Authentic Versus Counterfeit Faith (Ii) Series

Intro

A major theme in Romans 4 is faith. Paul is aggressively contending for justification by faith alone. The issue we are currently addressing is the kind of faith Paul has in mind when he uses the word. We know from James 2 that some forms of faith are dead and worthless. We know from Jesus’s words in Matthew 7 that on judgment day some people who said, “Lord, Lord” will discover that their faith was not saving faith. To understand Romans 4, it is essential to understand what kind of faith results in justification.

Last week we began addressing that subject. We discussed four characteristics of biblical, authentic faith which I am referring to as saving faith.

I. Saving faith acknowledges God for who he is. In Romans 4:17, Paul talks about the nature of the God that Abraham believed in. “As it is written, ‘I have made you the father of many nations’), in the presence of the God in whom he believed, who gives life to the dead and calls into existence the things that do not exist.”i Abraham’s faith was valid because it rested on an accurate revelation of who God is.ii

II. Saving faith takes God at his word. Abraham was not believing for something he created in his own imagination. His faith rested on the word of the Lord, the promise God made to him. We see this in Romans 4:18: “Hoping against hope, he believed that he would become ‘the father of many nations,’ according to what was said, ‘So shall your descendants be’” (emphasis mine). God said it, so he believed it. Biblical faith has a reliable object. It trusts in what God says. It takes God at his word.

III. Saving faith obeys God. This is implied in the Romans 4 text. For example, verse 20 says, “No distrust made him waver concerning the promise of God, but he grew strong in his faith as he gave glory to God.” Disobedience does not give glory to God. Abrahan’s faith was evidenced by his unwavering commitment to the Lord and the promise God had given him. Abraham’s obedience is an important part of the Genesis narrative, and it is explicitly stated in Hebrews 11:8: “By faith Abraham, when called to go to a place he would later receive as his inheritance, obeyed and went, even though he did not know where he was going” (emphasis mine). Obedience was part of Abraham’s faith response.

IV. Saving faith hopes in the fulfillment of the promise regardless of natural impossibilities. Verse 18 begins by saying, “Hoping against hope, he believed. . . .” Naturally speaking, there was no hope for the fulfillment of the promise. But authentic faith looks beyond the natural circumstances to God “who gives life to the dead and calls into existence the things that do not exist” (v. 17). Authentic faith cannot be destroyed by natural impossibilities.

Those are the four characteristics of saving faith that we discussed in our last message.

Today we find four more in Romans 4:19-22. Throughout this chapter, Paul is using Abraham to teach justification by faith. And in verses 16-22 he uses Abraham to teach us what kind of faith results in justification and salvation. Six additional qualities of authentic, saving faith:

I. SAVING FAITH FACES REALITY BUT INCLUDES GOD AS THE GREATEST REALITY (V. 19).

“He did not weaken in faith when he considered his own body, which was already as good as dead (for he was about a hundred years old), and the barrenness of Sarah’s womb.”

Some versions say Abraham did not consider his own body. The NKJV says, “And not being weak in faith, he did not consider his own body.” The NIV says, “Without weakening in his faith, he faced the fact that his body was as good as dead.” So, which is it? Did Abraham consider his own body as the NIV has it, or did he not consider his own body as the NKJV translates it? It depends on which manuscripts you are using. The Greco-Latin and Byzantine manuscripts include the negative ou (not) before katenoesen (considered). The Alexandrian family of manuscripts do not include ou.iii Textual variances like this occur because we do not have Paul’s original document. If that is the case, why can we rely on the authority of Scripture? There are hundreds of meticulous copies of Paul’s letters.iv With relatively few exceptions these say exactly the same thing. Therefore, by analyzing and comparing these copes we can know with much assurance what the original document said.

But what about these textual variances? Most of the time the difference is rather inconsequential. At first it might appear that the presence of ou in the statement would be highly significant. But if the reader interprets the statement in context, either reading renders a similar understanding. If the ou is included, in context it simply means he did not focus on the problem but set his mind on the promise. If the ou is excluded, the meaning is that “he faced the fact” (NIV) but did not allow that to undermine his faith.v Bruce Metzger wisely concluded that the absence of the ou fits the context better and should be accepted.vi He wrote, “Here Paul does not wish to imply that faith means closing one’s eyes to reality, but that Abraham was so strong in faith as to be undaunted by every consideration.”vii