sign” of that time, not for a prerogative title to salvation. In fact, subsequent patriarchs were uncircumcised, like Melchizedek, who, uncircumcised, offered to Abraham himself, already circumcised, on his return from battle, bread and wine. — An Answer to the Jews

Tertullian: But how are we children of faith? and of whose faith, if not Abraham’s? For since “Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness; " since, also, he deserved for that reason to be called “the father of many nations,” whilst we, who are even more like him in believing in God, are thereby justified as Abraham was, and thereby also obtain life-since the just lives by his faith,-it therefore happens that, as he in the previous passage called us “sons of Abraham,” since he is in faith our (common) father, so here also he named us “children of faith,” for it was owing to his faith that it was promised that Abraham should be the father of (many) nations. — Against Marcion Book V

Tertullian: For, albeit comeliness is not to be censured, as being a bodily happiness, as being an additional outlay of the divine plastic art, as being a kind of goodly garment of the soul; yet it is to be feared, just on account of the injuriousness and violence of suitors: which (injuriousness and violence) even the father of the faith, Abraham, greatly feared in regard of his own wife’s grace; and Isaac, by falsely representing Rebecca as his sister, purchased safety by insult! — On the Apparel of Women Book II

Tertullian: For albeit it is subsequently that he is called “a father of many nations,” still it is of those (nations) who, as the fruit of the “faith” which precedes digamy, had to be accounted “sons of Abraham.” — On Monogamy

Romans 4:12

Ambrosiaster: Paul says this because Abraham by believing became the forefather of the circumcision, but of the heart, not only of those who descended from him but also of those who, from among the nations, believed in the way he did. He is the father of the Jews according to the flesh, but according to faith he is the father of all believers. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Irenaeus: Now, this Jesus did by drawing us off from the religion of stones, and bringing us over from hard and fruitless cogitations, and establishing in us a faith like to Abraham. As Paul does also testify, saying that we are children of Abraham because of the similarity of our faith, and the promise of inheritance. — Against Heresies Book IV

John Chrysostom: Here again he lays low the lofty spirit of the Jews by reminding them of the time of the justification. And he well says, “the steps,” that you as well as Abraham may believe in the resurrection of bodies that are dead. For he also displayed his faith upon this point. And so if you reject the uncircumcision, be informed for certain that the circumcision is of no more use unto you. For if you follow not in the steps of his faith, though you were ten thousand times in a state of circumcision, you will not be Abraham’s offspring. For even he received the circumcision for this end, that the man in a state of uncircumcision might not cast thee off. Do not then demand this of him too. For it was you whom the thing was to be an assistance to, not he. But he calls it a sign of the righteousness. And this also was for thy sake, since now it is not even this: for thou then wert in need of bodily signs, but now there is no need of them. — Homily on Romans VIII

Pelagius: Therefore all the Gentiles who believe are children of Abraham when faith alone is credited to them as righteousness and they too receive the circumcision—of the heart. Or perhaps this verse should be understood like this: Abraham was righteous in uncircumcision so that he could become the father of uncircumcised believers, and he remained righteous once he was circumcised in order to become the father of the righteous who are circumcised. — PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

Theodoret of Cyrus: If a Gentile who has not been circumcised follows Abraham’s faith, which he manifested before being circumcised, he will not be rejected. For the God of all, since he had foreseen as God that he would gather one people from both Jews and Gentiles and prepare for them salvation by faith, had appointed Abraham as their father as well. Paul had demonstrated that Abraham had acquired righteousness by faith before being circumcised and that even after being circumcised he lived not according to the law of Moses but by clinging to his faith. Hence Paul called him the father of the Gentiles who believe. — INTERPRETATION OF THE LETTER TO THE ROMANS

Romans 4:13

Ambrosiaster: It is clear that the law had not yet been given, neither was there as yet circumcision, when the promise was made to Abraham the believer and to his seed, which is Christ, who would cleanse the sins of all. Therefore Abraham was made heir to the world not by the merit earned from keeping the law but by faith. The heir of the world is the heir of the earth, which he obtained in his children. For Christ is the heir of the nations, as David sings: “I will make the nations your heritage and the ends of the earth your possession.” — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

John Chrysostom: “For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.”

He had shown that faith is necessary, that it is older than circumcision, that it is more mighty than the Law, that it establisheth the Law. For if all sinned, it was necessary: if one being uncircumcised was justified, it is older: if the knowledge of sin is by the Law and yet it was without the Law made evident, it is more mighty: if it has testimony borne to it by the Law, and establisheth the Law, it is not opposed to it, but friendly and allied to it. — Homily on Romans 8

Origen of Alexandria: “For the promise to Abraham, or to his seed, that he should be heir of the world, was not through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.” In this place it seems to me that the Apostle is arguing about the law of Moses, and asserting that the promise which was made to Abraham, that he himself or his seed should receive the inheritance of the world — that is, of the whole earth — did not rest upon the law of Moses. For before Moses the lawgiver existed, “the Lord appeared,” he says, “to Abraham and said to him: ‘Go out from your land, and from your kindred, and from your father’s house, and come into the land which I will show you; and I will make you into a great nation, and I will bless you, and I will magnify your name, and you shall be blessed; and I will bless those who bless you, and curse those who curse you, and in you shall all the tribes of the earth be blessed.’” Therefore what he says, “In you shall all the tribes of the earth be blessed,” is to have been made heir of the whole world. And this promise was assuredly made to Abraham before anything was commanded through Moses about the observance of the law. So then the promise to Abraham, or to his seed, that he should be heir of the world, is not from the law, but through the righteousness of faith. What is this righteousness of faith? It is that of which it is written in the passages above, as we have already often said, that “Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him unto righteousness.” And not without reason: for the observance of the law merely escapes punishment, whereas the merit of faith awaits the hope of the promise; and a precept is laid down for servants, but faith is sought from friends. But even if, according to what we have discussed above, Paul be understood to say these things concerning the natural law, it will not be contrary to the reasons given above. For although the law of nature bears witness concerning good and evil according to the judgment of conscience, nevertheless it cannot be put on a level with the law of faith, by which Abraham believed God, and deserved to be justified and to be called the friend of God. — COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

Pelagius: Here Paul calls circumcision the law, because every commandment can be regarded as part of the law. Abraham inherited the world, either because in his seed (viz., Christ) all the nations which were given to him by the Father might be blessed or because the nations would sup with him in the kingdom of heaven. — PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

Severian of Gabala: Paul says that the righteous will inherit the world because the ungodly will be thrown out and handed over to punishment on the day of judgment, but the righteous will possess the universe which remains, and will have been renewed, and the good things of heaven and earth will be theirs. — PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH

Romans 4:14

Ambrosiaster: The apostle shows that there is something wicked in hoping for an inheritance by the law. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

John Chrysostom: He had shown that faith is necessary, that it is older than circumcision, that it is more mighty than the Law, that it establisheth the Law. For if all sinned, it was necessary: if one being uncircumcised was justified, it is older: if the knowledge of sin is by the Law and yet it was without the Law made evident, it is more mighty: if it has testimony borne to it by the Law, and establisheth the Law, it is not opposed to it, but friendly and allied to it. Again, be shows upon other grounds too that it was not even possible by the Law to attain to the inheritance, and after having matched it with the circumcision, and gained it the victory, he brings it besides into contrast with the Law in these words, “For if they which are of the Law be heirs, faith is made void.” To prevent them anyone from saying that one may have faith and also keep up the Law, he shows this to be impracticable. For he that clings to the Law, as if of saving force, does disparagement to faith’s power; and so he says, “faith is made void,” that is, there is no need of salvation by grace. For then it cannot show forth its own proper power; “and the promise is made of none effect.” This is because the Jew might say, What need have I of faith? If then this held, the things that were promised, would be taken away along with faith. See how in all points he combats with them from the early times and from the Patriarch. For having shown from thence that righteousness and faith went together in the inheritance, he now shows that the promise did likewise. For to prevent the Jew from saying, What matters it to me if Abraham was justified by faith? Paul says, neither can what you are interested with, the promise of the inheritance, come into effect apart from it: which was what scared them most. But what promise is he speaking of? That of his being “the heir of the world,” and that in him all should be blessed. And how does he say that this promise is made of none effect?… — Homily on Romans VIII

Origen of Alexandria: “For if those who are of the law are heirs, faith has been made void, and the promise has been annulled. For the law works wrath. But where there is no law, neither is there transgression.” If, he says, the promise was given to Abraham that he should be heir of the world not from the law, but through the faith which was reckoned to him unto righteousness, it will follow without doubt that all who hope that righteousness will be reckoned to them by God should hope for it not through the law, but through faith. And in order to show this more evidently, he added: If, he says, those who are of the law shall themselves be heirs of that promise which Abraham merited through faith, then that fact will be emptied out — that Abraham was justified by faith: since assuredly, if the inheritance were to come from the law, it would have been necessary that Abraham too first fulfill the law, and thus earn the inheritance of righteousness. And in order to show that this could in no way have happened so, he says that the law works wrath. But where there is wrath, there is no inheritance; and he added: “But where there is no law, neither is there transgression.” But let us go back a little, and see concerning which law these things are said. In the earlier words, indeed, where he says, “For if those who are of the law are heirs, faith has been made void, and the promise has been annulled,” it can be referred both to the law of Moses and to the natural law. For it is certain that if the inheritance is furnished from the law of Moses, then what is written is annulled — that Abraham merited it by the belief of faith; and again, if the understanding be turned to the natural law, these things can be said: If the natural law could have sufficed for faith, that would seem superfluous which was said to Abraham: “Go out from your land, and from your kindred, and from your father’s house, and come into the land which I shall show you.” For why should he go out from his own land and from his own house, if the natural law sufficed for him, which surely he could have possessed and kept even while placed in his own land? But now, as though that law were insufficient, he is commanded to follow the law of faith, without which neither he himself nor his seed could be heir of the world, nor could he be called the friend of God. Thus, then, what he says — “For if those who are of the law are heirs, faith has been made void, and the promise has been annulled” — can be withdrawn from both laws and look to the law of faith alone. — COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

Pelagius: If only the circumcised are heirs, God has not fulfilled his promise to Abraham that he would be the father of many nations, and it will seem that the nations believed in God without any reason. — PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

Romans 4:15

Ambrosiaster: In order to show that no man can be justified before God by the law, nor can the promise be given through the law, Paul says that “the law brings wrath.” It was given in order to make transgressors guilty. But faith is the gift of God’s mercy, so that those who have been made guilty by the law may obtain forgiveness. Therefore faith brings joy. Paul does not speak against the law but gives priority to faith. It is not possible to be saved by the law, but we are saved by God’s grace through faith. Therefore the law itself is not wrath, but it brings wrath, i.e., punishment, to the sinner, for wrath is born from sin. For this reason Paul wants the law to be abandoned so that the sinner will take refuge in faith, which forgives sins, that he may be saved.Paul says that “where there is no law there is no transgression,” because once the guilty have been removed from the power of the law and given forgiveness, there is no transgression. For those who were sinners because they had transgressed the law are now justified. For the law of works has ceased, that is, the observance of sabbaths, new moons, circumcision, distinction of foods and the expiation by a dead animal or the blood of a weasel. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Augustine of Hippo: This applies to the second state of man, when he is under the law. — AUGUSTINE ON Romans 23

Augustine of Hippo: Paul said this because God’s wrath is more severe toward a transgressor who knows sin by the law and still commits it. — GRACE AND FREE WILL 10.22

Cosmas Indicopleustes: But without law it is impossible there should be transgression, as saith the Apostle: For where there is no law there is no transgression, and Without the law sin is dead. So that the angels themselves in every way want to obtain freedom from the law and from mutation — The Christian Topography, Book 2

John Chrysostom: Now if it worketh wrath, and renders them liable for transgression, it is plain that it makes them so to a curse also. But they that are liable under a curse, and punishments, and transgression, are not worthy of inheriting, but of being punished and rejected. What then happens? faith comes, drawing on it the grace, so that the promise comes into effect. For where grace is, there is a remitting, and where remitting is, there is no punishment. Punishment then being removed, and righteousness succeeding from faith, there is no obstacle to our becoming heirs of the promise. — Homily on Romans VIII

Origen of Alexandria: But now, in this place where he says, “For the law works wrath,” it must be considered more carefully to which law this saying seems to look; and likewise that which follows, “For where there is no law, neither is there transgression.” But before a fuller explanation is required of us, let us reply briefly to those objections which the heretics are accustomed to raise against us from this passage. For they say: “See how the Apostle says that the law of Moses works wrath, and that where that law has not been, there neither will there be transgression.” Let us ask, then, of them: If where the law is, there will also be transgression of the law transgressed, then also where faith is, there will be transgression of faith transgressed. For if he becomes a transgressor who turns aside from the law, without doubt he too is a transgressor who turns aside from faith; and if for that transgression which is in the law the law itself is the cause, then for this transgression which is in faith, faith too is believed to be the cause. But if it is absurd to say that faith is the cause of anyone’s transgressing against faith, and that if he had not come to faith he would not have been a transgressor of faith, so too will it be absurd to take transgression of the law from the fact that someone has undertaken the observance of the law. But let us add this also. What will they say to us about those who fell into transgression before the law of Moses? For if no one before Moses was a transgressor, no one was condemned, no one punished. What will they say of the Sodomites? What of those who were condemned in the flood? What of Cain? What of Adam himself? What will they answer concerning Eve, of whom the Apostle says: “But the woman, being seduced, fell into transgression”? If without the law of Moses there is no transgression, on what ground are Adam and Eve named transgressors by the Apostle? But, as we have already often said above, the Apostle introduces various laws in this Epistle: now he speaks of the law of Moses, now he names the law of faith, as when he says: “Where then is your boasting? It is excluded. By what law? Of works? No; but by the law of faith.” He brings in besides other laws also, of which he says: “For I delight in the law of God according to the inner man; but I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and leading me captive in the law of sin”; and thus he passes from one law to another, so that unless one’s understanding is watchful and attentive, it can scarcely catch him and follow him. It must be seen, therefore, whether perhaps that law which is in our members, and leads us captive in the law of sin, is itself the law which the Apostle says works wrath. For without doubt it works wrath for the one whom it has led captive in the law of sin. But where that law has not been, it is certain that there neither will there be transgression. And those who have been under that law will consequently not be heirs either. But even if someone wishes it to be understood of the law of Moses, and to say that it works wrath, he will perhaps be able to affirm this for this reason alone: that it commands the one who sins against it either to be stoned at once, or to be burned with fire, or whatever other punishment is decreed in the law for sinners — so that the very penalty which is inflicted on the sinner from the law seems now to be named “wrath” by the Apostle. And similarly concerning transgression: that he does not here establish that every transgression generally is so called, but that of the one who, being placed under the law, has offended — so that the offense of him who sins though forbidden by the law may seem graver than that of him who has been admonished by no law. But this too must be observed, that the Apostle did not say that where the law has been, there is also transgression, but he says: “But where there is no law, neither is there transgression.” In which he shows that transgression indeed cannot exist at all unless there is a law; yet not that, if there is a law, there will in every case also be transgression. For it can happen that there is a law, and there is no transgression; it cannot, however, happen that there is transgression where there is no law. For even if we posit the law of Moses, it does not immediately follow that all who lived under the law of Moses fell into transgression: otherwise we would seem to involve at the same time both the prophets and all the just — unless perhaps someone should say that all the just and the prophets lived not so much under the law as under faith, while sinners and the unjust were bound by the chains of the law, as the Apostle also says: “Because the law is not laid down for the just man, but for the unjust and the insubordinate, for the impious and sinners, for the wicked and profane, for parricides and matricides, for murderers, fornicators, for those who lie with males, for kidnappers, liars, perjurers, and whatever else is contrary to sound doctrine.” But if the law was laid down for such as these, will not those seem to you much better of whom it is said: “For when the Gentiles, who do not have the law, do naturally the things of the law, these, not having the law, are a law unto themselves, and they show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness to them”? And let us set before our eyes, if it seems good, two men, for example, who have not lain with males as with a woman: one of them restrained by the precept of the law, which had he not feared, he would perhaps have done it; and another who by the judgment of his own mind has not permitted a contagion of this sort to enter even his thoughts. Would you not much prefer the one who, deterred by no threat of the law, kept himself free from the defilement of the crime? And similarly if an examination be made concerning the other sins as well. And therefore, whether the law of Moses is understood, or also that law which is in our members and works wrath, those who are of it cannot be heirs, but those who are of the law of faith — of that faith, indeed, by which Abraham was justified. But perhaps someone may ask how it is that he who is under the law of Moses is not also seen to be under the law of faith, since it is written in Exodus: “And the people believed God, and Moses his servant”; and again the Lord says in the Gospel: “If you believed Moses, you would surely believe me also: for he wrote of me.” For it will seem that, just as he said of himself, “he who believes in me believes also in him who sent me,” so also he says of Moses, that “if you believed Moses, you would surely believe me also.” To which we shall reply that what was said in the desert, “The people believed God, and Moses his servant,” is a narrative by which it is shown that through the ministry of Moses, by which he administered signs and wonders, the people believed God. In this saying, where he says, “If you believed Moses, you would surely believe me also,” he reproves the unbelief of those who, while they do not believe him, show that they do not believe even the writings of Moses, in which the coming of Christ was set forth in prophetic speech. But where he says, “He who believes in me believes in him who sent me,” he lifts up the hope of believers all the way to God the Father, so that just as one who sees the Son knows that he has seen the Father also, so when he believes the Son, he may know that he has believed the Father also. — COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

Pelagius: The law brings wrath because it was ordained for the unrighteous, and it weighed sinners down rather than set them free.… Where there is no law there is nothing which can be broken. Or perhaps this means that there is nothing to be punished where the law is not necessary. — PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

Romans 4:16

Ambrosiaster: The promise could not be certain to every offspring, that is, to everyone from every nation, unless it was by faith. The source of the promise is faith and not the law, because those who are under the law are guilty, and the promise cannot be given to those who are guilty. For this reason they must first be purified by faith, so that they may become worthy to be called the children of God, so that the promise may be certain. For if they say they are children of God when they are still guilty (that is to say, under the law), then the promise is not certain. First the children of God must be set free from sin. So those who are under the law must be rescued from the law in order to deserve to receive the promise, which is all the greater because it is apart from the law. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

John Chrysostom: You see that it is not the Law only that faith establisheth, but the promise of God also that it will not allow to fall to the ground. But the Law, on the other hand, by being kept to unseasonably, makes even the faith of none effect, and hindereth the promise. By this he shows that faith, so far from being superfluous, is even necessary to that degree, that without it there is no being saved. For the Law worketh wrath, as all have transgressed it. But this doth not even suffer wrath to arise at all: for “where no Law is,” he says, “there is no transgression.” Do you see how he not only does away with sin after it has existed, but does not even allow it to be produced? And this is why he says “by grace.” For what end? Not with a view to their being put to shame, but to the end that the promise might be sure to all the seed. Here he lays down two blessings, both that the things given are sure, and also that they are to all the seed, so gathering in those of the Gentiles, and showing that the Jews are without, if they contend against the faith. — Homily on Romans VIII

Origen of Alexandria: “Therefore it is of faith, that according to grace the promise might be sure to all the seed, not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all (as it is written: For I have made thee a father of many nations) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which are not as though they were.” In what went before he gave the distinction between wages and grace, saying that wages are a matter of debt, but that grace is a matter of no debt at all, but rather the benefit of goodwill. And so in the present passage too, wishing to show that God gives the inheritance of the promises not out of debt but through grace, he says that the inheritance is granted by God to those who believe not as a debt of wages but as the gift of faith. For just as (to speak by way of example) the fact that we exist cannot be understood as though we existed by the wages of our own work, but it is plainly the gift of God that we are, and the grace of the Creator, who willed that we should be: so also, if we receive the inheritance of God’s promises, it belongs to the divine grace, and is not the wage of any debt or work. But if perchance this very thing which is said, “of faith,” should seem not to be free — since faith must first be offered by man, and thus grace be earned from God — hear how the same Apostle teaches this very point elsewhere as well. For where he enumerates the gifts of the Spirit, which he says are given to believers according to the measure of faith, there among the rest he also asserts that the gift of faith is bestowed through the Holy Spirit. For after many things he says this also concerning it: “To another faith, in the same Spirit,” so as to show that faith too is given through grace. But elsewhere also the same Apostle teaches, saying: “For unto you it is given by God not only to believe in Christ, but also to suffer for him.” You find this indicated in the Gospels too, where the apostles, understanding that the faith which is from man cannot be perfect unless there be added also that which is from God, say to the Saviour: “Increase our faith.” From all of which what the Apostle here says is most plainly proved: “Therefore it is of faith, that according to grace the promise might be sure”: because even that very faith by which we seem to believe God is confirmed in us by the gift of grace. And this is the grace which, if a man is blessed, he deserves to find like a great treasure. Noah found it; and therefore it is written of him: “But Noah found grace in the sight of the Lord God.” Moses too had found this grace; and therefore he said to God: “If I have found grace in thy sight.” Yet we find that some of the saints found grace not only in the sight of the Lord God, but also in the sight of men. Thus of blessed Joseph it is written: “And Joseph found grace in the sight of his master.” But that grace which is found in the sight of men is granted by God’s bounty. For thus it is written of the same Joseph: “And the Lord was with Joseph, and poured out mercy upon him, and gave him grace in the sight of the keeper of the prison.” Something still further concerning grace of this kind is recorded in the divine writings about blessed Esther. For it says thus: that “Esther was finding grace with all who saw her.” And a little later the Scripture says: “Esther found grace above all the other virgins, and the king set upon her the woman’s diadem.” These things, I think, we have sought out from the holy Scriptures not unseasonably, for the confirmation of the apostolic saying in which he discusses faith and grace. He says therefore: “Therefore it is of faith, that according to grace the promise might be sure.” But this too is to be noted, that he says, “Therefore it is of faith, that according to grace the promise might be sure,” as though wishing to show that if the promise were of the law and not of grace, it would not be sure; but that now it is sure for this reason, that it is not of the law but through grace. In which I think that he wishes something of this sort to be understood: that the things which are of the law are outside us, but the things which are through grace are held within us. For example, the things which are written in the law are written with pen and ink on parchments or on little sheets; but the things which come down from grace are written in our heart by the Spirit of God, as the same Apostle, the minister of this grace, indicates elsewhere, saying: “Ye are our epistle, written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God; not in tables of stone, but in fleshly tables of the heart.” Therefore, as it seems to me, he says that the things which are through grace are surer than those which are of the law, because the latter are outside us and the former within us: and the latter consist in fragile material, so that they can easily perish, whereas the former, written by the Spirit of God and impressed in the inmost recesses of the soul, obtain the firmness of perpetuity. With such letters, then, of the promise is inscribed that soul which has offered its faith to God like wax made ready, so that upon it the grace of God may worthily be inscribed: and therefore such faith is reckoned unto righteousness, since it has shown itself capable of the heavenly grace. And this befalls the seed of Abraham, not that only which is of the law, but that also which is of faith. For Abraham’s succession by faith is far nobler than that by the flesh, since he is recorded to have been justified not by flesh but by faith. For if the succession is to be given not by faith but by seed, it will be fitting that the posterity of Ishmael also, and those who descend from Keturah, be brought to the sacred mysteries of the promises. But this assuredly is not admitted; rather, the posterity of the law and of faith alone is brought in. But let us not pass over a certain wavering and ambiguously expressed manner of speech of the Apostle in this place. For what he said — “That the promise might be sure to all the seed, not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of faith” — if it be so understood as though he had spoken of one seed of the law and another of faith, so that the promise of the inheritance ought to be expected from both seeds alike, he is found to say things contrary to what he wrote above, when he said: “For they which are of the law are not heirs”; and again elsewhere: “For we reckon that a man is justified by faith without the works of the law”; and again: “For if they which are of the law are heirs, faith is made void.” For indeed, if a man is justified by faith without the works of the law, and if those who are of the law do not become heirs, how will it not seem contrary, what he says in this place, that the promise is sure through grace not to that seed only which is of the law, but to that also which is of faith? — COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

Origen of Alexandria: And whereas in the passages above he seems to have rejected those who are of the law, how does he here place them on an equal footing with those whom he says hope for grace from faith? But it seems to me that when he says, “To all the seed, not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of faith,” he here indicates, as we have often already said, the natural law, and asserts this: that the promise is firm not only for those who come by the natural law alone, but also for those who from faith have added to the natural law that faith which our father Abraham had — so that he seems to indicate not two peoples, one from faith and another from the law, but one and the same people, which pleases God not only by the natural law which all men employ, but by the faith of which Abraham stood forth as the author. By this, namely, he shows that if anyone should possess intact all the things which the natural law teaches, and the consciousness of sin reproach him in nothing, yet he should not also have the grace of faith, he cannot be justified. For it is faith which is reckoned unto righteousness. And this distinction, once grasped, renders the understanding plainer; and those things which are thought contrary are found to be consonant and mutually in accord. But concerning the diversity of the laws — that in this Epistle especially the Apostle often, even covertly and suddenly, shifts the sequence of his discourse from one law to another — we have frequently shown, and it is superfluous to repeat the same things. And rightly he did not say of Abraham: The father of all, but says, “The father of us all”; that is, not of us who descend from the law, but of us who from faith come after the law. And because he is the father of all who are of this sort, he has fittingly set down in what follows the sentence of the divine promise, saying: “As it is written: For I have made thee a father of many nations, before him whom he believed, God.” If therefore he is promised that he shall be the father of many nations, not undeservedly is he named father both of those who come from the Gentiles and of those who come from the circumcision. And rightly the Apostle added, from his own interpretation: “Before him whom he believed, God” — that is, he was appointed father of many nations before that very God in whom he believed, whose promises, and from whom he received the seal of faith in circumcision. How then does the circumcision claim Abraham as its father in a special sense, when that very God who gave him circumcision appointed him the father of many nations? But if anyone should wish to turn this to the posterity of Ishmael or of Keturah, there meets him what is written: that “in thee shall all the tribes of the earth be blessed.” This also John was saying in the Gospel: “For God is able of these stones to raise up children to Abraham.” — COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

Pelagius: The law does not forgive sins but condemns them, and therefore it cannot make all nations children of Abraham, because in the end all must be punished since all are found under sin. But faith makes all believers children of Abraham, because their sins have been forgiven by grace. — PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

Theodoret of Cyrus: Paul humbled the pride of the Jews by calling all those who imitated Abraham’s faith “the seed of Abraham,” even if they were of a different race. For if the law punishes those who break it, grace gives forgiveness of sins and confirms the promise of God, giving a blessing to the Gentiles. — INTERPRETATION OF THE LETTER TO THE ROMANS

Romans 4:17

Ambrosiaster: Paul confirms by quoting the law that Abraham is the father of all who believe, and so the promise is firm if they abandon the law on account of their faith, because the promise of the kingdom of heaven is given to the righteous, not to sinners. Those who are under the law are under sin because all have sinned, and it is not possible for anyone who is under the law to receive grace.In order to teach that there is one God for all, Paul tells the Gentiles that Abraham believed in God himself and was justified in his sight. The Gentiles also believe in him that they may be justified, and so there is no difference between Jew and Greek in faith, for when the circumcision and the uncircumcision are taken away they are made one in Christ. Paul invites the Gentiles to share the faith of Abraham, who believed God while he was still uncircumcised. Now that that faith is preached in Christ, he has been raised from the dead, along with his wife. For when they were already very old they sprang back to life, so that Abraham did not doubt that he would have a son by Sarah, whom he knew to be sterile and who had long since ceased to have her menstrual period. Paul said this so that they would not worry about circumcision or uncircumcision but that they would respond eagerly because of their faith, secure in the knowledge that the one in whom they believe is no other than the one who gives life to the dead, who has the power to bring things which do not exist into being by his will. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Augustine of Hippo: This means that faith is in the inner man, in the sight of God and not in human display, which is what the circumcision of the flesh is. — AUGUSTINE ON Romans 24

Augustine of Hippo: Everything which God did not beget of himself but made through his Word he made not out of things which already existed but out of what did not exist at all, i.e., out of nothing. — THE NATURE OF THE GOOD 26

John Chrysostom: Do you observe that this was ordered by Providence from of old? What then, he means, does He say this on account of the Ishmaelites, or of the Amalekites, or of the Hagarenes? This however, as he goes on he proves more distinctly not to be said of these. But as yet he presses forward to another point, by which means he proves this very thing by defining the mode of the relationship, and establishing it with a vast reach of mind.

But his meaning is something of this sort, as God is not the God of a part, but the Father of all, so is he also. And again, as God is a father not by way of the relationship of nature, but by way of the affiance of faith, so is he also inasmuch as it is obedience that makes him father of us all. For since they thought nothing of this relationship, as clinging to that grosser one, he shows that this is the truer relationship by lifting his discourse up to God. And along with this he makes it plain that this was the reward of faith that he received. Consequently, if it were not so, and he were the father of all the dwellers upon earth, the expression before (or answering to) would be out of place, while the gift of God would be curtailed.

For if He could “quicken the dead” and bring in “those things that were not as though they were,” then could He also make those who were not born of him to be his children. And this is why he does not say, bringing in the things which are not, but calling them, so showing the greater ease of it. For as it is easy to us to call the things which are by name, so to Him it is easy, yea, and much easier to give a subsistence to things that are not. — Homily on Romans VIII

Origen of Alexandria: And he added in what follows: “Who quickens the dead, and calls those things which are not as those which are.” Here we understand the dead according to the sin of the soul, since he says, “the soul which sins shall die.” For just as in bodily death the senses perish, so that a man no longer receives through the body either hearing, or smell, or taste, or touch: so also he who has lost the spiritual senses in the soul, so that he does not see God, nor hear the word of God, nor take in the sweet fragrance of Christ, nor taste the good word of God, nor do his hands handle of the word of life — men of this sort are deservedly called dead. Such the coming of Christ found us, but it made us alive through his grace, as the same Apostle also says elsewhere: “And we, when we were dead in our offenses and sins, he raised us up together with him.” But do you wish it to be proved to you also from the prophetic Scriptures that all who worship idols, and trust in them, are dead? Hear how David says: “The images of the nations are silver and gold, the works of men’s hands. They have a mouth, and they shall not speak: they have eyes, and they shall not see: they have ears, and they shall not hear.” And after a little: “Let those,” he says, “who make them become like them, and all who trust in them.” You see that they are dead, and made like the images, who worship them and who trust in them. Whence let us look more carefully whether perhaps, just as those who worship idols and trust in them are said to become like them, so also those who worship the true God, and trust in him, become like him. And this is perhaps why in the beginnings, when it had been proposed that man should be made to the image and likeness of God, he was indeed made to the image, but the likeness was deferred for this reason: that he should first trust in God, and so become like him, and that he himself should hear that everyone who trusts in him shall be made like him. These things we have joined by a kind of digression to what we have discussed concerning the kind of death, so that it might become clearer in what ways God quickens the dead. But let us also see how what he says in the following is to be understood: “And calls those things which are not as those which are.” We have frequently expounded, in other places too, that God alone is he who said: “I am who I am”; and that substance of God is one, which always is; and if anyone joins himself to it, he becomes one spirit with him, and through him who always is, he too is said to be. But he who is far from him, and takes no participation of him, is not even said to be — as we the Gentiles were, before we came to the knowledge of the divine truth; and therefore God is said to call “those things which are not as those which are.” For among those who are, that is, who have participation in him who is, are numbered Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and the rest of the saints. But if the Gentiles by believing come into the faith of Abraham, the Apostle consequently declares that God has called “those things which are not as those which are.” Yet this too may be observed: that in this place the Apostle may seem to have poured himself out more widely upon the praises of God, and to have recalled with admiration the beginnings of his first creation, when he made all things to be out of nothing, and by his powerful might called forth those things which were not as though they were and subsisted; and that thus nothing was difficult for him in creating, so that, when nothing existed, all things being suddenly called were at once present as though they had always existed. But if someone should object to us that discourse of the Apostle which he writes to the Corinthians, where he says that “God chose the contemptible things of the world, and the things which are not, that he might destroy the things which are, so that no flesh should glory before God” — and should say that according to this exposition it is not fitting that the things which are should be said to be destroyed, when the things which are not have been chosen — we shall say to this that in that place he called some men “those who are,” and others in this chapter in the Epistle to the Romans. For he made clear to the Corinthians that he was speaking of those whom he had enumerated above. For he said above: “For behold your calling, brethren, that not many wise among you according to the flesh, not many powerful, not many noble: but God chose the foolish things of the world, that he might confound the wise: and God chose the weak things of the world, that he might confound the strong.” Just as, then, he says that God chose the foolish things of the world, that is, the Gentiles, that he might confound the wise, without doubt the Jews; and the weak things of the world, that he might confound the strong: in the same order he speaks in this place also of the things which are not, that he might destroy the things which are; and he shows that the Gentiles are not, but that the Jews are — that is, those who were in the law but did not fulfill the law — so that these might be destroyed, and those brought in who were not in the law, and were joined by the merit of their believing to the faith of Abraham. But as to what he said, That he might confound the wise — not that they were truly wise; otherwise God would never confound those who are wise according to the wisdom of God; but he means those who think themselves to be wise, and are not, as he also says elsewhere: “Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?” Therefore he confounds the wise of this world by choosing the foolish — not because these too were foolish in like manner through poverty of understanding, but according to that which was said: “He who wishes to be wise, let him become foolish in this world, that he may be wise with God: because the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God.” — COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

Pelagius: Abraham is the father of all believers, not just of the nation of Israel. “Life to the dead” is given to those who are dead for the purpose of bearing children, which is the context of the present discussion. — PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

Philoxenus of Mabbug: Faith looketh upon something which existeth not as if it were something which doth exist, and that which existeth it accounteth as if it existed not. And this also is an example of the power of God, concerning Whom Paul spake, “He calleth the things that are not as though they were.” Now these things the Spirit of God spake concerning the power of God, that those things which were not He called to come into existence, and that what did exist He called and changed into nothing. To this power also He compareth faith, not only in that matter of [the working] of signs and wonderful things, in that the things which are not it worketh after the manner of God, and those which are it bringeth to an end and finisheth by the power of God, but also in that those things which, because of their being hidden, were accounted as if they existed not, were perceived by it as if they were manifest, and those which are, and in which we labour, and by which we are ministered unto, are accounted as if they existed not, for [faith] saw aforetime their dissolution. — 13 Ascetic Discourses, Discourse 2 – On Faith

Philoxenus of Mabbug: For as God is over created things so art thou god over thy lusts, and as by the will of the Creator created things exist, and if He willeth not they exist not, so also according to thy will are thy lusts, and at thy will they become nothing. “God calleth the things which are not as if they were,” even so also doth thy will create the lusts which are not, that they may come into existence; now God looketh upon all things, and they become nothing, so also doth thy will look upon all the passions, and straightway they are destroyed and become nothing. If thou wishest, they are thy passions; and if thou wishest, they do not exist. From thee springeth up the cause of thy lust, and from thee is born the destruction thereof; if thou makest it to live, thou canst make it to die, and if thou makest lust to live in thee, thou makest thy life which is in God to die. — 13 Ascetic Discourses, Discourse 11 – On Abstinence

Pseudo-Clement: For He had compassion on us, and mercifully saved us, observing the many errors in which we were entangled, as well as the destruction to which we were exposed, and that we had no hope of salvation except it came to us from Him. For He called us when we were not, and willed that out of nothing we should attain a real existence. — Second Epistle To The Corinthians (Pseudo-Clement)

Romans 4:18

Ambrosiaster: It is clear that since Abraham had no hope of having a son, he believed God and had faith against hope that he would have a son, knowing that with God all things are possible.The quotation is from Genesis [15:5], where God shows Abraham the stars of the sky and says: “So shall your descendants be,” because in believing he was justified. For Abraham believed what seems impossible to the world because it does not occur in the order of nature that old people should have children and know that their seed will increase to such an extent that it will be impossible to count them. Therefore, faith is precious because it believes in the future, even against what it now sees or knows. For it consoles itself in this hope, that it is God who promises. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

John Chrysostom: How was it that he “believed in hope against hope?” It was against man’s hope, in hope which is of God. (For he is showing the loftiness of the action, and leaving no room for disbelieving what is said.) Things which are contrary to one another, yet faith blends them together. But if he were speaking about such as were from Ishmael, this language would be superfluous: for it was not by faith but by nature that they were begotten. But he bringeth Isaac also before us. For it was not concerning those nations that he believed, but concerning him who was to be from his barren wife. If then it be a reward to be father of many nations, it would be so of those nations clearly of whom he so believed. For that you may know that he is speaking of them, listen to what follows. — Homily on Romans VIII

Origen of Alexandria: “Who against hope believed in hope, that he might become the father of many nations, according to that which was said to him: So shall your seed be, as the stars of heaven and the sand of the sea. And he was not weakened in faith, nor did he consider his own body now dead, since he was almost a hundred years old, and the dead womb of Sarah. In the promise also of God he did not hesitate through distrust: but was strengthened in faith, giving glory to God, and knowing most fully that whatever he promised, he is able also to do. Therefore it was also reputed to him unto justice.” It seems to me that when the Apostle said “against hope,” he had in view that which is related in Genesis, that Abraham said to the Lord: “Sovereign Lord, what will you give me? I am dismissed without children: but this son of Masech my homeborn maidservant is Damascus Eliezer. And Abraham said: Since you have given me no seed, this homeborn servant of mine shall be my heir.” From which words Abraham is certainly understood to have despaired of receiving children. But as for what he said, “he believed in hope,” I think he gathers the hope given to him again from that place where it is written: “And the voice of the Lord came to him saying: This man shall not be your heir; but he who shall come forth from you, he himself shall be your heir. And he led him outside, and said to him: Look up to heaven, and number the stars, if you are able to count them. And he said to him: So shall your seed be. And he believed God, and it was reputed to him unto justice.” From these words, therefore, both his earlier despair and the hope afterwards given to him by God’s promises are declared. And because he believed him, that is written of him which the Apostle now sets forth, that “it was reputed to him unto justice.” And rightly, and in the manner customary to him whenever he treats of faith, the Apostle joins hope also, knowing that hope inseparably cleaves to faith, just as he teaches the same in the Epistle to the Hebrews, saying: “Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things that do not appear.” And again in this same Epistle to the Romans he says further on: “For by hope we were saved. But hope that is seen is not hope. For what a man sees, why does he hope for it? But if we hope for what we do not see, we wait for it through patience.” What he says, “by hope we were saved,” is the same as what he says elsewhere, that “by faith we have been saved”; and, “Your faith has made you whole”; and, “According to your faith be it unto you.” Which things are certainly said to those who, believing in Jesus, bore the hope that they could be cured by him. And just as Abraham “against hope believed in hope,” so all who by faith are sons of Abraham believe against hope in hope concerning each and every one of the things they believe, whether concerning the resurrection of the dead or concerning the inheritance of the kingdom of heaven. For these things, so far as human nature is concerned, seem to be against hope; but so far as the power of God is concerned, they are believed in hope, after the example of Abraham believing that “whatever God has promised, he is able also to do” — provided, however, that in those who believe there abide faith, hope, and charity. And I think that the first beginnings of salvation, and the very foundations, are faith; but the advance and increase of the building is hope; while the perfection and summit of the whole work is charity: and therefore charity is called “the greatest of all.” — COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

Origen of Alexandria: Therefore Abraham “against hope believed in hope, that he might become the father of many nations,” which were to be as the stars of heaven, not only in multitude but also in brightness; and he, faithfully believing him who promised, “was not,” he says, “weakened in faith.” What he says, “he was not weakened in faith,” seems to me to show that there is a certain weakness in faith. But if there is weakness, there is without doubt also health, as he shows in other places when he says: “Rebuke them sharply, that they may be sound in the faith.” Blessed, therefore, is he who is not made weak in faith. But if anyone should be made weak, the Apostle describes the care for him when he says: “Him that is weak in faith take unto you, but not in disputes about thoughts. For one believes that he may eat all things; but he who is weak, let him eat herbs.” By which he certainly indicates that the herbs of the word are to be offered to him who is weak in faith, lest the full doctrine of faith be forced upon those who waver in it and are in a manner sick. But that faith is called sound which is perfect and to which nothing is lacking: and it is that faith which believes that it may eat all things, that is, which is able to take in all things; and he who has it is called spiritual, and judges all things, and can be scandalized in no word. From which it evidently appears that there are certain increases and advances in faith, and that some have a small portion of faith, others a great one, and others indeed have all faith. Whence the Apostle also said: “If I should have all faith, so that I might remove mountains.” But in the Gospels too the disciples say to the Lord, as men in whom full faith was not yet present: “Increase our faith.” Consider indeed whether, according to those things which we say about faith, we may likewise understand about the increases of charity as well, so that we may say of charity also, as he said, “If I should have all faith,” — If I should have all charity: and that he has all charity who has all those things which are proper to charity, as the Apostle says: “Charity is patient, is kind, is not puffed up, is not envious, is not ambitious, does not act perversely, is not provoked: bears all things, believes all things, hopes all things, endures all things,” and other things similar to these. And if anyone has these, it rightly seems to me to be said that he has all charity: which charity without doubt consists of these several parts mentioned above by the Apostle. And similarly I think it can be said of mercy also, and of piety, and of the other virtues. And perhaps through each of these, just as it was said of faith, that “faith was reputed unto justice,” so also it can be said of charity, that charity was reputed to him unto justice, or piety, or mercy. But let us now look at the things which follow. “And he was not,” he says, “weakened in faith, nor did he consider his own body now dead, since he was almost a hundred years old, and the dead womb of Sarah; in the promise also of God he did not hesitate through distrust, but was strengthened in faith.” So far indeed as pertains to the simple understanding, he has set forth an evident reason: that Abraham, when he heard offspring promised to him by God, did not look to the dead powers of a hundred-year-old body, from which certainly no succession could in any way be hoped for; but gazing upon the power of him who promised, he believed that nothing was difficult among those things which the Almighty was promising: but he gave, he says, “glory to God,” understanding that it was the gift of God alone where the laws of human fruitfulness had ceased. Rightly therefore did he give glory to God, who had been abandoned by the helps of nature.

Such things, as I have said, so far as concerns the simple understanding, will seem to have been said sufficiently. But if someone objects to us: How can Abraham, set in the hundredth year of his age, be called “of a dead body,” when, after he had received Isaac, and after Sarah had died — she who had conceived him at ninety and had lived a hundred and twenty-seven years — and after Isaac too, being forty years old, had taken Rebecca, after all these things it is written: “And Abraham again took a wife whose name was Keturah, and she bore him Zimran, and Jokshan, and Medan, and Midian, and Ishbak, and Shuah”? How then will he seem to be “of a dead body,” who, being made much older than he was then, was able both to take a wife and to beget six children? In order that we may fittingly dispose of these objections, we transfer the exposition of “a dead body” to that sense, so that we may say that Abraham was dead not by the infirmity of age, but according to that virtue which the saints, fulfilling it first in themselves, admonish others also to have, saying: “Mortify your members which are upon the earth.” For I think it absurd, if this good which Paul had in himself (for he would not command to others what he had not himself done) — if, I say, this good which Paul had, we should not believe that so great a patriarch as Abraham had, whom the Apostle even calls his own father. There was therefore in him also this mortification of the members: he was not incited by wantonness, he was not burned with lust, like those of whom the Apostle says: “It is better to marry than to burn.” This same thing was in Sarah also, because “it had ceased to be with Sarah after the manner of women.” For there was not in her womanly wantonness, nor the looseness of incontinence, nor were they hurried headlong, unwilling, into the exercise of lust; but when they hear of so great a hope of posterity, and of the glory of their offspring to be made equal to heaven and the stars — when they hear these things, they do not look to their own goods, to the grace of continence, to the mortification of the members, but all these things which they had counted gains they judge to be losses, that they may gain Christ. But perhaps you think that I have erred, in that, when I ought to have spoken of Abraham’s posterity and his seed, I have spoken of Christ. We do not err, but we speak with the Apostle. For he himself interprets these things to have been said of Christ when he says: “It is written: To thee will I give this land, and to thy seed. He did not say, And to seeds, as in many; but, To thy seed, as in one, which is Christ.” You see then how the Apostle teaches us that the Lord so spoke to Abraham that in his seed he should understand that Christ was to be perceived; and for this reason I think that the Apostle added and said: “Giving glory to God.” For Abraham could not have offered so much glory from the birth of Isaac as he was able to give glory to God, if he understood that Christ was to be born from his body, already dead and purged of vices. But you too, if you mortify your members which are upon the earth, if, having cast away every heat of lust, you keep your body dead and liable to no vices, you also can generate from it the best fruits; you can generate Isaac, which is joy — and this is the first fruit of the spirit; your seed, that is, your works, can ascend to heaven and become works of light and be compared to the brightness and splendor of the stars, so that when the day of the resurrection shall have come, you may differ, as star from star, in glory. I say yet more: you can, if you be so pure in mind, so holy in body, so unstained in your acts, generate even Christ himself, according to him who said: “My little children, of whom I travail in birth again, until Christ be formed in you.” And thus the Lord himself says of himself: “Whoever shall do the will of my Father who is in heaven, he is my brother, and sister, and mother.” Who then shall be the mother of Jesus, save she whose womb is dead? — that so at last she may bring forth children of chastity, like that woman too of whom the Apostle says: “But she shall be saved through the bearing of children, if she continue in faith and chastity.” Whence also I think it fittingly added for these reasons: “And it was reckoned to him for righteousness.” For how should it not be reckoned for righteousness to him who held perfection not only in faith, but in all the virtues? — COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

Pelagius: It was against all natural hope for a hundred-year-old man to believe that his seed would become as numerous as the stars, especially given that his wife had been barren in her youth and was now as feeble as he was. — PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

Theodoret of Cyrus: Abraham believed against the hope of nature but in the hope of the promise of God. — INTERPRETATION OF THE LETTER TO THE ROMANS

Romans 4:19

John Chrysostom: Do you see how he gives the obstacles, as well as the high spirit of the righteous man which surmounts all? “Against hope,” he says, was that which was promised: this is the first obstacle. For Abraham had no other person who had received a son in this way to look to. They that were after him looked to him, but he to no one, save to God only. And this is why he said, “against hope.” Then, “his body now dead.” This is a second. And, “the deadness of Sarah’s womb.” This is a third, aye and a fourth obstacle. — Homily on Romans VIII

Oecumenius: Paul was right to say: “about a hundred,” because Abraham was not a hundred but only ninety-nine years old. — PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH

Pelagius: Faith takes no aspect of nature into account, because it knows that the one who spoke is almighty. — PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

Romans 4:20

Augustine of Hippo: Paul says that Abraham “gave glory to God” when he was attacking those who were seeking their own glory in the sight of men by doing the works of the law. — AUGUSTINE ON Romans 25

John Chrysostom: For God neither gave any proof nor made any sign, but there were only bare words promising such things as nature did not hold out any hopes of. Yet still he says, “he staggered not.” He does not say, “He did not disbelieve,” but, “He staggered not,” that is, he neither doubted nor hesitated though the hindrances were so great. From this we learn, that if God promise even countless impossibilities, and he that heareth doth not receive them, it is not the nature of things that is to blame, but the unreasonableness of him who receiveth them not. “But was strong in faith.” See the pertinacity of Paul. For since this discourse was about them that work and them that believe, he shows that the believer works more than the other, and requires more power, and great strength, and sustains no common degree of labor. For they counted faith worthless, as having no labor in it. Insisting then upon this, he shows that it is not only he that succeeds in temperance, or any other virtue of this sort, but he that displays faith also who requires even greater power. For as the one needs strength to beat off the reasonings of intemperance, so hath the faithful also need of a soul endued with power, that he may thrust aside the suggestions of unbelief. How then did he become “strong?” By trusting the matter, he replies, to faith and not to reasonings: else he had fallen. But how came he to thrive in faith itself? By giving glory to God, he says. — Homily on Romans VIII

Pelagius: Abraham doubted neither the impossibility of old age nor the greatness of the promise. — PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

Romans 4:21

Augustine of Hippo: God brings about the faith of the Gentiles, because he is able to perform what he has promised. If it is God who produces our faith, acting in a wondrous manner in our hearts so that we believe, surely we should not fear that he cannot do the entire work. — PREDESTINATION OF THE SAINTS 2.6

John Chrysostom: Abstaining then from curious questionings is glorifying God, as indulging in them is transgressing. But if by entering into curious questions, and searching out things below, we fail to glorify Him, much more if we be over curious in the matter of the Lord’s generation, shall we suffer to the utmost for our insolence. For if the type of the resurrection is not to be searched into, much less those untterable and awestriking subjects. And he does not use the word “believed” merely, but, “being fully persuaded.” For such a thing is faith, it is clearer than the demonstration by reasons, and persuades more fully. For it is not possible for another reasoning succeeding to it to shake it afterwards. He indeed that is persuaded with words may have his persuasion altered too by them. But he that stays himself upon faith, hath henceforward fortified his hearing against words that may do hurt to it.

Having said then, that he was justified by faith, he shows that he glorified God by that faith; which is a thing specially belonging to a good life. For, “Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father Which is in heaven.” But lo! this is shown also to belong to faith! Again, as works need power, so doth faith. For in their case the body often shareth the toil, but in the faith the well-doing belongeth to the soul alone. And so the labor is greater, since it has no one to share the struggles with it. — Homily on Romans VIII

Pelagius: Abraham thanked God as if he had already received the gift. — PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

Romans 4:22

Ambrosiaster: Paul claims that Abraham is worthy of this praise because although he knew that he could not do it himself, he strengthened his weakness by faith, so that he believed that with God’s help he could do what he knew was impossible by the laws of the universe. He was of great merit before God because he believed God over against his own knowledge, not doubting that because he was God he could do things which were impossible according to the world’s wisdom.Paul therefore urges the Gentiles to believe as firmly as Abraham did so that they might receive the promise of God and his grace without any hesitation, secure in the example of Abraham that the praise given to a believer increases if he believes what is incredible and seems to be foolish to the world. For the more foolish what he believes is thought to be, the more honor he will have, and indeed it would be foolish to believe it if it were said to occur without God. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

John Chrysostom: “And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.”

Abstaining then from curious questionings is glorifying God, as indulging in them is transgressing. But if by entering into curious questions, and searching out things below, we fail to glorify Him, much more if we be over curious in the matter of the Lord’s generation, shall we suffer to the utmost for our insolence. For if the type of the resurrection is not to be searched into, much less those unutterable and awestiking subjects. And he does not use the word “believed” merely, but, “being fully persuaded.” For such a thing is faith, it is clearer than the demonstration by reasons, and persuades more fully. For it is not possible for another reasoning succeeding to it to shake it afterwards. He indeed that is persuaded with words may have his persuasion altered too by them. But he that stays himself upon faith, hath henceforward fortified his hearing against words that may do hurt to it. — Homily on Romans 8

Pelagius: This was because Abraham believed so completely and so steadfastly. — PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

Romans 4:23

Ambrosiaster: Paul says that in Abraham a model was given to both Jews and Gentiles, so that by his example we might believe in God and Christ and the Holy Spirit, and that it might be reckoned to us as righteousness. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

John Chrysostom: After saying many great things of Abraham, and his faith, and righteousness, and honor before God, lest the hearer should say, What is this to us, for it is he that was justified? he places us close to the Patriarch again. So great is the power of spiritual words. For of one of the Gentiles, one who was recently come near, one who had done no work, he not only says that he is in nothing inferior to the Jew who believes (i.e. as a Jew), but not even to the Patriarch, but rather, if one must give utterance to the wondrous truth, even much greater. For so noble is our birth, that his faith is but the type of ours. And he does not say, If it was reckoned unto him, it is probable it will be also to us, that he might not make it matter of syllogism. But he speaks in authentic words of the divine law, and makes the whole a declaration of the Scripture. For why was it written, he says, save to make us see that we also were justified in this way? For it is the same God Whom we have believed, and upon the same matters, if it be not in the case of the same persons. And after speaking of our faith, he also mentions God’s unspeakable love towards man, which he ever presents on all sides, bringing the Cross before us. — Homily on Romans IX

Origen of Alexandria: “Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was reckoned to him for righteousness, but for our sake also, to whom it shall be reckoned, believing in him who raised up Jesus Christ our Lord from the dead, who was delivered up for our offenses, and rose again for our justification.” In this place, what he says, “not for his sake alone,” is to be understood as “concerning him”; and again what he says, “but for our sake also,” this is, “and concerning us.” For it is manifest that this which is said, “Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him for righteousness,” Moses did not write in order that Abraham might read it, who had of course long since died, but that we might take from a reading of this sort a profiting in faith, understanding that if we too so believe God as he believed, our faith also shall be reckoned to us for righteousness, “believing in him who raised up Jesus Christ our Lord from the dead.” — COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

Origen of Alexandria: But I should like to inquire into this: whether it is only for this reason that the Apostle says that “it was not written for the sake of” Abraham “alone, but for our sake also,” namely, because he said, “Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned to him for righteousness.” Do you suppose that this saying alone, out of all the things that are said about Abraham, was written not for his sake only, but for ours as well? Or will certain other things also appear to have been written not for his sake only, but for ours too? Or is it rather the case that all the things which are said about him are said not about him alone, but for our sake as well? And not only concerning Abraham — but see whether perhaps these same considerations ought to be applied in like manner to Isaac as well, so that the things written about him look not to him alone but to us also. And similarly concerning Jacob and the rest of the patriarchs. For what reason will there appear to be that the things written about Abraham should be said to pertain to us also, but not in the same way the things written about Isaac, and about Jacob, and about Judah, or about Joseph, and the rest? But if no reason appears why this should be so understood of one patriarch and not of the others as well, it will follow that the things written about them all seem to have been written not only for the sake of those who lived at that time, but for our sake also. And what especially persuades me to think thus is that word of the Gospel in which our Lord and Savior answered those who had said to him, “Our father is Abraham”: “If you were Abraham’s seed, you would surely do the works of Abraham. But now you seek to kill me, a man who has spoken to you the truth which I heard from my Father: this Abraham did not do.” By this he certainly shows that those who do the works of Abraham are the sons of Abraham; and that the things written about Abraham were written for their sake. Here now it belongs to a wise man, one enlightened by God, to look closely and to discern how each single work that is written of Abraham may be seen to be fulfilled in himself; for example, what was said to him: “Go out from your land, and from your kindred, and from your father’s house, and come into the land which I will show you” — how he too who wishes to be seen from his works to be of the seed of Abraham ought to obey these words, which assuredly were written not for Abraham’s sake only, but also for the sake of those who believe in him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead; and, when he has fulfilled these things, how he ought also to hope for what is added, that is: “And I will make you into a great nation, and I will bless you, and I will magnify your name, and you shall be blessed: and I will bless those who bless you, and I will curse those who curse you, and in you shall all the tribes of the earth be blessed”; and again, when Scripture says, “And Abraham departed according to the things which the Lord had spoken to him” — how this too seems to have been written not for Abraham’s sake only, but for ours also, that we may walk according to all the things which the Lord has spoken. And likewise concerning Isaac, or concerning the others, the things that are similarly written — how these too may be seen to pertain to us. But it is not the business of the present occasion to bring all these things forward and to examine each one, showing in what manner the things said or done by Abraham or by the other saints in the divine Scriptures are fulfilled also in us who believe in him in whom Abraham believed; but so far as the necessity of the present work allows, we have opened a road along which whoever desires to be exercised in the Scriptures may advance more widely. Thus far the course of our discussion has run concerning the character of that faith which was reckoned unto righteousness, and concerning the observance of the various laws, and the difference between uncircumcision and circumcision. Now let us see in what manner those who have been justified by faith and not by works are instructed by the Apostle. — COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

Romans 4:24

Ambrosiaster: Although what is now believed is different, faith has one and the same gift. Therefore we receive this gift because we believe. And believing that Christ is the Son of God, we are adopted as sons, for God could give no greater gift to believers than to call them sons of God once they had renounced their sins. For we are called “sons of God,” but they are not worthy even to be called servants. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

Apollinaris of Laodicea: The Lord is building his own temple, for the Father raised Christ from the dead in order to do his work through the Son. — PAULINE COMMENTARY FROM THE GREEK CHURCH

Origen of Alexandria: I should indeed like to inquire why it is that in this place the Apostle, when naming God, in whom we believe and in whom Abraham believed, did not say “believing” in God most high, or “believing in him” who made heaven and earth, or “in him” who made the angels and the other powers of the heavenly glory; but says: “who raised the Lord Jesus from the dead.” Let us therefore inquire for what cause this title of the Lord’s resurrection is taken up for the comparison of Abraham’s faith. Had Abraham believed in him who raised the Lord Jesus from the dead, when Jesus had not yet then been raised from the dead? I should wish, then, to consider what Paul had in view when he promises us that, just as faith was reckoned to Abraham believing for righteousness, so also it shall be reckoned to us who believe in him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead. In this matter I, according to the smallness of my perception, observe this: that it is far more magnificent among the praises of God to have raised Jesus our Lord from the dead than to have made heaven and earth, to have created the angels and established the heavenly powers. For that was to make the things which were not, but this to repair the things which had perished. That was to establish things not yet destroyed, this to restore things already destroyed. That, finally, was accomplished by a command, this by suffering. But of this so great and so magnificent a mystery, a form and image had gone before in the faith of Abraham. For he had believed, when he was bidden to offer his only son, that God was able to raise him even from the dead; he had believed also that the matter was then being transacted not for that Isaac alone, but that for his seed, which is Christ, the full truth of the sacrament was being kept in store. Thence, finally, he offered his only son rejoicing, because in him he was pondering not the destruction of his posterity, but the repairing of the world and the renewal of the whole creation, which has been restored through the resurrection of the Lord; and therefore the Lord says of him: “Abraham your father rejoiced to see my day; and he saw it and was glad.” In this way, then, the comparison made between the faith of Abraham and of those who believe in him who raised the Lord Jesus will be seen to be fitting; because what he believed would be, is believed by us to have been done. And at the same time this also is shown, which does not please the heretics: that God, in whom Abraham believed and who reckoned his faith for righteousness, is the very one who also raised the Lord Jesus from the dead; nor is any room left for understanding one God of the law and another the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. But let us inquire something else: since there are very many things which Christ is said to be (for he is called both Wisdom, and power, and righteousness, and word, and truth, and life), why the Apostle makes mention, in our faith, chiefly of his resurrection. The same Apostle says elsewhere that “God has raised us up together with Christ, and has made us sit together with him in the heavenly places.” This, then, is what he admonishes: If you believe that Christ rose from the dead, believe also that you yourselves have risen together with him; and if you believe that he sits at the right hand of the Father in the heavens, believe also that you yourselves are now placed not among earthly things, but among heavenly; and if you believe that you have died together with Christ, believe that you shall also live together with him; and if you believe that Christ died to sin and lives to God, you also be dead to sin, and live to God. And this is what he attests by apostolic authority when he says: “If you have risen with Christ, seek the things that are above, where Christ is, sitting at the right hand of God; savor the things that are above, not the things that are upon the earth” — because he who acts thus shows that he believes in him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead, and to such a one faith is truly reckoned for righteousness. For neither is it possible that righteousness should be reckoned to one having in himself something of unrighteousness, even if he believes in him who raised the Lord Jesus from the dead. For unrighteousness can have nothing in common with righteousness, just as neither light with darkness, nor life with death. So therefore also, to those who indeed believe Christ, and yet do not put off the old man with his unrighteous deeds, faith cannot be reckoned for righteousness. And in like manner we can say that, just as righteousness cannot be reckoned to the unrighteous, so neither can chastity be reckoned to the unchaste, nor equity to the iniquitous, nor liberality to the miser, nor piety to the impious, so long as he does not cast off the old garments of the vices and put on “the new man, who is created according to God, and is renewed in the knowledge of God after the image of him who created him.” — COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

Pelagius: We are meant to imitate Abraham’s example as if he were our father, just as we imitate the examples of the saints, by which they pleased the Lord. They were tempted so that they might know themselves and so that we might follow them. We shall benefit if we believe as completely that God has raised Christ from the dead as Abraham believed that his body, which was as good as dead, could be made alive in order to produce children. — PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

Romans 4:25

Ambrosiaster: Those who were baptized before Christ’s passion received only the remission of their sins.… But after the resurrection both those who were baptized before and those who were baptized after were all justified by the set form of faith in the Trinity, and they received the Holy Spirit, who is the sign of believers that they are children of God.… For by the Savior’s passion death is vanquished. Once it was dominant because of sin, but it does not dare to hang on to those who have been justified by God. — COMMENTARY ON PAUL’S EPISTLES

John Chrysostom: See how after mentioning the cause of His death, he makes the same cause likewise a demonstration of the resurrection. For why, he means, was He crucified? Not for any sin of His own. And this is plain from the Resurrection. For if He were a sinner, how should He have risen? But if He rose, it is quite plain that He was not a sinner. But if He was not a sinner, how came He to be crucified?-For others,-and if for others, then surely he rose again. Now to prevent your saying, How, when liable for so great sins, came we to be justified? he points out One that blotteth out all sins, that both from Abraham’s faith, whereby he was justified, and from the Saviour’s Passion, whereby we were freed from our sins, he might confirm what he had said. And after mentioning His Death, he speaks also of His Resurrection. For the purpose of His dying was not that He might hold us liable to punishment and in condemnation, but that He might do good unto us. For for this cause He both died and rose again, that He might make us righteous. — Homily on Romans IX

Origen of Alexandria: For this reason also in what follows he adds and says of the Lord Jesus: “Who was delivered up,” he says, “for our sins, and rose again for our justification” — that he may show that those things for which Christ was delivered up we too ought to abhor and cast away. For if we believe that he was delivered up for our sins, how is not every sin to be counted by us as foreign and hostile, for which our Redeemer is recorded to have been delivered up to death? For if there should again be for us any fellowship or friendship with sin, we show that we count the death of Christ Jesus as nothing, since we embrace and follow the very things which he overcame and conquered. And the Apostle, binding all this together as it were into the very body of sin, called it the garment of the old man, which he urges to be put off by those who believe in him who raised the Lord Jesus from the dead, so that, having cast away the garment of unrighteousness, they may put on the Lord Jesus, who is the true garment of righteousness, in order that faith may deservedly be reckoned for righteousness to those who believe. “He was therefore delivered up for our sins, and rose again for our justification.” For indeed, if we have risen with Christ, who is righteousness, and walk in newness of life, and live according to righteousness, Christ has risen for us unto our justification. But if we have not yet put off the old man with his deeds, but live in unrighteousness, I dare to say that Christ has not yet risen for us unto justification, nor has he been delivered up for our sins. For if I believe this, how can I love that for the sake of which he endured death? If I believe that he rose again for my justification, how can injustice be pleasing to me? Christ, therefore, justifies those alone who have taken up a new life after the example of his resurrection, and who cast off the old garments of injustice and iniquity as being the cause of death. — COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS

Pelagius: Christ wiped away our sins by his death, and, rising again in the same state as the one in which he died, he appeared to believers in order to confirm their righteousness. — PELAGIUS’S COMMENTARY ON ROMANS

Tertullian: The apostle also knows what kind of God he has ascribed to us, when he writes: “If God spared not His own Son, but gave Him up for us, how did He not with Him also give us all things? " You see how divine Wisdom has murdered even her own proper, first-born and only Son, who is certainly about to live, nay, to bring back the others also into life. I can say with the Wisdom of God; It is Christ who gave Himself up for our offences. Already has Wisdom butchered herself also. — Scorpiace

Theodoret of Cyrus: Christ underwent suffering for our sins in order to pay our debt and so that his resurrection might prefigure the general resurrection of us all. — INTERPRETATION OF THE LETTER TO THE ROMANS