The apostle now proceeds to illustrate the principles he has just now been stating at the end of chapter three.

Structure of the chapter

6(d)	4:1-5	The boasting of the natural man excluded
6(e)	4:6-8	The blessedness of the forgiven man explained
6(f)	4:9-12	The blessing for any man ensured
6(g)	4:13-22	The behaviour of the believing man examined
6(h)	4:23-25	The belief in the Risen Man expected

Special note on Abraham
It might be helpful, (since the apostle is going to use the experience of Abraham to illustrate his case), to list the events in Abraham’s life that are singled out for mention by New Testament writers.

1. The God of glory appears to Abram in Ur, Acts 7:2, and he responds in faith, Hebrews 11:8.

2. He reaches Canaan and lives there in faith, Genesis 12:5, Hebrews 11:9.

3. God promises him a son, and Abraham believes God, Genesis 15:5,6; Romans 4:3, Galatians 3:6.

4. Abraham listens to Sarah’s suggestion, and fathers a son, Ishmael, by Hagar, Genesis 16:2,15.

5. Thirteen silent years pass, Genesis 16:16; 17:1.

6. God promises Abraham that he will be the father of many nations, Genesis 17:4. His name is changed from Abram, meaning “exalted father” to Abraham, “father of a multitude”, in remembrance of this promise, Genesis 17:5, Romans 4:17.

7. Abraham and Sarah are both strengthened in faith, and despite their old age Isaac is born, Romans 4:19-21, Hebrews 11:11.

8. Abraham offers Isaac on Moriah, as an act of faith, Hebrews 11:17; obedience, Genesis 22:18; and righteousness, James 2:21-24.

Special note on circumcision
Considered literally and physically, circumcision was an operation performed on male children. God required this to be done on the eighth day of their lives in normal circumstances, for He, as Creator, had so made us that it is on that day we are least likely to bleed to death.

This operation is said to have some medical advantages, but the main point about circumcision is its spiritual significance. Because it was a procedure where the flesh was cut round, (hence the “circum”), and then cut off, (hence the “cision”), it became a sign of being cut off from others and separated off or sanctified to God. We may think of it in the following ways, as the doctrine develops in the Scriptures:

1. Circumcision and Abraham
After he had believed God and been reckoned righteous as a result, Abraham was commanded by God to be circumcised, even though he was an old man. He obeyed God, and circumcision became for him a seal or confirmation of the faith he already had, Romans 4:11.

2. Circumcision and Ishmael
At the same time, God required Abraham to circumcise his son Ishmael, so that he had a mark on his body signifying that God’s covenant was with Abraham, Genesis 17:26.

3. Circumcision and Isaac
When Isaac was born Abraham circumcised him on the eighth day, and he was thereby marked out as Abraham’s true seed, Genesis 21:4.

4. Circumcision and Moses
The rite of circumcision seems to have lapsed after Israel went into Egypt, for when Moses was returning from the desert of Midian it was found that his two sons were not circumcised. The account is in Exodus 4:18-20; 24-26.

When the law was given at Sinai, circumcision was required, as Leviticus 12:3 informs us. This is why the Lord Jesus, when referring to circumcision, said “Moses therefore gave unto you circumcision; (not because it is of Moses, but of the fathers:) and ye on the sabbath day circumcise a man. If a man on the sabbath day receive circumcision, that the law of Moses should not be broken; are ye angry at me, because I have made a man every whit whole on the sabbath day?” John 7:22,23. His point was that if a boy was born on a Friday, they would have no problem in circumcising him on the sabbath day, for that was eight days after he was born. Why then should they complain if He healed a man on the sabbath?

When a Hebrew parent circumcised a male child, there was a physical aspect, and a moral one. The physical aspect was that he now bore the mark of an Israelite on him. He was now of The Circumcision, the nation of Israel. But the moral side was that he was now committed to keeping the law of Moses. So important were these two aspects, that God sanctioned the work of circumcising on the day of rest, if the child had been born eight days before. After all, He who controls the timing of everything, even the birth of children, did not ordain that no Hebrew son should be born on a Friday.

Now no one was angry at a Hebrew parent who did this. Nor did they seek to kill him. Rather, they would applaud that he had kept the law. All this being the case, and they felt free to “break” the sabbath in this God-appointed way, then surely the Lord Jesus should not be persecuted for making a man entirely whole, and not merely ceremonially whole, on the sabbath.

For the healing of the impotent man did make him entirely whole. He was healed as to the body, so that he was able to rise at Christ’s bidding. He was healed as to the soul, for the misery of the last thirty-eight years was for ever gone, symbolised by his taking up his bed, for he would not need it again. And he was healed as to the spirit, for as he walked at Christ’s command, he went straight into the temple to praise God. Thereafter the moral implications of Christ’s words to him would be uppermost in his mind, “sin no more, lest a worse thing come upon thee”.

The Jews should ask themselves, which was better, to be miserable and powerless at the Pool of Bethesda, or to be in the temple with renewed body and spiritual joy? The law required that Israel “Remember the sabbath day, to keep it holy.” Exodus 20:8. But that holiness was not merely a negative idea, keeping the day as a special one, different to the rest of the week. It had its very important positive side, to set the day apart for spiritual purposes. And this Christ had done. He had enabled a man to sanctify the sabbath day in a way he could not have done all the while he was impotent.

So we could summarise the argument as follows: if the people who were angry with Christ to the extent of wishing to kill Him, were free to do a lesser thing on the sabbath in order to obey God’s law, surely He could do the greater thing. They did the lesser thing at God’s commandment, He acted likewise at the command of God His Father.

As a result of this connection between the law of Moses and circumcision, it became a sign of being under the law, so that the nation of Israel were the Circumcised, and the Gentiles all around were the Uncircumcised, even if the latter were in fact physically circumcised out of national custom. We have already seen these distinctions in Romans 2:24-29.

5. Circumcision and Joshua
We learn from Joshua 5:2-9 that those who had died under the judgment of God during the wilderness journey had not circumcised their male children. This was not surprising, since those who fell in the wilderness were not believers, Hebrews 3:17,18. The crossing of the Jordan represents a new beginning for Israel, so God commanded that the children be circumcised so that the “reproach of Egypt”, should be “rolled away” from them, Joshua 5:9. This introduces a third aspect of circumcision, for just as a portion of flesh was rolled away from the child, so association with Egypt was rolled away also, since this had not been done in the wilderness. Those who refused the land were also those who longed to return to Egypt. It is no surprise then that an operation that signified separation from Egypt did not appeal to them, and they allowed it to lapse. Centuries before, their ancestors had sold Joseph into Egypt, and eventually the rest of Jacob’s family followed. So they left Canaan and went to live in Egypt. Now whilst this was a fulfilment of prophecy, Genesis 15:13, nonetheless it was failure, and so it seems that this was called the reproach of Egypt, meaning the reproach and shame that came to them for going into Egypt. When they crossed the Jordan with Joshua, this was reversed, and their circumcision signified it.

6. Circumcision and Christ personally
When He was eight days old, Joseph and Mary had Christ circumcised, Luke 2:21, for He had come into the nation of Israel under the law. As the apostle Paul puts it, “But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law”, Galatians 4:4. He was thereby committed to keeping God’s law, which He did perfectly. Unlike other Jews, however, He was not under the law to force Him to obey God. Rather, He obeyed God and thereby kept the law.

7. Circumcision and Christ doctrinally
The apostle Paul wrote to the Colossian believers to warn them of the evil influences in the world around them which would seek to harm them. He tells them that they are “circumcised with the circumcision made without hands”, Colossians 2:11. Not only are believers complete in Christ, verse 10, but they are separated unto Him from the sphere where error flourishes. Christ cannot link sinners with Himself, so He must cut them off from their links with Adam so as to join them to Himself. This He did at the cross, where He dealt with all that Adam represented. This is the circumcision made without hands, for it is not physical, but moral and spiritual. The cross has cut off believers from the world, including the philosophy-world that was attacking the Colossians.

When God made a covenant with Abraham, He made physical circumcision the sign of that covenant. Abraham was now special to Himself, and had the mark on his body to prove it. Such a rite is no longer relevant, so that the apostle described physical circumcision as “concision”, a cutting along and a maiming, Philippians 3:2, whereas believers are now the true circumcision, properly cut off by God from their links with Adam’s world. This means they are cut off from the sphere where heretics operate, for such men are of the world, being unbelievers, and as such have no contact with the things of God.

When he is dealing with the case of the Jew in his epistle to the Romans, the apostle shows that true circumcision is a heart matter, “For he is not a Jew, which is one outwardly; neither is that circumcision, which is outward in the flesh: but he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men but of God.” Romans 2:28,29. This is why Stephen was justified in calling the Jews who were about to stone him, “uncircumcised in heart and ears”, Acts 7:51.

True circumcision is now “putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ”, Colossians 2:11, and this happens at conversion. What is cut off is the body as the vehicle by which sins of the flesh are conceived and committed, the flesh being the sinful self, which is resident in the body. Paul calls the body “the body of sin” in Romans 6:6. He is there concerned with the sin-principle within, whereas here it is the sin-practice that is in view; nonetheless the idea is that the body is the base of operations from which sins proceed. As far as God is concerned, that body has been cut off so that it may be brought over into resurrection conditions to be used for God. That which is called “the body of sin” in Romans 6:6 can be presented to God in Romans 12:1, for God has wrought upon it to His glory.

6(d)   4:1-5
The boasting of the natural man excluded

4:1
What shall we say then that Abraham our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found?

What shall we say then that Abraham, our father, as pertaining to the flesh, hath found? Abraham’s original name was Abram, meaning “exalted father.” God changed this to Abraham, meaning “father of a multitude” after He had promised to make him the father of many nations. The teaching of the chapter revolves around various aspects of the fatherhood of Abraham.
The literal order of the words is, “Abraham our father has found according to the flesh”. In other words, we should connect “according to the flesh” with “found”, and not with “father”. It is not the natural fatherhood of Abraham that is in view, because Gentile Christians do not have him as their natural father. The question on the mind of the apostle is what discovery did Abraham make as a natural man?

4:2
For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not before God.

For if Abraham were justified by works, he hath whereof to glory- if, as a natural man, Abraham had been able to earn justification, then he would have had reason to glory or boast in his achievement.
But not before God- such a theoretical justification would not be valid before God, for, as the apostle goes on to show, God’s dealings with Abraham were not on that basis.

4:3
For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.

For what saith the scripture? Paul had stated in 3:21 that the righteousness of God was witnessed by the law and the prophets. He had appealed to the prophet Habakkuk in 1:17, and now he appeals to the law, (meaning, in this context, the writings of Moses), by quoting Genesis 15:6. Note the present tense of “saith,” for the apostle believes in the living, up-to-date voice of the scriptures, being God’s word, which “liveth and abideth for ever”, 1 Peter 1:23.
Abraham believed God- this is a reference to Genesis 15:6, after Abraham had declared that he was an old man who was soon to die childless. In response God showed him the multitude of the stars in the sky, and promised “So shall thy seed be”. Abram accepted what God said, even though it was naturally impossible for him and Sarah his wife to have a son. This is the essence of faith, the acceptance of God’s word without reserve, even though it goes beyond natural reasoning. The apostle deliberately uses an incident in the life of Abraham which does not involve him in any activity, such as moving from Ur in faith, Hebrews 11:8, or building an altar, Genesis 12:7.
Note that the apostle refers to the expression found in Genesis 15:6, “believed in the Lord”, and quotes it as “believed God”. To believe in the Lord is to have trust and confidence in the Lord as the one who keeps His promises. This was appropriate in Abraham’s situation, since God had just given Him a promise. This is not the context in Romans 4, where the apostle is dealing with the imputation of righteousness. To believe God is to accept that what He says is true, and the logical outcome of this is to believe Him. The inspired apostle is bringing out different aspects of the truth.
And it was counted unto him for righteousness- God was prepared to count or reckon Abraham to be a righteous man on the basis of his faith. It was not that Abraham was now perfect, but rather that God was prepared to think of him as a righteous man. The basis on which God did this was the then-future work of the Lord Jesus at Calvary, as the apostle has explained in 3:25. He was counted righteous because God anticipated Calvary.

4:4
Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt.

Now to him that worketh- the apostle gives an everyday illustration to show the difference between justification (being reckoned righteous) by works, and by grace. He had said in 3:24 that justification is by God’s grace, and now he shows this by using a practical example.
Is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt- during the working week the workman puts his employer under obligation, and he discharges that obligation by paying the appropriate wages (reward). God cannot be placed under obligation by any of His creatures however, so any benefit He gives must be on the basis of grace, that is, His free favour. To try to earn justification by works is pointless, since if God were to bless on that basis it would be at the expense of His own honour as the God of grace. Needless to say, God will never dishonour Himself in this or any other way.

4:5
But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness.

But to him that worketh not- the “but” introduces the alternative to working for righteousness. “Worketh not” involves a man renouncing all idea of being able to earn salvation by works.
But believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly- the opposite of working is resting, and this is what faith does as it relies on the promises of the God who blesses in grace. The ungodly are the impious, those who act contrary to God. We might be surprised that the apostle uses this strong word here, but he is preparing the way for the next example, that of David, in whose case it was a question of forgiveness for hideous sins. When David confessed those sins in Psalm 51 he spoke of having sinned against God, which is the essence of impiety. By using this severe word, the apostle assures us that the grace of God is not limited at all, for even daring rebels may be justified.
His faith is counted for righteousness- even an ungodly, (albeit repentant), man’s faith is valid, and finds a response from God, since the point about faith is in whom it rests. Of course, the ungodliness goes when he believes.

6(e)   4:6-8
The blessedness of the forgiven man described

4:6
Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man, unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works,

Even as David also describeth the blessedness of the man- to be reckoned righteous is a great blessing, but Abraham does not describe it, so the apostle brings in David to do it for him. With Abraham it was a question of God imputing righteousness when he believed. In the case of David it was God not imputing sin when he repented.
David sinned badly in the matter of Bathsheba, Uriah’s wife, and 2 Samuel 11 records the sorry incident. Sadly, however, David remained silent, refusing to confess his sin, but at last he was brought to the point of acknowledging his sin, and confessing his transgressions unto the Lord. Then he began to know the blessedness of sins forgiven, and wrote Psalm 32 and Psalm 51 to describe that blessedness.
Note that although David’s sin was personal to him, he speaks of “the man”; in other words, this forgiveness is not limited to David, but is available to all who repent. Perhaps there is also an allusion to Nathan’s accusation of David using the words “Thou art the man”, 2 Samuel 12:7. The man who is convicted by the word of God and repents, is the same man who is forgiven.
Unto whom God imputeth righteousness without works- after he had repented, David wrote, “For thou desirest not sacrifice; else would I give it: thou delightest not in burnt offering. The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and a contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise.” Psalm 51:16,17. David shows deep insight into the ways of God, and realises that God looks for a broken spirit on the part of sinners, not their so-called good works. Thus David was forgiven by God apart from the work of bringing a sacrifice.

4:7
Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.

Saying, Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered- in Psalm 32:1, quoted here, the word blessed is in the plural, signifying most blessed. This contains the idea of being spiritually prosperous. Instead of the misery of unconfessed sins, David now experiences the bliss of sins forgiven.
Iniquities are lawless acts, and David had been guilty of breaking the sixth commandment of the law by having Uriah slain; the seventh by taking Bathsheba whilst her husband was still alive; the eighth commandment by stealing another’s wife; the ninth commandment by deceiving Uriah into thinking he was in favour with the king; and the tenth commandment by coveting his neighbour’s wife at the outset.
Not only are iniquities or lawless acts forgiven by the One against whom they were committed, but the sins are covered, indicating that they were no longer under the eye of God. If God covers sins, they will never be uncovered. The lawlessness of David was in marked contrast to the concern of Uriah for the welfare of the ark, which contained the tables of the law, 2 Samuel 11:11.

4:8
Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.

Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin- not only was David forgiven, but by the grace of God he was still reckoned to be a righteous man. His fall, although extremely regrettable and dishonourable, had not altered his standing before God. So Abraham illustrates the principle of the imputation of righteousness, whereas David illustrates the principle of the non-imputation of sin, whether past sins, or sins in the future, (note the “will”). The fact that both Abraham and David were believers before these events took place does not alter the principle.

6(f)   4:9-12
The blessing for any man ensured

4:9
Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness.

Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only? Does the use of David, a circumcised Jew, as an illustration, mean that the blessedness of having one’s sins forgiven is only available to Jews?
Or upon the uncircumcision also? Can Gentiles know this forgiveness?
For we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness- the apostle reverts to Abraham, his principal example in this passage, and restates the substance of verse 5, after which he had referred to David. He needs to go back to considering Abraham because of the matter of circumcision, which did not come up with David.

4:10
How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision.

How was it then reckoned? When he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? This is the critical question. At what point in his career did Abraham believe God, and was reckoned righteous?
Not in circumcision- the apostle puts this first so that his denial might be unmistakeable. Abraham was justified by faith before he was circumcised.
But in uncircumcision- which means that those who are not circumcised, (that is, are Gentiles), may come into blessing as Abraham did. The apostle comments on this by writing, “Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us: for it is written, Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree: That the blessing of Abraham might come on the Gentiles through Jesus Christ; that we might receive the promise of the Spirit through faith.” Galatians 3:14. The personal blessing granted to Abraham was the gift of a son. The blessing that Gentiles receive when they believe is the gift of the Spirit, who guarantees all other spiritual blessings.

4:11
And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:

And he received the sign of circumcision- that is, the sign consisting of circumcision.
A seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised- the rite of circumcision was required by God as a sign that Abraham was in covenant relationship with God. But he only had this covenant relationship because he was a believer. So the circumcision became a seal or confirmation of the reality of his faith. As far as Abraham’s physical descendants were concerned, circumcision was simply a sign that they were of Abraham’s line; it said nothing about whether they had a personal relationship to God.
That he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also- Abraham was not the first man to exercise faith, but he is specially taken up by God as an example to those who believe. In this way his characteristics have been passed on, and in this sense he is their father, even though they are neither descended naturally from him, nor circumcised. Of course the apostle, by saying “all them that believe, though they be not circumcised” does not imply that all those who believe were formerly uncircumcised. He is emphasising that Abraham is even the father of those who were not circumcised before.

4:12
And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumcised.

And the father of circumcision- not only is Abraham an example of faith, but he also demonstrates the principle of separation, the idea behind circumcision, a cutting off from the things of man to be involved in the things of God. The family of faith looks up to Abraham as a role-model.
To them who are not of the circumcision only- he is this example to all who believe, whether they were physically circumcised before, or not.
But who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumcised- believing Jews and Gentiles may find in Abraham one to follow, as he marks out the pathway of faith and separation.

6(c)   4:13-22
The behaviour of the believing man examined

The apostle has asked “Is He the God of the Jews only? Is He not also of the Gentiles?” and had answered his own question in 4:1-12, by the use of two Old Testament worthies, Abraham and David. Now he highlights the character of the God of Abraham and David, by further references to the life of Abraham.

4:13
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.

For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world- in Genesis 15, the passage the apostle has referred to, God promised Abraham the land of Canaan. But now the idea is extended to include the whole earth. In the final sense the seed of Abraham is Christ, Galatians 3:16,17, and He will inherit the earth, Psalm 2:8; Psalm 72:8.

When God made a covenant with Abraham, Abraham was asleep, so did not pass between the pieces of the covenant victim. But a burning lamp did, and Isaiah looks on to the time when Israel shall be restored to God, and at that time the salvation of Jerusalem shall be “as a lamp that burneth”, Isaiah 62:1. The word used for salvation there is “yeshuah”, the equivalent of the New Testament name Jesus. We can see why the apostle Paul wrote that the covenant was “confirmed…in Christ”, for He was the one who passed through the pieces that night, whilst Abraham was asleep. Abraham’s link with Christ will ensure that he and his seed, will inherit the world, for Christ will inherit the world. Note that the promise is not said by Paul to be to inherit the land of Israel, for that is reserved only for the spiritual seed of Abraham who are descended from him physically.
Was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith- God gave promises to Abraham because, having believed God, he was now righteous by faith. As the apostle points out in Galatians 3:17, the promise to Abraham was four hundred and thirty years before the law was given.

4:14
For if they which are of the law be heirs, faith is made void, and the promise made of none effect:

For if they which are of the law be heirs- if the inheritance is on the basis of merit, then all is lost, because as soon as we seek to gain merit by works, the law confronts us as those who are transgressors unfit to inherit.

Faith is made void- if we introduce works, faith is robbed of its relevance, and is virtually cancelled, for works implies dependence on self, whereas faith implies dependence on God.

And the promise made of no effect- if no-one inherits, (either because they opt for law-works but cannot do them perfectly, or reject faith), the promise has not achieved its purpose.

4:15
Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression.

Because the law worketh wrath- far from enabling man to inherit, the law exposes man’s failure, which merits Divine wrath. The reason for this is next given.
For where no law is, there is no transgression- the law shows up man’s transgressions, not his merit. Only in the absence of law is there absence of transgression, which in turn means absence of wrath. But since the Jew has the law on tables of stone, and the Gentile has the law written in his heart, then both are exposed to wrath as transgressors, being unable to keep the law.

4:16
Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end 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,

Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace- the line of thought regarding the promise resumes from verse 13 after the explanation of verses 14 and 15. God’s promise that Abraham and his seed would inherit the world was on the basis of grace (favour shown), not works (merit demanded).
To the end the promise might be sure to all the seed- because the promise is by grace, not law, it is sure to all those who believe. The spiritual seed of Abraham is considered as being of two origins, as is next said, but to both classes the promise is certain.
Not to that only which is of the law- meaning those believers who were formerly Jews. He is not saying that the promise originates from the law, but that some of the people who make up the seed originate from a nation under the law.
But to that also which is of the faith of Abraham- meaning Christians who were formerly Gentiles. As previously explained, this faith of Abraham’s was exercised when he was not circumcised, and therefore no different to a Gentile. The apostle is not speaking of two groups of people, Jews under law and Gentiles under faith, because that would contradict his former statement that those under law do not inherit, verse 13.
Who is the father of us all- that is, of all who are believers. Whether they were Jews or Gentiles formerly is not relevant in this connection.

4:17
(As it is written, 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 be not as though they were.

(As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations)- the promise here mentioned was given to Abraham in Genesis 17:5, after which God commanded him to be circumcised as a token of the covenant He had made with him. Paul no doubt chooses this promise because of its connection with circumcision, and also because it implies that Abraham would have a son, or else he could not be the father of many nations. So that is the initial meaning of the promise. But Paul also sees in this promise the fact that people from many nations will call Abraham their father in the faith. Abraham’s original name of Abram, “exalted father”, was changed by God to Abraham, meaning “father of a multitude”. It is Abraham’s reaction to the promise of a son that is developed in the next verses.
Before him whom he believed- in Genesis 17:1 God commanded Abraham to walk before Him and be perfect, which suggests that he had not walked before God wholeheartedly (perfectly) after Ishmael was born. It is only as he walks before God in faith that he is an example.
Even God, who quickeneth the dead- Abraham is now acting in the light of the fact that God is able to quicken his body, and that of Sarah, so that they may have a child. See Hebrews 11:12, where he is described as “him as good as dead.” Perhaps it was because of this that Abraham, in a later incident, believed God could raise Isaac from the dead if he offered him as a sacrifice, Hebrews 11:17-19.
And calleth those things that be not, as though they were- so sure is the birth of a son to Abraham that he can be called or named by God before his conception, Genesis 17:19.

4:18
Who against hope believed in hope, that he might become the father of many nations, according to that which was spoken, So shall thy seed be.

Who against hope- when all natural hopes of having a child were gone, and when natural reason said the situation was hopeless.
Believed in hope, that he might become the father of many nations- his faith in God was exercised on the sure basis of the hope God’s promise gave him. Hope is not the object of his faith, but rather, God’s promise gave him a sure hope, and he believed on that basis.
According to that which was spoken, So shall thy seed be- his faith as he believed in God’s promise of a son, can be expressed in terms of his initial faith in Genesis 15:6, so the one exercise of faith was according to the other. His intervening lapse of faith is over.

4:19
And being not weak in faith, he considered not his own body now dead, when he was about an hundred years old, neither yet the deadness of Sarah’s womb:

And being not weak in faith- as temporarily he seems to have been when he fathered a child by Hagar.
He considered not his own body now dead, when he was about a hundred years old, neither yet the deadness of Sarah’s womb- before this he seems to have considered these obstacles to be insurmountable, for when he was told that he would have a son, “he laughed, and said in his heart, Shall a child be born unto him that is an hundred years old? And shall Sarah, that is ninety years old, bear? Genesis 17:17, but now he thinks these doubts not worth taking into consideration.

4:20
He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God;

He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief- he did not doubt God’s word, implying he did before, when he laughed, Genesis 17:17. Compare also Sarah’s reaction, Genesis 18:12,13, then her return to wholehearted faith, Hebrews 11:11.
But was strong in faith, giving glory to God- this is the secret of his restoration, for he has captured again the sight of the God of glory who appeared to him in Ur of the Chaldees at the first, Acts 7:2.

4:21
And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform.

And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform- this is the proper response that should be made to the promises of God. Compare Mary’s response to the news that she, a virgin, would have a son, Luke 1:38, with Abraham and Sarah’s response in Genesis 17:17 and 18:12. Mary was fully persuaded, and Elizabeth, her kinswoman believed also, for she said, “there shall be a performance of those things which were told her from the Lord”, Luke 1:45, but Abraham and Sarah were unconvinced initially.

4:22
And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness.

And therefore it was imputed to him for righteousness- this seems to make his being made righteous in Genesis 15 dependant on what happened 13 years later, which cannot be the case. Rather, the apostle is indicating that the faith of Abraham became strong again, after his temporary lapse when he laughed. He has now returned to the sort of faith that he manifest in Genesis 15. The apostle’s purpose is to return to the subject of being reckoned righteous, not only to apply it to us today, but also to prepare the way for the teaching found in 5:1-11.

6(h)   4:23-25
The belief in the Risen Man expected

4:23
Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him;

Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him- the account in Genesis of Abraham’s faith is not just for historical interest, or just so that we might admire his faith.

4:24
But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;

But for us also- the principles involved are just as relevant today.
To whom it shall be imputed- the sense of “shall be” is “shall certainly be”. The “it” refers to the rightousness of verse 22.
If we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead- the same God that brought life out of death when the “dead” bodies of Abraham and Sarah produced a living son, has brought Jesus our Lord from the sphere of death. Abraham believed the birth of Isaac would happen, and Christians believe the resurrection of Christ has happened.
Note that faith is placed in Divine persons, not just in events. We are not only expected to believe the resurrection has taken place, but to believe on the One who performed it. Notice the title “Jesus our Lord”, reinforcing the previous statement, for if He is truly our Lord, then there is personal faith like Abraham’s, and if He is truly our Lord, then we have submitted to His authority by repenting, as David did.

4:25
Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.

Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification- the apostle implies two questions, and then answers them. It is as if he asks, “Why was He, Jesus our Lord, delivered by God to death?” The answer is “Because of our offences”. His second question is, “Why was He raised from the dead?” The answer, “Because of the justification which His death secures”. Thus the resurrection of Christ is God’s indication to us that the work of Calvary satisfies His every demand against our sins.
The mention of offences reminds us we were like David, having sinned. The mention of justification reminds us that the believer is justified, like Abraham. The apostle has now brought us back to the idea of justification, and so prepares for the truth of chapter 5, which begins, “Therefore, being justified by faith”.