WAS PAUL INVENTING SOMETHING NEW OR REVEALING SOMETHING ANCIENT?

Picture this scene: You’re discussing faith with a thoughtful sceptic who challenges you directly. “Your Protestant doctrine of justification by faith alone,” they say, “that’s just Paul’s invention. The Old Testament is all about law-keeping and works-righteousness. If justification by faith isn’t clearly taught before Paul, how can you claim it’s the biblical gospel?”

It’s a penetrating question that strikes at the heart of Reformed theology. If the doctrine of justification by faith alone is absent from the Old Testament, then either God has multiple ways of salvation, or the Reformers built their theology on shaky ground. But here’s the compelling truth: the doctrine of justification by faith alone doesn’t just appear in the Old Testament—it is the bedrock of Old Testament salvation from the very beginning.

 

THE FOUNDATION STONE: GENESIS 15:6

Is the doctrine of justification in the Old Testament? The clearest proof for it lies in one of Scripture’s most profound verses: “And he [Abraham] believed the LORD, and he counted it to him as righteousness” (Genesis 15:6). This single sentence contains the entire doctrine of justification in embryonic form, and Paul doesn’t invent anything new when he expounds it in Romans 4—he simply explains what was always there.

Consider the Hebrew words carefully. When Abraham “believed” (he’emin), this wasn’t mere intellectual agreement but active, trusting faith. When God “counted” (chashab) righteousness to him, this was a judicial declaration, not a moral transformation. God didn’t make Abraham righteous; He declared him righteous based on his faith. The “righteousness” (tsedaqah) Abraham received was forensic standing before God—the very concept Paul calls justification.

What makes this even more remarkable is the timing. Abraham was justified by faith 430 years before the Law was given at Sinai. Paul’s point in Romans 4:3-5 isn’t that he’s revealing some hidden meaning, but that the plain reading of Genesis teaches justification by faith apart from works. Abraham is the father of all who believe precisely because he demonstrates that justification has always been by faith alone.

 

THE PATTERN THROUGHOUT SCRIPTURE

This wasn’t unique to Abraham. The sacrificial system itself pointed beyond works to substitutionary righteousness. Those countless offerings couldn’t actually remove sin (Hebrews 10:4)—they required faith in God’s promise of future atonement. When Habakkuk declared “the righteous shall live by his faith” (Habakkuk 2:4), he was articulating a principle that had governed God’s people from the beginning.

David understood this clearly. In Psalm 32:1-2, he wrote, “Blessed is the one whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is covered. Blessed is the man against whom the LORD counts no iniquity.” Paul quotes these very words in Romans 4:6-8 as evidence that David knew righteousness came apart from works. David wasn’t learning something new from Paul; Paul was learning something ancient from David.

The prophets proclaimed the same truth. Isaiah spoke of the coming Servant who’d “make many to be accounted righteous” (Isaiah 53:11) and rejoiced that God had “clothed me with the garments of salvation” (Isaiah 61:10). Jeremiah prophesied of the Messiah whose name would be “The LORD is our righteousness” (Jeremiah 23:6). These weren’t vague hints—they were clear proclamations of righteousness received rather than achieved.

 

ANSWERING THE OBJECTIONS

“But,” the sceptic persists, “doesn’t the Old Testament emphasise law-keeping and works?” This misses the law’s true purpose. Paul explains that “by works of the law no human being will be justified” and that the law brings “knowledge of sin” (Romans 3:20). The law was never intended as a means of justification—it was meant to drive us to faith by showing us our need for a righteousness we cannot achieve. As Paul puts it, “the law was our guardian until Christ came, in order that we might be justified by faith” (Galatians 3:24).

Others object that justification terminology isn’t explicit in the Old Testament. But the reality exists even when technical terms don’t. Genesis uses “reckoned righteousness”—the identical concept Paul calls justification. Progressive revelation means fuller terminology develops over time, but the substance precedes the systematic formulation.

The most serious objection claims this reads New Testament concepts back into the Old Testament. Actually, it’s the opposite—it reads the Old Testament correctly in light of its fulfillment. Jesus Himself said the Scriptures testified of Him (John 5:39), and after His resurrection, He explained Himself to the disciples “beginning with Moses and all the Prophets” (Luke 24:27). There’s one covenant of grace, administered differently in different eras but offering the same salvation.

 

THE CHRISTOCENTRIC FOUNDATION

Here’s the crucial point: the object of Old Testament faith was always Christ. Jesus told the Jews, “Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day” (John 8:56). Peter explains that the prophets searched concerning “the sufferings of Christ and the subsequent glories” (1 Peter 1:10-11). Paul declares “the gospel was preached beforehand to Abraham” (Galatians 3:8).

Old Testament saints were justified by faith in the coming Messiah—the same faith, the same object, the same justification, just a different administration of the same covenant of grace. The heroes of faith in Hebrews 11 were all justified the same way we are, looking forward to the Christ we see clearly.

 

ONE ETERNAL GOSPEL

So, is justification in the Old Testament? The unity of Scripture demands one gospel. God doesn’t have multiple plans of salvation for different eras. When Paul writes that righteousness is “witnessed by the Law and the Prophets” (Romans 3:21), he’s not claiming they gave hints—he’s saying they testified to the same righteousness we receive today.

This is why the Reformed distinctives aren’t Reformation innovations—they’re recoveries of biblical truth. Sola fide—salvation is by faith alone—isn’t something Luther invented; it’s something the church rediscovered. The same faith that justified Abraham justifies us. The same Christ Abraham saw from afar, we see clearly. The same righteousness credited to David is credited to believers today.

Paul wasn’t inventing something new—he was revealing something gloriously ancient. The doctrine of justification by faith alone flows like a golden thread from Genesis to Revelation, proving God’s grace has always been the only hope for sinful humanity. The gospel isn’t new; it’s eternal. And that truth should fill every believer’s heart with profound comfort and unshakeable assurance.

 

JUSTIFICATION IN THE OLD TESTAMENT: RELATED FAQs

What do contemporary Reformed scholars say about Old Testament justification? Leading theologians such as Michael Horton, RC Sproul, and John Murray have consistently argued justification by faith alone is the unified teaching of both testaments. Westminster Seminary scholars, including Richard Gaffin emphasise Paul’s doctrine isn’t innovative but expository—he’s explaining what Genesis always taught. Systematic theologians Joel Beeke and Sinclair Ferguson argue denying Old Testament justification by faith creates an artificial divide that Scripture itself rejects.

• How does the concept of “merit” work in Old Testament salvation? Reformed theology teaches Old Testament saints earned no merit before God through their works, just as New Testament believers don’t. Their good works were fruits of faith, not grounds for justification. Even Abraham’s obedience in offering Isaac (James 2:21) demonstrated his faith rather than earning his righteousness—Genesis 15:6 shows he was already justified years earlier. The merit that saves comes entirely from Christ’s perfect obedience, credited to believers in every era.
• What about passages that seem to emphasise law-keeping for salvation in the Old Testament? Passages like “Keep my statutes and rules; if a person does them, he shall live by them” (Leviticus 18:5) describe the law’s theoretical standard, not a practical path to salvation. Paul quotes this very verse in Romans 10:5 to contrast law-righteousness with faith-righteousness. These passages show what perfect obedience would require (which no one achieves) while driving readers to seek righteousness through God’s promise instead. The law reveals our need for the gospel rather than providing an alternative to it.

How did Old Testament believers understand the specifics of Christ’s substitutionary atonement? Old Testament saints didn’t need to understand the mechanics of Calvary to be saved by its benefits—just as a child can benefit from medicine without understanding pharmacology. They trusted in God’s promise of a coming deliverer who would crush the serpent’s head (Genesis 3:15) and knew their sacrifices pointed to something greater. Progressive revelation means their understanding was less detailed than ours, but their faith was in the same Christ. Abraham “saw” Christ’s day and “was glad” (John 8:56), though the specifics remained mysterious.

• What’s the difference between Old Testament and New Testament administration of justification? The difference isn’t in the essence but in the clarity and fullness of revelation. Old Testament believers looked forward to the promised Messiah through types, shadows, and prophecies, while we look back to the accomplished work of Christ. They were saved by the same grace through the same faith in the same Saviour, but we have the advantage of seeing the complete picture. Think of it like viewing a sunrise from different vantage points—the sun is the same, but the view becomes progressively clearer.
• How do we handle apparent contradictions between Paul and James on justification? John Calvin and contemporary scholars like Thomas Schreiner explain Paul and James address different questions using “justify” in different senses. Paul discusses how someone becomes righteous before God (by faith alone), while James discusses how genuine faith demonstrates itself (through works). They’re not contradicting but complementing—Paul shows the root (justifying faith), James shows the fruit (faith that works). Both agree that dead faith cannot save and that true faith always produces good works.

What about the “New Perspective on Paul”—doesn’t it challenge traditional Reformed views on Old Testament justification? While scholars like NT Wright have raised important questions about Second Temple Judaism, most Reformed scholars argue the New Perspective doesn’t overturn the traditional understanding of justification. Critics like John Piper and DA Carson contend Paul’s argument in Romans 4 still clearly teaches Abraham was justified by faith apart from works, regardless of the first-century Jewish context. The exegetical evidence for Old Testament justification by faith remains compelling even when viewed through updated historical lenses. Contemporary Reformed scholarship continues to affirm Paul was expositing Moses, not opposing him.

 

JUSTIFICATION IN THE OLD TESTAMENT: OUR RELATED POSTS

• Trinity in the Old Testament: Hidden, Yet Always in Plain Sight
• The Grand Unveiling: Progressive Revelation in the Bible
• Types of Christ and His Cross in the Old Testament