Romans 4:1-2 : What then shall we say that Abraham,our forefather, hath found according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not toward God. To see clearly the mean-ing of an author it is necessary that we get his background, and be able to grasp the purpose of his writing. Why did Paul labor so earnestly to set forth the distinction between the law and the gospel and to prove that men are justified by faith, and not by works of law? In much of what he said in Romans, Galatians, and Hebrews, he set forth plainly that the gospel was a thing apart from the law of Moses, that the law ended at the cross, and that the gospel is God's perfected plan for man's redemption. But what was back of all this effort? What special need was there for so much teaching along that line? The reader will also find some very pointed teaching along the same line in Second Corinthians, Ephesians, and Colossians. Why was it so necessary that all the churches be informed along these lines? The first converts to Christ were Jews. They were so wedded to the law of Moses that they broke away from it slowly. At first they thought the gospel was for Jews only. The conversion of Cornelius convinced them that God had also granted to the Gentiles repentance unto life (Acts 11:18). But they still thought and contended that these Gentile Christians had to keep the law of Moses. After the church was planted at Antioch, "certain men came down from Judea and taught the brethren, saying, Except ye be circumcised after the custom of Moses, ye cannot be saved" (Acts 15:1). When appeal was made to the apostles and elders in Jerusalem, the Holy Spirit through them decreed that the Gentiles should not be required to keep the law. But this decree did not stop the mouths of some of these extreme Judaizing Christians. These went about among the churches, making much trouble in the churches where there were Gentile members. They sought to make the church a mere sect of the Jews and the gospel a sort of adjunct to the law of Moses. Judging from a human standpoint, they would have succeeded had it not been for Paul. Be-cause he fought them on every point of their contentions, they were his bitter enemies. A little thought will enable one to see that Paul's whole line of reasoning along these lines was directed against the contention of these Judaizing Christians, and not toward the unbelieving Jews. When he dealt with the unbelieving Jews, he sought to convince them that Jesus was the Christ of whom the prophets spoke. It would have been useless to argue to one who did not believe in Jesus as the Christ that the law ended at the cross and that the Jew had become dead to the law that he might be married to Christ Jesus; but it was eminently fitting to so argue to one who believed in Christ and yet held that the law was still binding. It was necessary also to indoctrinate the churches on this point so as to limit the pernicious influence of these Judaizers. These Judaizers put stress on their fleshly relation to Abraham and on the fleshly mark of circumcision. In effect Paul said to them: "You put so much stress on the flesh, now tell us what Abraham obtained ac-cording to the flesh. He came out of heathenism, and therefore had no fleshly connections of which he could boast, and he was also justified before he was circumcised. He was not justified by works, and therefore could not boast toward God." Then he quotes the Scriptures to remind them that Abraham was justified on a plan contrary to their contention.