Romans 4:1

What shall we say then? A common expression with Paul, connecting that which follows with the preceding passage (see also chs. 6:1; 7:7; 9:14, 30). If the plan of righteousness by faith excludes all boasting (eh. 3:27), and makes no distinction between Jew and Gentile (vs. 22, 23), what then shall we say about the case of Abraham? Surely, the Jews might assert, the father of the chosen people was accepted before God because of his great merit. Paul now proceeds to explain, on the authority of the OT Scriptures, that even Abraham was justified on the same basis on which justification is offered to the heathen. Moreover, Abraham enjoyed this experience before he was circumcised (eh. 4:10). Thus it could hardly be charged that Paul was advancing any strange new doctrine in maintaining that justification still comes by faith. And he could rightfully claim that he was keeping strictly within the spirit of the religion of the OT in teaching that the Gentile world, though uncircumcised, might also be justified by faith. The record of Abraham’s faith, in Gen. 15:6, provides an instance of righteousness “without the law” and yet “witnessed by the law” (Rom. 3:21).

Abraham our father. Textual evidence is divided (cf. p. 10) between this and the reading, “Abraham our forefather.” The Jews prided themselves highly on having Abraham as their progenitor, and an example drawn from his life and conduct would be especially forceful (see on Matt. 3:9; John 8:39, 40, 53).

As pertaining to the flesh. There has been some uncertainty as to whether this phrase should be connected with “hath found” or with “our father.” The former connection would read, “What shall we say that Abraham our father has found with respect to the flesh?” That is, Was Abraham justified by anything which pertained to the flesh? The other possible connection would read, “What shall we say that Abraham, our father according to the flesh, has found?” This would be referring to Abraham as forefather by natural descent. Either reading makes good sense in this context. Some see a third possible connection: “What, then, shall we say? That we have found Abraham [to be] our forefather [only] according to flesh?” (Lenski).

Hath found. Textual evidence may be cited (cf. p. 10) for the omission of this phrase. Whether the words are included or not, Paul’s purpose is clear. The general question, “What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?” (ch. 3:1) is being answered by a review of the experience of the great patriarch. In what did the undeniable superiority of Abraham really consist?