by Angus Harley

A brother recently wrote a post talking about how he read the ‘text-in-context’, and, because of this, he wanted to see what was going on ‘behind’ the text. The brother did not mean some kind of spiritualizing, allegorical, reading, but the likes of irony, some nuance, even humor. Things that don’t jump out from the words as such. A similar principle that does not automatically jump out from the text is Paul’s mindset or hermeneutic. It has to be deduced from the text. In Romans 4, there is a framework or hermeneutic he is operating within. It sharply contrasts the realm of the flesh as a dead-end, literally ending with spiritual death and physical death, to faith as the true mark of a son of Abraham. Oftentimes we do not see this contrast because we are concerned with justification by faith per se.

THE DEAD-END OF THE FLESH


Let’s begin with the flesh as a dead-end, that is, it ends in spiritual and physical death, according to Romans 4.

“According to the flesh”

V1 is most commonly understood to mean that Abraham was the father, according to the flesh, of those Jews who were Christians, and whom Paul was addressing. The NASB 1995 states, “What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, has found?” The Greek grammar does favor this reading. Moreover, Paul addresses Jews in Romans 2 and 7. 

In contrast to the common reading, there are some general considerations. Although v1’s syntax (sentence order in the Greek) does favor the NASB’s reading, it is not uncommon for Paul and other NT writers to put words and phrases at the end of a sentence, out of order, as it were, to emphasize their presence. The KJV opts for a neutral reading that can go either way, “What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found?” When Paul does address Jews in Romans, it is clear. Here in Romans 4:1 it is far from clear. We must not forget that Paul is writing to Jews and Gentiles, and in Romans 3-5, he is addressing both as one. In Romans 3, Jew and Gentiles are sinners; and, Jew and Gentile are saved by faith in Jesus Christ. Romans 5 teaches the same concepts, especially vv12ff.. Sandwiched in-between is Romans 4. 

There are, too, two alternative solutions to the text that contrast to the common reading. 

The first view notes how in Romans 4 Abraham is the father of Jews and Gentiles (see ahead). Building on this, it argues that Abraham is described as both Jew-like and Gentile-like. On the one hand, his faith preceded his circumcision (the Gentile, uncircumcised Abrahamic-mode), and the implication that he was later circumcised (the Jewish, circumcised Abrahamic-mode). Abraham in his flesh was the father of both Jews and Gentiles, both according to the flesh.

Even though this view is closer to Paul’s mind than the first, it makes the same error as the first: both views focus exclusively on Abraham in the flesh. It is clear, however, that human birth is not at all in Paul’s mind, in fact, quite the opposite, for he’s arguing against its virtue. Moreover, Abraham was, indeed, a fleshly father to Gentiles, yet it is utterly impossible that he was the fleshly progenitor of all Gentiles of the faith. 

It is a stronger contextual argument that “according to the flesh” does not pertain to Abraham as a Jewish father, nor as a Gentile father of the flesh, but to Abraham as a spiritual father of both Jew and Gentile. Abraham’s fleshly status (circumcised or uncircumcised) is being dispensed with, in effect, in the light of his non-fleshly faith. Romans 4:11 explicitly calls Abraham the “father of all of they who believe”, Jews and Gentiles of faith; v12 refers to Abraham as the “father” of both the circumcision and uncircumcision; Abraham is the “father of many nations”, “our father” who is in the presence of God (v17); and, the “father of many nations” (v18). V1 is, in other words, anticipating the same corporate and universal father of faith spoken of in v17, “our father”. Romans 4 goes on to press this contrast between the flesh and faith. It is of this spiritual father that Paul writes that Abraham discovered via the flesh-mode that no one-Jew or Gentile- can earn the righteousness that God imputes. Abraham understood that the flesh was a dead-end, exposing the sinful corruption of the soul and its shadow of death. That was Paul’s point in v1 in using “according to the flesh”.

Abraham’s fleshly failure in producing an heir

Abraham, “our father”, discovered that the flesh could not merit divine righteousness. Two times he came to a dead-end as to a fleshly heir. At first, his “heir” was merely a fleshly relative (Gen.15:2). His wife then conspired to produce an heir according to the flesh (Gen.16). Galatians 4:23 states, “But the son by the bondwoman was born according to the flesh, and the son by the free woman through the promise.” Both fleshly heirs resulted in a dead-end.

Ungodly Abraham

For all the greatness of Abraham the father in his person, his flesh produced one result: the exposure of godlessness in his life. Nonetheless, faith in God meant that God imputed righteousness to him, for God justifies those ungodly who believe in his promise:

“2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3 For what does the Scripture say? “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness.” 4 Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due. 5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness….”

David the ungodly

This lesson is then thoroughly underscored in the example of David, the greatest Jewish king, the fleshly ‘father’ of the Christ (Rom.1:3). As to his fleshly existence, he was the ‘anointed one’ reigning in the great city of Jerusalem. He was the epitome of the OT, fleshly, Jew. He had everything going for him as to this world and its fleshly life. Yet, like Abraham before him, his fleshly existence produced one fruit: he was ungodly and in need of the forgiveness of God:

“6 just as David also speaks of the blessing on the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:

7 “Blessed are those whose lawless deeds have been forgiven,
And whose sins have been covered.

8 “Blessed is the man whose sin the Lord will not take into account.” “


Circumcision irrelevant

Having established Abraham’s fleshly failure, and king David’s, too- the two great ‘Messianic fathers’  (Matt.1:1)- Paul has to, then, underscore that circumcision had no value:

“9 Is this blessing then on the circumcised, or on the uncircumcised also? For we say, “Faith was credited to Abraham as righteousness.” 10 How then was it credited? While he was circumcised, or uncircumcised? Not while circumcised, but while uncircumcised; 11 and he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while uncircumcised, so that he might be the father of all who believe without being circumcised, that righteousness might be credited to them, 12 and the father of circumcision to those who not only are of the circumcision, but who also follow in the steps of the faith of our father Abraham which he had while uncircumcised.”

Circumcision, to state the obvious, was in the flesh, fleshly. Its significance for the Jews was that fleshly circumcision was required as a member of the Abrahamic community and covenant. Genesis 17:13-14 states:

“13 A servant who is born in your house or who is bought with your money shall surely be circumcised; thus shall My covenant be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant. 14 But an uncircumcised male who is not circumcised in the flesh of his foreskin, that person shall be cut off from his people; he has broken My covenant.” “

Notice how the Abrahamic covenant is stated to be “in your flesh for an everlasting covenant”. The Jews interpreted this to mean that God’s divine righteousness, his divine approval, was set upon this covenant people who followed circumcision in the flesh. Circumcision was a religious act, or as Paul would call it, a “work”, that was essential to righteousness- so the Jews thought. 

Uncircumcision irrelevant

It is not merely circumcision that was irrelevant because it was of the flesh, but uncircumcision, too. Even though Abraham was not circumcised, but uncircumcised, when God approved of him, it was equally clear that Abraham’s faith did not require uncircumcision to operate. David himself was a Jew and circumcised, yet he was a man of faith. It mattered not if one were Jew or Gentile, circumcised or uncircumcised, for either state made zero contribution to the imputation of God’s righteousness through faith. Paul writes elsewhere, “For neither is circumcision anything, nor uncircumcision, but a new creation” (Gal.6:15).

The flesh and the Law fail

Paul writes in Romans 4:13-15:


“13 For the promise to Abraham or to his descendants that he would be heir of the world was not through the Law, but through the righteousness of faith. 14 For if those who are of the Law are heirs, faith is made void and the promise is nullified; 15 for the Law brings about wrath, but where there is no law, there also is no violation.”

Paul had previously demonstrated that the Law of Moses served one end: to expose sin in the Jews (Rom.2:1-3:20). This is a point he drives home in Romans 5:12ff. and Romans 7 and 8. The book of Galatians is, in particular, an apologetic for the true Gospel over against a fake, Law-based, gospel. 

We may put this truth in another fashion: the Law exposed the flesh in its sinfulness (Rom.3:20; 7:5, 14, 25). Righteousness could not be according to the Law, therefore, for the Law and the flesh were interwoven, and produced only death (1 Cor.15:56).

The logic of Paul’s argument is that the Law, even though an exclusively Jewish blessing and instrument, was ‘the’ medium for exposing the Jews in sin, but, more profoundly, the Law exposed ‘the flesh’ in sin (Rom.3:20; 7:5, 14, 25). As such, the Law in exposing sin in the flesh became a de facto, yet indirect,witness against the Gentile, for they were in the flesh, just like Abraham ‘the uncircumcised’. Righteousness could not be according to the Law, therefore, for the Law and the flesh were interwoven, and both produced only death (1 Cor.15:56).

Human generation impotent

Just look at the OT’s record of genealogies, and you will understand Israel’s preoccupation with a ‘pure’ birth. Jesus and Nicodemus sparred over this very issue, as Nicodemus was dialed into the typically Jewish mentality of fleshly (Jewish) birth being the path to righteousness and life. Jesus countered this fleshly notion with the heavenly birth from the Spirit above (John 3). John 1:12-13 is a grenade going off in the Jewish fleshly compound, “12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, 13who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.”

In the case of Abraham, there was also the insuperable fleshly difficulty of Abraham’s and Sarah’s effectively dead bodies, “…he contemplated his own body, now as good as dead since he was about a hundred years old, and the deadness of Sarah’s womb” (Rom.4:19). It is easy to forget that Abraham waited years by this point, for we focus upon the miracle itself. One is reminded of Jesus deliberately delaying going to Nicodemus’ tomb, so that he would be well and truly established as dead. So, in the divine wisdom, God left Abraham’s heir until the very last second, so to speak, so that no man would think that the flesh contributed to this miraculous event.


The death of Jesus in the flesh

The flesh leads to one terminus: death. Even though Jesus was without sin and did not come in sinful flesh (Rom.8:3; 2 Cor.5:21), he did enter into the realm of flesh, in the flesh, and in the likeness of sinful flesh. Even for the Seed of David, the flesh led to one end: his death (Rom.1:3). Similarly, as the Seed of Abraham, his death in the flesh was inevitable because he had to die because of our transgressions in the flesh (Rom.4:25). 

In all these things, we see that the flesh invariably results in a ‘dead’-end, even in regard to Christ himself. Having concluded this, there are some who take issue with my view, who consider it too strong a division between the flesh and God’s redemptive plan in Christ Jesus.

ANSWERING AN OBJECTION


It is sometimes argued that the realm of the flesh is neutral, and spills over into a negative (sin and death) mode, and at other times it is positive (as in Jesus coming in the flesh to redeem us, or Paul living in the flesh). The flesh is not always a dead-end, therefore.

I both disagree and agree with the above counter-argument. There are times when “flesh” (Gk, sarx) is used in a neutral or positive fashion. However, when used of Christ and of man’s spiritual condition, it invariably bears a sinister force, even when used to a positive, or redemptive, end by God. My view argued that the flesh led inevitably to death. I did not say that God did not use the flesh to his own positive ends. Let’s take another look at the same problem.

Why did Jesus come in the likeness of sinful flesh, in the flesh? To die on the cross to pay the penalty for our transgressions (Rom.4:25; Gal.3:10-14; 4:1-7). He came “under the Law”, in other words, to bear its curse on sinful men, sinners in the flesh. As the Seed of David, Jesus went to the cross to die (Rom.1:3-4). Recall David’s own conception and birth: in iniquity and in sin (Psa.51). Certainly, Jesus was sinless in conception, birth, and life, and David was sinful in all these areas. Yet, David is implying that he, as the king of the Jews, was inevitably born into the realm of the flesh and sin. His ‘sons’ would come into the same realm. Only one thing could result! Abraham’s physical seed and heirs (Isaac and Jacob) were spiritually sinful men and eventually died, just as Abraham- failures as to the flesh. For how could Abraham as to the flesh produce something that was spiritually ‘righteous’ or that could defy death? It required a Son from above, without sin, yet born of a woman, born under the Law, issuing from both Abraham and David, to destroy the powers of sin, death, the Law, and the flesh.

Let us recall the wisdom of God: it takes the weapons of the enemy, using their full force and fury against God, and turns these weapons on themselves through his Son. God takes the fully charged ‘negative’ of the Law’s curse and uses it to bring about the positive of redemption by Jesus’ death on the cross. Similarly, God takes the ‘deathly’ flesh of David and of Abraham and uses it to bring forth the true Seed from above. In particular, death became the ‘springboard’ for life, for God raised Jesus from the dead. In this light, death, Law, flesh, and sin, never in themselves change, never stop being enemies of the Gospel, but God has already, in his Son, destroyed their combined power by his Son absorbing all of their enmity, and then by vindicating him as true Son in his resurrection unto new-creation life (Rom.1:3-4; 1 Cor.15:54-57). 

TRUE SONSHIP

Romans 4 is usually read and mined for its teaching on justification by faith, not by works. Fair enough! Yet, the passage itself has another overtly positive concern, namely, true sons of Abraham and true sons of David are identified by their faith in God’s promise of the Christ. 

Faith sonship

The flesh dominates human living. What to do? Enter faith. Not the mere act of faith, mind you, but faith understood as belief in the promises of God. The human flesh conjures up a sonship based on the flesh alone. Faith takes hold of heavenly sonship that is entirely focused on a new world founded upon the resurrection of Jesus Christ, the Lord. He has defeated death and its allies. Faith grasps the Messianic victory as the fulfillment of the promise. 

Abraham’s fatherhood is spiritual, but his victory is over the flesh, is it not? His sons are according to faith, not according to the flesh; even so, they are taken from the fleshly world of Jew and Gentile. Jews and Gentiles of faith constitute a new world, thereby. They do not prolong the old world and its fleshly control and order; for, the new world is driven by resurrection power and accessed by faith alone. One is not special in God’s eyes due to being a Jew, or because of being a Gentile. Faith is alone what marks out the true son of Abraham. We may put it this way: sinners in the flesh are saved, and they are Jew and Gentile, but they are not saved to be sinners in the flesh, or to be Jew and Gentile. They are saved to be sons of Abraham by faith, followers of the anti-flesh faith of Abraham and David, believers in the promise of salvation fulfilled in the crucified and risen Lord, Jesus Christ.

Messianic sonship

As already stated, faith is not a mere act in Romans 4. It is valued because of its anti-flesh nature and due to what it connects to: the promise of the Messiah. Not a fleshly ‘Jewish’ Messiah only. For this Messiah, as to his Jewishness and flesh, came under the Law to go to the cross. All forms of fleshliness, especially that of the Jews, is a spiritual and physical dead-end.  Our sonship is due to faith in this Christ: the one who conquered the flesh and rose unto resurrection life. His resurrection is life from another realm and world. He was crucified Son in this world, but now is risen Son and Lord in the next. Faith not only understands these things, but walks by them. God’s justification is given through faith in that Son. Those who do believe are true, spiritual, heirs of Abraham that walk by faith under the eternal safety of this justification’s umbrella, not according to the flesh, nor under the Law.