Romans 4:14

Paul says that the promise given to Abraham that he should inherit the world did not come from the law but by faith, which was reckoned to him as righteousness. It doubtless follows that everyone who hopes that God’s righteousness will be imputed to him hopes for this by faith and not by the law.

The apostle shows that there is something wicked in hoping for an inheritance by the law.

He had shown that faith is necessary, that it is older than circumcision, that it is more mighty than the Law, that it establisheth the Law. For if all sinned, it was necessary: if one being uncircumcised was justified, it is older: if the knowledge of sin is by the Law and yet it was without the Law made evident, it is more mighty: if it has testimony borne to it by the Law, and establisheth the Law, it is not opposed to it, but friendly and allied to it. Again, be shows upon other grounds too that it was not even possible by the Law to attain to the inheritance, and after having matched it with the circumcision, and gained it the victory, he brings it besides into contrast with the Law in these words, "For if they which are of the Law be heirs, faith is made void." To prevent them anyone from saying that one may have faith and also keep up the Law, he shows this to be impracticable. For he that clings to the Law, as if of saving force, does disparagement to faith's power; and so he says, "faith is made void," that is, there is no need of salvation by grace. For then it cannot show forth its own proper power; "and the promise is made of none effect."

If only the circumcised are heirs, God has not fulfilled his promise to Abraham that he would be the father of many nations, and it will seem that the nations believed in God without any reason.

If the inheritance, he says, is given by the law, then "faith is made void," that is, it turns out to be vain and useless. For who would concern himself with faith if the promise of the inheritance were given by the law? But the state of affairs is not so. Abraham inherited the promise not by the law (for where was the law then?), but by faith, as it is written: "Abraham believed" (Gen. 15:6).

Then when he says, for if they, he proves his statement:

first, in regard to the denial that the promise is to be fulfilled through the law;

second, in regard to the assertion that it is to be fulfilled through the justice of faith, at therefore it is of faith (Rom 4:16).

In regard to the first he presents this argument: if the promise made to Abraham were to be fulfilled through the law, Abraham's faith believing the promise would be null, because the promise made to him would be abolished. But this is not fitting. Therefore, the first.

In regard to this he does two things:

first he presents a conditional statement;

second, he proves it, at for the law.

The destruction of the consequent is manifest.

He says first, therefore, that the promise was not made through the law.

For if they who are of the law are to be the heirs, i.e., if, in order to share in the promised inheritance, it is required that one obtain this from observing the law, faith is made void, i.e., the faith has been made futile by which Abraham believed God's promise in Genesis 15. But this is not in keeping with what has been stated in 1 Corinthians: if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins (1 Cor 15:17).

Why it is futile is shown when he adds, the promise is made of no effect, i.e., emptied, because it does not produce its effect. But this is contrary to what is stated in Hebrews: she considered him faithful who had promised (Heb 11:11) and to what is stated in this chapter: whatsoever he has promised, he is able also to perform (Rom 4:21).