Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Romans 4:10
How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision.
10. Not in circumcision ] Genesis 15 precedes Genesis 17 by at least fourteen years.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
How – In what circumstances, or time.
When he was in circumcision … – Before or after he was circumcised? This was the very point of the inquiry. For if he was justified by faith after he was circumcised, the Jew might pretend that it was in virtue of his circumcision; that even his faith was acceptable, because he was circumcised. But if it was before he was circumcised, this plea could not be set up; and the argument of the apostle was confirmed by the case of Abraham, the great father and model of the Jewish people, that circumcision and the deeds of the Law did not conduce to justification; and that as Abraham was justified without those works, so might others be, and the pagan, therefore, might be admitted to similar privileges.
Not in circumcision – Not being circumcised, or after he was circumcised, but before. This was the record in the case; Gen 15:6; Compare Gen 17:10.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 10. How was it then reckoned?] In what circumstances was Abraham when this blessing was bestowed upon him? When he was circumcised, or before?
Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision.] Faith was reckoned to Abraham for justification, as we read Ge 15:6, (where see the note;) but circumcision was not instituted till about fourteen or fifteen years after, Ge 17:1, c. for faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness or justification at least one year before Ishmael was born; compare Gen. 15, and 16. At Ishmael’s birth he was eighty-six years of age, Ge 16:16; and, at the institution of circumcision, Ishmael was thirteen, and Abraham ninety-nine years old. See Ge 17:24, Ge 17:25; and see Dr. Taylor.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
And if this be the question, the way to resolve it, is, to consider in what circumstances Abraham was when his faith was thus reckoned to him for righteousness; it was a long time before he was circumcised. The promise to which Abrahams faith had respect, was made to him fourteen years, at least, before his circumcision: compare Gen 15:2, and Gen 17:24,25; also see Gen 16:16. If the blessedness, therefore, of justification was not annexed to circumcision, the Gentiles are no less capable of it than the Jews.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
How was it then reckoned?…. The Arabic version adds, “and when”; and the Ethiopic version reads it, “when was Abraham justified?” expressing the sense, not the words of the original text, with which agree the following questions:
when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? that is, was he justified, or his faith reckoned to him for righteousness, when he was a circumcised, or an uncircumcised person?
not in circumcision; or when he was circumcised; for when it was said of him, that “he believed in the Lord”, and “he counted it to him for righteousness”, Ge 15:6, he was then uncircumcised, and remained so many years after: for this was before the birth of Ishmael, and Ishmael was “thirteen” years of age when he and his father Abraham were circumcised; so that it must be “fourteen” years, or thereabout, before his circumcision, that this declaration of his being a justified person was made; wherefore the apostle rightly adds,
but in uncircumcision; or whilst an uncircumcised person: hence it clearly appears that circumcision could not be the cause of his justification, since it followed it; and if Abraham when uncircumcised was a justified person, as it is certain he was, why may not uncircumcised Gentiles be justified also? and especially when it is observed, that the covenant made with Abraham when uncircumcised, included the Gentiles; see Ge 12:3.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
When he was in circumcision ( ). Dative masculine singular of the present active participle of ; “to him being in a state of circumcision or in a state of uncircumcision?” A pertinent point that the average Jew had not noticed.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
1) “How was it then reckoned?” (pos oun elogisthe); “How then was it accounted, imputed, or reckoned?” –tell it again, repeat it! For it is based on Scriptural and historical evidence, Gen 15:6. Under what circumstances was Abraham justified by faith?
2) “When he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision,” (en peritome onti e en akrobustia); “While he (existed) in a state of circumcision or uncircumcision?” While he was uncircumcised is the answer. It was at least some fourteen years after God preached the gospel to him, and after he was saved, that he was circumcised, Gen 15:6; Gal 3:8; Gen 17:23-26.
3) “Not in circumcision,” (ouk en peritone) “Not in circumcision;” Abraham did not depend on circumcision to make him right with God or to obtain Divine righteousness. For Abraham was not circumcised until he was 99 years of age, when Ishmael was 13 years of age, Gen 17:25.
4) “But in uncircumcision,” (all’ en akrobustia) “But while he was in (a state of) uncircumcision;” Before even Ishmael was ever born, his faith was counted for righteousness, and he was justified before God by his faith, Gen 15:6; Gen 15:18; Gen 16:16. He was 86 years old when Ishmael was born.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
10. How reckoned The apostle puts this point in full dialogue (a dialogue which had, doubtless, often occurred between him and the Jews) in order to give it the emphasis due to its importance. All the blessedness over which David exults may come by faith to the uncircumcised.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Rom 4:10. Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision Faith was reckoned to Abraham for justification, Gen 15:6 but circumcision was not instituted till about fourteen or fifteen years after that, Gen 17:1-2; Gen 17:27 for faith was reckoned to Abraham for justification before Ishmael was born, at least one year. Compare Gen 15:16 : At Ishmael’s birth, he was eighty-six years of age (Gen 16:16.); and at the institution of circumcision, Ishmael was thirteen, and Abraham ninety-nine years old. See Gen 17:24-25.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
10 How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision.
Ver. 10. In, circumcision ] As the Jew would have it. No such matter.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
10. ] , under what circumstances ? The interval between the recognition of his faith ( Gen 15:6 ) and his circumcision, was perhaps as much as twenty-five, certainly not less ( Gen 17:25 ) than fourteen years.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Rom 4:10 . ; To say that his faith was reckoned as righteousness, without mentioning circumcision, suggests that the latter was at least not indispensable; still it is not decisive, and so the further question must be asked, How i.e. , under what conditions was his faith thus reckoned to him? Was it when he was circumcised or when he was uncircumcised? History enables Paul to answer, Not when he was circumcised, but when he was uncircumcised. Abraham’s justification is narrated in Gen 15 , his circumcision not till Gen 17 , some fourteen years later: hence it was not his circumcision on which he depended for acceptance with God.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
10.] , under what circumstances? The interval between the recognition of his faith (Gen 15:6) and his circumcision, was perhaps as much as twenty-five, certainly not less (Gen 17:25) than fourteen years.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Rom 4:10. , how) This word implies more than when.- , not in circumcision) For justification is described, Genesis 15; circumcision, Genesis 17.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Rom 4:10
Rom 4:10
How then was it reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision?-But was Abraham circumcised or uncircumcised when his faith secured that state of blessedness?
Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision:-[The word then shows that the question arises out of the preceding argument, and is to be answered in accordance with it; this is further shown in the words for we say. Abraham became partaker of the blessing when he was justified by faith. He was so justified while yet in uncircumcision; therefore, the blessing is not upon the circumcision only, but upon the uncircumcision also. The conclusion, though drawn from the one case of Abraham, is assumed to be general, and rightly so, because that case is not merely an example of the rest, but the origin and cause of all, as is more fully shown in the following verse. The history of Abraham is conclusive on this point. And he believed in Jehovah; and he reckoned it to him for righteousness. (Gen 15:6). After this, Ishmael was born; and when thirteen years old (Gen 17:25), he and Abraham were circumcised on the same day. This was a fearful blow to those who claimed that there could be no salvation (Act 15:1) without circumcision, for the father of the Israelites was justified thirteen or more years before he was circumcised.]
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
not in circumcision: “Faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness,” at least 14 years before he was circumcised; the former having taken place some time before Ishmael’s birth, at which time he was 86 years old, and the other when Ishmael was 13 years of age, and Abraham 99. Gen 15:5, Gen 15:6, Gen 15:16, Gen 16:1-3, Gen 17:1, Gen 17:10, Gen 17:23-27, 1Co 7:18, 1Co 7:19, Gal 5:6, Gal 6:15
Reciprocal: Act 7:8 – the covenant Rom 2:28 – neither Gal 3:6 – as Col 3:11 – there Jam 2:23 – Abraham
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
:10
Rom 4:10. Abraham was reckoned righteous while he was uncircumcised, hence the favor could not have been by virtue of circumcision as the Jews claimed.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Rom 4:10. How then was it reckoned? Not, what was the mode in which it was reckoned, but, how was he situated when this took place? The rest of the verse makes this clear.
Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. The reckoning took place (Gen 15:6) at least fourteen years before the circumcision of Abraham (Gen 17:25); consequently the latter was the Divine ratification of grace already received, not the effective cause or condition of the bestowal of grace.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
How then was it reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision [Do the words of David apply only to the Jews, the circumcised, or do they likewise apply also to the Gentiles, the uncircumcised? Surely they apply to the uncircumcised, for they describe the blessing which Abraham enjoyed before his circumcision. Of what use, then, was circumcision, and why did Abraham receive it?]:
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
10. How then was it imputed? to him being in circumcision or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. This is a continued evolution of this wonderful and unanswerable Pauline argument, actually the most prolix in all the Bible, confirmatory of justification full and free for all the world by the free grace of God in Christ, received and appropriated by faith alone, without work of law. The very fact that this took place in the case of Abraham twenty four years before the organization of the visible church in his house, teaches us a grand and impressive lesson; i. e., that God in His infallible administration, by putting twenty-four years between the two transactions, forever annihilates the possibility of their identification by sensible, honest people. What an awful job the devil has on his hands to prove the essentiality of water baptism or any other church ordinance to justification, when Abraham, Gods paragon saint and the representative of every other, was justified by the free grace of God in Christ twenty-four years before he received a church ordinance! I know there is a disposition on the part of many superficial, bogus theologians flippantly to pass over the Abrahamic covenant. This is wholesale murder, because Abraham had no covenant, but was simply the recipient of the renovation of the Messianic covenant by which the world is redeemed. Hence the Scriptures positively identify the Abrahamic with the Mediatorial covenant. Then, if you are not justified like Abraham, becoming one of his legitimate spiritual posterity, you have no interest in Christ (Gal 3:25). Mark this long quotation from the Psalms of David, descriptive of Gods blessed man, whose sins are covered, and to whom he does not impute iniquity. If it turns out that you are not that blessed man, the devil gets you to an absolute certainty, whether in the pulpit, the pew or the world. Now you see clearly how Paul identifies this blessed man with the Abrahamic covenant, because he is justified by faith alone, without works, like father Abraham, who actually got converted twenty-four years before he was baptized. Do not forget the inspired epithet, blessed, which God applies to the man who, like Abraham, is justified by faith without legal obedience. Blessed literally means happy. You take the poor legalists, all round, and you find anything but a happy people. They are blue as indigo. It is a regular long-faced Christianity Satans counterfeit. Take the people who have nothing but Jesus and depend on nothing but God, and you will find happy pilgrims every time. That is the reason why Satans legalistic church members can not keep away from theaters, dances, card tables, circuses, horse races and saloons. It is because they have no happiness in their religion. Hence they have to go to the devil for joy to keep them from dying of the blues. There is nothing in the Abrahamic covenant but Jesus. Hence the children of father Abraham are a jolly set.
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament
4:10 {7} How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision.
(7) He proves that it belongs to the uncircumcised (for there was no doubt of the circumcised) in this way: Abraham was justified in uncircumcision, therefore this justification belongs also to the uncircumcised. Nay, it does not belong to the circumcised, in respect of the circumcision, much less are the uncircumcised shut out from it because of their uncircumcision.