Saturday, March 7, 2020

John Murray on Genesis 15:6 and Psalm 106:31


In his commentary on Romans, Reformed theologian John Murray wrote the following about Rom 4 and Paul’s use of Gen 15:6, as well as Psa 106:31 which uses similar language of Phinehas as it does for Abraham:

In the Hebrew Genesis 15:6 is as follows: “And he [Abraham] believed in the Lord, and he reckoned it to him righteousness”. The formula is similar to that used in the case of Phinehas in reference to his zeal for the Lord: “And it was reckoned to him for righteousness to all generations for ever” (Psalm 106:31). Here need be no question it was the zealous act of Phinehas that was reckoned to him for righteousness, and the formula in Genesis 15:6 both from its own terms and from the analogy of Psalm 106:31 is to be interpreted similarly, namely, that God reckoned Abraham’s faith to him for righteousness. Paul’s quotation here (cf. also vss. 9, 22, 23; Gal. 3:6) is to be interpreted likewise. Verse 9 is explicit to the effect that “faith” was reckoned for righteousness. And the word “reckoned” here, as in the Hebrew, means that it was placed to his account, it was imputed to him. And the implication is that the corresponding results followed upon this imputation.

We must, however, recognize the difference between the two cases (Gen. 15:6 and Psalm 106:31). In the case of Phinehas it is an act of righteous zeal on his part; it is a deed. He was credited with the devotion which his faith in God produced—righteousness in the ethical and religious sense. But that which he was reckoned to Abraham is of a very different sort. In Paul’s interpretation and application of Genesis 15:6 this becomes quite patent. Paul could not have appealed to Psalm 106:31 in this connection without violating while whole argument. For if he had appealed to Psalm 106:31 in the matter of justification, the justification of the ungodly (cf. vs. 5), then the case of Phinehas would have provided an inherent contradiction and would have demonstrated justification by a righteous and zealous act. Though then the formula in Genesis 15:6 is similar to that of Psalm 106:31, the subjects with which they deal are diverse. Genesis 15:6 is dealing with justification, as Paul shows; Psalm 106:31 is dealing with the good works which were the fruit of faith. This distinction must be kept in view in the interpretation of Genesis 15:6, particularly as applied by Paul in this chapter. (John Murray, The Epistle to the Romans: The English Text with Introduction, Exposition and Notes, Volume 1 Chapters 1 to 8 [Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans, 1959], 130-31)

In my article Response to a Recent Attempt to Defend Imputed Righteousness I discuss Psalm 106:31 and Phinehas, and reproduce Robert Sungenis’ devastating response to Murray’s commentaries (which are fueled more by dogma than exegesis) under the section, “Does the use of Gen 15:6 in Rom 4 teach Imputation and Sola Fide?”

Notwithstanding, I decided to reproduce Murray’s comments in the above for these two reasons:

(1) Note how, for Murray, Phinehas is said to have righteousness reckoned unto him as a result of “his zeal for the Lord” and his “act of righteous zeal on his part . . .He was credited with the devotion which his faith in God produced—righteousness in the ethical and religious sense.” This refutes the naïve (and eisegetical) appeal to Isa 64:6 by many of Murray’s co-religionists.

(2) For Murray, Gen 15:6 must be the first time Abraham was justified, for if it was not, he was not as ungodly as Phinehas was, for Phinehas, when he engaged in his deed, was in a justified state. Notwithstanding, the New Testament refutes the common Reformed belief Gen 15:6 is when Abraham was once-for-all justified; indeed, the Old Testament teaches Abraham was initially justified in Gen 12, and this is the theology of Heb 11.

Consider the following which is not just textually prior to Gen 15:6, but chronologically prior to Gen 15:6, too:

And the Lord appeared unto Abraham, and said, Unto thy seed will I give this land; and there builded he an altar unto the Lord who appeared unto him. And he removed from thence unto a mountain on the east of Bethel, and pitched his tent, having Bethel on the west, and Hai on the east: and there he builded an altar unto the Lord, and called upon the name of the Lord. (Gen 12:5-6)

Do notice that Abraham did have an “object of faith,” namely Yahweh and the promises He made to Abraham (some will claim that Abraham did not have any “object” of faith, but any study of the life of Abraham preceding Gen 15:6 shows this to be a desperate ploy to avoid the obvious ramifications of this and similar verses have for Reformed soteriology).

What is even more devastating for Murray et al., is that the New Testament refutes such a view, ascribing “saving faith” to Abraham and his wife in Gen 12, not 15:6(!)

Recounting many great heroes of faith, the author of Hebrews hearkens back to the Book of Genesis and the lives of Abel, Enoch, and Noah:

By faith Abel offered unto God a more excellent sacrifice than Cain, by which he obtained witness that he was righteous, God testifying of his gifts: and by it he being dead yet speaketh. By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him; for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God. But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith. (Heb 11:4-7)

In the above pericope, Abel, Enoch, and Noah, by their faith, are said to have pleased God. There is no question that this is not a “so-called” or “false” faith, but what Protestants would label a “true” or “saving” faith that, in their theology, appropriates the alien righteousness of Christ (per the historical Reformed interpretation of James 2). The problem, however, are the verses that follow:

By faith Abraham, when he was called to go out into a place which he should after receive for an inheritance, obeyed; and he went out, not knowing whether he went. By faith he sojourned in the land of promise, as in a strange country, dwelling in tabernacles with Isaac and Jacob, the heirs with him of the same promise: For he looked for a city which hath foundations, whose builder and maker is God. Through faith also Sara herself received strength to conceive seed and was delivered of a child when she was past age, because she judged him faithful who had promise. (Heb 11:8-11)

The author of Hebrews, in the above pericope, ascribes “saving faith” to both Abram and Sarah. However, the incident in their life pertains to Abraham being called out of his homeland to the Promised Land, as recounted in Gen 12:1ff. This proves that the biblical authors believed Abraham had “saving faith” prior to Gen 15:6, refuting further Reformed theology. As is the case in so many instances, Reformed apologists and authors have to go against the Bible to prop up their made-man theology (e.g. imputed righteousness; sola scriptura; purely symbolic understanding of baptism; creedal/metaphysical Trinitarianism, etc.).

“Eisegesis” sums up the Reformed response to Psa 106:31 and Phinehas being said to have righteousness reckoned unto him.