Romans 9:17

Rom_9:17-18

For the Scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up.

Pharaoh

1. How can we reconcile it with the Divine justice and mercy that a man should be brought upon the stage of life to illustrate the powerlessness of the creature who presumes to measure himself against the will of the Creator? The truth is, that such passages of Holy Scripture state only one side of the complete truth, viz., Gods sovereignty. They do not notice, as other passages, mans persistent free-will and entire responsibility. God raises up men like Pharaoh to be what he became by their own resolve and rejection of the light which might have saved them.

2. Pharaoh was not without means of shrewdly suspecting something of the true character and mission of Israel. His bearing before Moses implies this, and it may be gathered from independent considerations. The earliest religion of Egypt had belief in one supreme power, and this had only become degraded into idolatry in the course of long ages. The secret of the ancient truth was still preserved by the priestly colleges attached to the temples, and each monarch could, if he wished, be initiated into it. This was the wisdom of the Egyptians in which Moses was learned. Then in the dynasty which immediately preceded, the king had actually endeavoured to restore the worship of one God under the crude form of devotion to the suns disc. When Moses stood before Pharaoh, he therefore touched a chord, if not of sympathy, at least of apprehension, in the conscience of his royal hearer, and the conduct of Pharaoh was of a man who wishes not only to awe an opponent, but to crush his personal misgiving. Thus it was that he was by turns obdurate and yielding, until at last he engaged in the enterprise which led to the triumph of Israel. The event, indeed, is not mentioned in the inscriptions on the monuments--no national disasters ever are, but its effects are written on the face of history, and Pharaohs name is remembered as that of one whose destiny it was to show forth the power of Him whose will he resisted. Note:--

I. The pathetic and awful spectacle of the growth of a human being into an attitude of fixed opposition to the all-Holy and almighty God.

1. No man becomes utterly evil all at once; he is only, perhaps, half conscious of the change which is slowly but surely going on within him. There was a time, no doubt, when Pharaoh was a bright, thoughtless boy, with a kind mother, and, as he grew up, he was probably, at first, and generally, well-meaning according to his lights, and his actions might have been at any rate first shaped in part by the traditions of his family, or the necessities of his position. But these were not irresistible, and at last the work of hardening was complete, and by a well-known licence of language God is said to have done that which He permitted--to have hardened Pharaohs heart.

2. Throughout the ages of Jewish history no name more represents emphatic hostility to the honour of God, or the discomfiture which, sooner or later, awaits that hostility, than that of Pharaoh. As the Jew passed in review the names of the enemies of his people, none seemed to loom so large. And as the Christian looks back, he, too, sees in the enemies of Gods people that which the Jews saw. But with his clearer faith he knows that they are dark shadows on earth of that invisible spirit who can mould man into being his instrument. Isaiahs description of the descent of the King of Babylon into the world of the dead melts insensibly into the more awful picture of the fall of Satan. How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! And in the same way the words which Moses addressed to Pharaoh are less true of mortal man than the fallen archangel. Satan had his time of trial, he was not forced to be the Prince of Evil, he became it in the abuse of his free will. But having chosen to be the first-born of rebellion, he was not simply a disturbing force: the evil which God could not have created He might control; in the vast universe there was a function assigned to the apostle of universal revolt. For that cause have I raised thee up, that I might show My power in thee, etc., a power exhibited when our Lord by His Cross spoiled principalities and powers, and destroyed him that had the power of death.

3. And Satan is only an instance of that which takes place in human experience. And the gradual growth of the spirit of resistance culminates at last, not in the triumph of the rebel, but in his being assigned an awful place in the plans of the Divine providence, in which he is to illustrate the justice of the Omnipotent.

II. Some good natural qualities may exist in a man who, nevertheless, perhaps, dies as an opponent to the will of God.

1. There is a bust of Pharaoh in the museum at Cairo, and as we stand before the grave, but by no means unkindly Coptic face, it is difficult to think that it represents a human being to whom these stern words were addressed in the name of the All-Merciful. And yet that this is possible is a matter of experience. A man may be respectable, and even interesting, and yet throughout his life opposed to God through some warp in the will or lack of sensitiveness in the conscience. And this is much more dreadful than when a thoroughly bad man is opposed to God. That Nero should burn the Christians in order to amuse the Roman populace and divert public attention from his own wrong-doing, seems to be quite natural, considering who Nero was. But contrast Nero with Julian. Julian was a man whom to know was to respect. It is true that he had advantages which were unknown to Nero; he knew what the Christian life was, and what it could be, and yet he devoted his great powers to uprooting Christianity and restoring Paganism. But he died, owning that the Galilean had been too strong for him. If he had been an idle, profligate sensualist, his case would have been less pathetic. Julian seems like Pharaoh to have been raised up, that the crucified and risen Redeemer might show in him His power, and His name might be declared in all the earth.

2. These examples apply on a smaller scale. Good natural qualities--industry, justice, temperance, kindliness, etc.

are consistent with a general drift of life which is opposed to Gods will; they are no guarantee that a man has that tenderness and sensitiveness of conscience which will enable him to see the line of duty in difficult circumstances, which will save him from the misery of finding himself at the last among those who have fought against God. Have we not, perhaps, reason to fear lest we ourselves should be of the number of petty Pharaohs who will illustrate Gods power rather than His mercy on the Day of Judgment?

III. How easily those who are in superior and engrossing positions may be fatally blinded to the highest and best interests of others who are dependent upon them. Pharaoh, no doubt, had his head and hands full of great affairs of state--too full, he may have thought, to give much time to the complaints of a troublesome tribe of Asiatic bondsmen. He closed his eyes, ears, and heart when he ought to have kept them wide open to all the indications of Gods will and human needs round him, and so he drifted on to his ruin. May not something of the same kind occur to any who are entrusted by Providence with the care of others--not only the rulers of nations and churches, but the great employers of labour, and the heads of educational institutions, and the fathers and mothers of families? An Israel may be close round them, to whose real wants they are insensible, but of which they have had ample warning, and meanwhile time is passing, and they are approaching some catastrophe: the ruin of families, societies, institutions may be due to some fatal insensibility on the part of those who direct them, some inability to enter into their moral and spiritual requirements.

IV. There is here great comfort for those who desire to serve God in the conviction that in the end He will triumph over all His opponents, however long the triumph be delayed. Pharaoh was sitting on his throne in all the pride of the Egyptian monarchys brightest days when Moses dared to tell him that he was raised up to set forth the power of God. God allows much evil to exist. This is a distress and perplexity to His servants. Wait, and you will see. If God is patient, it is because He is eternal. Pharaoh for a while was borne with, remonstrated with, before the Red Sea closed upon him and his army. Still more sure of this should we Christians be who can gaze into the empty sepulchre, and who know that He who has left it holds the keys of hell and of death. Sin may still be strong, death may still be terrible, Satan still a standing menace, but these enemies will only illustrate our Redeemers power. (Canon Liddon.)

The case of Pharaoh

The subject in question is not the wicked disposition which animates Pharaoh, but the entire situation in which he finds himself providentially placed. God might have caused Pharaoh to be born in a cabin, where his proud obstinacy would have been displayed with no less self-will, but without any notable historical consequence; on the other hand, He might have placed on the throne of Egypt at that time a weak, easy-going man, who would have yielded at the first shock. What would have happened? Pharaoh in his obscure position would not have been less arrogant and perverse; but Israel would have gone forth from Egypt without eclat. No plagues one upon another, no Red Sea miraculously crossed, no Egyptian army destroyed; nothing of all that made so deep a furrow in the Israelitish conscience, and which remained for the elect people the immovable foundation of their relation to Jehovah. And thereafter also no influence pronounced on the surrounding nations. The entire history would have taken another direction. God did not therefore create the indomitable pride of Pharaoh, as it were, to gain a point of resistance and reflect His glory; He was content to use it for this purpose. This is what is expressed by the following words: that thus, not simply that (cf. Exo_15:14-15; Jos_2:9-10; Jos_9:9)

. What is meant by the term hardening, and what leads the apostle to use the expression in verse 18? It signifies to take from a man the sense of the true, the just, and even the useful, so that he is no longer open to the wise admonitions and significant circumstances which should turn him aside from the evil way on which he has entered. The word cannot signify in Exo_4:14, anything else, as Gods act, than it signifies as the act of Pharaoh, when it is said that he hardened himself. Note carefully that Pharaohs hardening was at first his own act. Five times it is said of him that he himself hardened or made heavy his heart (Rom_8:13-14; Rom_8:22; Rom_8:32; Rom_9:7; we do not speak here of Rom_4:21; Rom_7:3, which are a prophecy), before the time when it is at last said that God hardened him (Rom_9:12); and even after that, as if a remnant of liberty still remained to him, it is said for a last time that he hardened himself (Rom_9:34-35). It was a parallel act to that of Judas closing his heart to the last appeal. Then, at length, as if by way of a terrible retribution, God hardened him five times (Rom_10:1; Rom_10:20; Rom_10:27; Rom_11:10; Rom_14:8.). Thus he at first closed his heart obstinately against the influence exercised on him by the summonses of Moses and the first chastisements which overtook him; that was his sin. And thereafter, but still within limits, God rendered him deaf not merely to the voice of justice, but to that of sound sense and simple prudence: that was his punishment. Far, then, from its having been God who urged him to evil, God punished him with the most terrible chastisements for the evil to which he voluntarily gave himself up. In this expression we find the same idea as in παραδιδόναι (God gave them up), by which the apostle expressed Gods judgment on the Gentiles for their refusal to welcome the revelation which He gave of Himself in nature and conscience (Rom_1:24; Rom_1:26; Rom_1:28). When man has wilfully quenched the light he has received and the first rebukes of Divine mercy, and when he persists in giving himself up to his evil instincts, there comes a time when God withdraws from him the beneficent actions of His grace. Then man becomes insensible even to the counsels of prudence. He is thenceforth like a horse with the bit in his teeth, running blindly to his destruction. He has rejected salvation for himself; he was free to do so; but he cannot prevent God from now making use of him and of his ruin to advance the salvation of others. From being an end, he is degraded to the rank of means. Such was the lot of Pharaoh. Everybody in Egypt saw clearly whither his mad resistance tended. His magicians told him, This is the finger of God (Exo_8:19). His servants told him, Let these people go (Exo_10:7). He himself, after every plague, felt his heart relent. He once went the length of crying out, I have sinned this time; the Lord is righteous (Rom_9:27). Now was the decisive instant; for the last time, after his moment of softening, he hardened himself (Rom_9:33). Then the righteousness of God took hold of him. He had refused to glorify God actively, he must glorify Him passively. The Jews did not at all disapprove of this conduct on Gods part as long as it concerned only Pharaoh or the Gentiles; but what they affirmed, in virtue of their Divine election, was, that never, and on no condition, could they themselves be the objects of such a judgment. They restricted the liberty of Divine judgment on themselves, as they restricted the liberty of grace toward the Gentiles. Paul in our verse re-establishes both liberties, vindicating Gods sole right to judge whether this or that man possesses the conditions on which He will think fit to show him favour, or those which will make it suitable for Him to punish by hardening him. Thus understood--and we do not think that either the context of the apostle or that of Exodus allows it to be understood otherwise--it offers nothing to shock the conscience; it is entirely to the glory of the Divine character. (Prof. Godet.)

The case of Pharaoh

Note the present tense, the Scripture says. It is not a thing of the past; there is an element of timelessness in the utterance. If the Scripture ever spoke at all, it continues to speak. It speaks to the autocrat of Egypt in no faltering tone. Greater than He was at work, who indeed had raised him up--not merely to the throne of Egypt, nor from the sickness of boils and blains; for no mention is made of illness but (see also Zec_11:16; Mat_11:11; Joh_7:52) in the sense of among men, on the stage of the world. God said, Let him be, and he was. He became a man and a monarch. He had a place in the Divine plan--to display the Divine power. In those idolatrous days the minds of thoughtful men were perplexed by the gods many whose reality was assumed by less considerate minds. Pharaoh scorned the authority of the God of the Hebrews (Exo_5:2). who now appealed to various demonstrations of His peerless power--a kind of proof readiest for argument, and most adapted to the spirit of the age and that of the tyrant. It requires, in some measure, a wise mind or a benevolent heart to appreciate exhibitions of wisdom or benevolence; but it requires little more than a capacity for terror to appreciate exhibitions of power. Pharaoh was compelled time after time to pause and reflect, but continued unsubdued, and the voice of retribution is first heard in the words, that I may display, etc., pointing ultimately to the catastrophe of the Red Sea (Exo_15:9-11). But the Hebrew says, That I might show thee--conveying the idea of mercifulness which goes before retribution which is to be reluctantly resorted to only in the sad event of mercy being spurned. The LXX., however, show in thee, uses a liberty in harmony with the acknowledged principles of the Divine government, and so Paul held himself justified in adopting it. The display of peerless power was in the first place for the instruction of Pharaoh; and it was only when that was repelled that the Lord turned to the dread alternative which runs onward, and that My name might be published in all the earth, i.e., failing thy repentance. The intervenience of latent conditional clauses is common in both promises and threatenings--e.g., in Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, there is a latent condition, and if thou persevere in thy faith. In the reverse threat, He that believeth not shall be condemned, there is a corresponding intervenience, and persisteth in his unbelief. Jonahs message to the Ninevites is a case in point: and on this principle we are to interpret this solemn warning to Pharaoh. I raised thee up that I might show thee (Hebrews) My power, and failing thine improvement of this instruction that by thy overthrow My name may be magnified, all the world over, above all the gods. (J. Morison, D.D.)

The character and history of Pharaoh

However clearly we may perceive the correctness and force of any abstract truth, it will usually make a more deep and definite impression when illustrated by some example. We are assured, for instance, of the omnipotence of God; but who does not find his own conceptions of it more definite and impressive when he turns to its illustrations in his own frame or in the wonders of creation? It is as adapted to this tendency that the Scriptures supply us with so many illustrative examples of their sentiments and requirements. This observation will be found applicable to the present subject--the sovereignty of God in dispensing the blessings of His saving grace. He tells us that He will have mercy on whom He will have mercy, and He illustrates this by the cases of Saul of Tarsus and the dying thief. He tells us that whom He will He hardeneth, and illustrates it in the case of the proud Egyptian monarch. Note--

I. Some of the most prominent and instructive points connected with Pharaohs character. And history.

1. His bold and impious defiance of Divine authority. Who is the Lord, that I should obey His voice, to let Israel go? This spirit is too often evinced still in those who meet the appeals of God with, What is the Almighty that we should serve Him? Our lips are our own: who is Lord over us?

2. The severe and repeated discipline to which he was subjected in order to humble and subdue this feeling. It is needless to repeat the ten plagues. These were not only most afflictive in themselves, but marked in the mode of their occurrence, a line of separation being so strikingly drawn between the Israelites and the Egyptians. How frequent are the instances in which God, to humble the sinners pride, subjects him to providential visitation!

3. The powerful but still defective impressions of which he was the subject. Of this the narrative supplies repeated evidence in the various compromises into which he seeks to enter, which were revoked as soon as the visitation was withdrawn. And so sinners, while Divine judgments press upon them, what sorrow will they express, and what salutary purposes they will form; and though, like Herod, they would do many things, yet, like him, they refuse compliance on some, and fail to give up the heart to God.

4. The persevering hostility he continued to discover. If his heart somewhat relented under suffering, it seemed in every quiet interval to become increasingly determined (Exo_10:10-28). All this does but illustrate what is still going on in many a sinner, who having been for a time alarmed, discovers, as the sense of danger gradually subsides, a mind rendered only the more callous.

5. The striking but awful visitation by which Pharaoh was at last overthrown. None hath hardened himself against God and prospered.

II. The vindication of the divine conduct toward Pharaoh.

1. God placed him in a situation adapted to develop the peculiar tendency of his sinful disposition, which appears to have been proud superiority. God afforded scope for the special display of this feeling by placing him on a despotic throne. God may still act toward some on the same principle, but it should be remembered that the very circumstances which expose to greater danger will only render superiority to them the more striking and honourable: and that where, as in the case of Pharaoh, an individual fails, he does so by his own act.

2. God afforded to him the most ample evidence of the folly and danger of his continued resistance.

(1) He had the plainest proof that Moses and Aaron were the accredited messengers of God.

(2) The displays of the Divine power were such as must have forced on his mind the consciousness of his own impotence.

(3) He was made to perceive how plainly all these exercises of Divine wrath were entirely and only in consequence of his own determined obduracy.

3. God designed in this case to exhibit an impressible example of the fearful danger of a proud and impious defiance of Divine authority.

Conclusion:

1. How proper and important the prayer which Christ has taught us--Lead us not into temptation.

2. How fatally defective and delusive those religious impressions and purposes which are founded on present alarming apprehensions of danger, while the heart remains unhumbled and in love with sin.

3. How vain and hopeless ultimate resistance to Divine authority.

4. How earnestly should we deprecate the thought of being abandoned to a hardened state of mind.

5. Let no humble and penitent sinner be discouraged by this illustration of Gods righteous justice. (H. Bromley.)

Lessons from the case of Pharaoh

I. The sovereignty of God is a great fact. Deity is the one primal cause, of which all secondary causes are but effects. All things owe their existence to Him. What are called laws of nature, are but the modes by which God works. Not a sparrow can fall to the ground without His permission. God rules among men as certainly as among suns and stars. The destinies of nations as surely obey His will as the revolutions of planets.

II. Gods decrees are irrespective of the actions of men (verses10-13). The strong Hebraistic expression means, Jacob have I chosen, and Esau have I rejected, which was contrary to the usual law of primogeniture. There is no injustice in this. Our Lord has told us that Offences must needs come, but woe to the man by whom they come. The crucifixion of Christ was by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, brought about: yet it was by wicked hands that Christ was crucified and slain. Happy are we if we do Gods will; but the work will be done whether we do it or not. God is independent of human agency, though He employs it to accomplish His purposes.

III. Gods doings must always be characterised by justice, truth, mercy, and love. If Pharaoh was created only to be damned, and if God all along intended he should not let the people go, such conduct would be--

1. Unjust and cruel on the part of God. To turn the heart of any one to hate is a dreadful act, even in a man, where the influence may be resisted. How much more so where an Omnipotent Being is operating! Upon this principle all the plagues of Egypt were shocking cruelties. The doctrine that some men are predestinated to eternal life and others to damnation, regardless of the actions of either, is monstrously unjust.

2. Not in harmony with His truth. For upon this principle God deliberately deceived the Egyptians. The message was, Let My people go, etc. On the Calvinistic theory, Moses was either aware of Gods purpose or he was not. If he knew that Pharaoh was secretly influenced by God, so that he could not let the Israelites go, then the whole thing is a solemn mockery, the leading characteristic of which is deception. But if he did not know, then he was himself deceived by God, an idea which is too shocking to be thought of. A God of truth could not thus act.

3. Opposed to Gods mercy and love. The Lord is good to all, and His mercy is over all His works. Here, however, we should have a terrible exception.

IV. In election and the hardening of mens hearts God does not destroy their freedom. This hardening is of different kinds, and has reference to various subjects.

1. Great national events. The whole of this chapter refers to the state of the Jews. Paul expresses great sorrow for his people, that they were in danger of being cut off from their long enjoyed blessings. He then goes on to show that their privileges no longer specially appertained to them. God had now determined to elect a Church for Himself out of all nations. The Jews prided themselves greatly on being the seed of Abraham. Paul shows them from their own history that only a portion of that seed had enjoyed the boasted privileges (verses 6, 7, 10, etc.). And even in the case of these all had not equally shared the blessing. For they are not all Israel which are of Israel. A great part of the ten tribes who had been carried into captivity had never returned. There are therefore three exclusions, and the argument is that there might be yet another. The whole affair is one of peoples, not individuals. The election of Isaac and Jacob and the rejection of Ishmael and Esau had nothing to do personally with any one of them. A reference, in the case of the elder serving the younger, is made to Gen_25:23, but Esau never did serve Jacob personally. The other quotation is from Mal_1:2-3, and certainly refers to the Edomites. Was there then unrighteousness, i.e., unfaithfulness, with God? By no means, because it was a general principle laid down in the Mosaic law, and one which consequently they were bound to acknowledge, I will have mercy, etc. These words are from Exo_33:19, a reference to which will show that they have no relation whatever to the pardon of sin, but applying to the granting of special privileges. And how true they are! In our time we see one nation or people favoured with blessings which are denied to another. So then it is not of him that willeth, etc.

2. The position of individuals in society. God gives to us all different places and work. One man rolls in wealth, another has to struggle with poverty. This man is endowed with a genius which shalt cause his name to ride down the ages; and that, just the necessary brain power to play his lowly part on lifes stage. In this there is no injustice. God dispenses His favours as He will. Our business is to play the part allotted to us, consistently, conscientiously, and energetically.

3. Life and death. These also are in the hands of the Lord. The infant dies almost before it has begun to live. The youth full of promise passes away in lifes green spring. Men die in the prime of life, and in the decrepitude of age. Is this unjust? No. Death is no respecter of persons or of ages. And He who was dead and liveth for evermore, holds the keys of Hades and of death. We shall each live our appointed time, and then no power on earth can save us.

4. Salvation. In some places it is said that Pharaoh hardened his own heart, and in others that God hardened it. Both are strictly correct. The rejection of truth and the abuse of our privileges ever tend to harden the heart. This is a spiritual law as certain in its operation as the law of gravitation. As soon as Pharaoh saw a respite from his afflictions, his heart was hardened. And how often do men make all kinds of promises, but no sooner does relief come than we fall back again into a state worse than the first. The sun, says Theodoret, by the force of its heat, moistens the wax and dries the clay, softening the one and hardening the other; and as this produces opposite effects by the same power, so through the long-suffering of God, which reaches to all, some receive good and others evil; some are softened and others hardened.

V. Man is therefore responsible, and is left without excuse. The freedom of the will is a fact testified to by the consciousness of every man. When, in accordance with this freedom, we depart from God, the fact is a terrible one. And the difficulty of returning becomes greater day by day. The remorse that we experience testifies to the fact that we feel our responsibility. Necessitarians at every moment of their lives give the lie to their faith. As we are free, then, our business is to use our freedom aright. Our duty is to love God and keep His commandments. Father Eternal! Thine is to decree; mine, both in heaven and earth, to do Thy will. (G. Sexton, LL.D.)

Pharaoh no unconditional reprobate

I. The benefit or indulgence offered by God unto Pharaoh time after time, upon condition of his repentance and dismission of his people, as, viz., his immunity from further plagues or judgments from God, show that the means vouchsafed were effectual, and sufficient to have wrought him to repentance. The proffer or promise of a benefit upon the performance of such or such a condition supposeth a sufficiency of power to perform this condition. To promise anything upon other terms is rather an insultation over the weakness of him to whom the promise is made, than any matter of kindness which the nature of a promise still imports. The promise of a reward of a thousand pounds made unto a cripple upon condition he will run twenty miles within an hours space, is merely to deride such a man in his misery. Therefore certainly Pharaoh, God by many promissory intimations signifying that upon his repentance the judgments threatened should not come upon him, is hereby shown to have had power to fulfil the condition.

II. Pharaoh, by the means vouchsafed, did several times truly repent of his obstinancy, and gave order for the dismission of the people (Exo_10:16-17; Exo_12:31-32, etc.). Therefore he was--questionless--in a sufficient capacity to have repented and dismissed the people. That afterwards he repented of this repentance, and returned to his former obdurateness, is no argument that his former repentance was not true. Yea, if this repentance had been hollow or counterfeit, his repenting of it had been no sin. And besides, if the tree--as our Saviour saith--be known by the fruit, that repentance of Pharaoh, which produced--

1. Confession of sin committed both against God and men (Exo_10:16).

2. Application by way of entreaty unto the saints to pray unto God for him (Exo_10:16).

3. An express order with encouragement unto Moses and Aaron, to expedite the departure of their people according to the commandment of God, and this in as ample manner as themselves desired it (Exo_12:31-32); that repentance must needs be conceived to have been a true repentance. And, doubtless, had Pharaoh persisted in that repentance, and not relapsed into his former provocation--which he was no ways necessitated unto--he had escaped that dreadful stroke from Heaven, which he met with in the Red Sea. (John Goodwin.)

An impenitent sinner in relation to Gods mercy

Powerfully does Paul, in this chapter, argue down the narrow predestinarianism of the Jews. They concluded that, being the lineal descendants of Abraham, they were predestinated to the mercy of God. The apostles method of combating this dogma may be briefly stated:--

1. He assures them of the deep interest he felt in them, and of the high estimation which he had formed of their privileges.

2. He affirms that God did not dispense His mercy on the principle of patriarchal descent.

3. That Gods mercy is ever bestowed on the principle of sovereignty alone. This he illustrates--

(1) By Gods declaration to Moses (verse 15). This language does not mean--

(a) That He does not show mercy to all men; this would be contrary to fact.

(b) Nor that He gives to some favours which He does not bestow on others. This is true, but this is not the truth here.

(c) Nor that He bestows all His mercies irrespective of conduct. This is always true of existence, with all its native attributes and talents, sometimes true of temporal circumstances, but never true of mental and spiritual excellence.

(d) Nor that He is not disposed to save all. This would be contrary both to His positive assurances and remedial measures.

(e) But it means simply that the reason of mercy is ever in Himself, and not in the creature (verse 16).

(2) By Gods declaration to Pharaoh. The passage leads us to consider an impenitent sinner:--

I. As raised up from affliction by the mercy of God. Pharaoh and his people had just been visited with the distressing plague of the boils. Jehovah condescends to restore the monarch to health. It is in relation to this recovery that these words were spoken. It was mercy that was dealing with this man. Why else was his probationary day lengthened out after the first warning had been delivered? Why else were there so many and varied influences employed to subdue his rebellious will? With one volition of the Almighty mind he would have ceased to be. What hindered that volition? Nothing but mercy. This is but a striking example of Gods ordinary dealing with all sinners here. Mercy afflicts and restores. This fact is testified--

(1) By the Scriptures.

(2) By every sinners consciousness.

II. As morally impressed by the mercy of God. There are two kinds of power--physical and moral. These differ not in source; each has its source in mind. But their objects differ: the one acts on matter, and the other on intelligent natures. Which did Jehovah purpose showing forth in Pharaoh? Undoubtedly the moral. His physical power could be seen far more gloriously in earthquakes and storms, etc., than in alternately afflicting and restoring the body of Pharaoh, or in any of the plagues. Besides, a man does not require a higher manifestation of physical power than he has everywhere around him. It was moral power--power over the monarchs mind and heart--that the Almighty sought now to exercise. In thee. It was everywhere out of him, But why show this power in him? It must have been either to promote holiness in him, or sin, and who will dare say it was the latter? It was to turn Pharaoh from the error of his ways that this power was employed; and this is ever Gods aim with the impenitent sinner. There were two things connected with this power in Pharaoh which always characterise its operations--

(1) It was sin-convicting. Several times, when this power was working in him, did he exclaim, I have sinned this time: the Lord is righteous, and I and my people are wicked. Cain, Belshazzar, Felix, Judas, and others, have felt the same. The great aim of God in thus making His power bear on the sinful world is to convince it of sin, of righteousness, etc.

(2) It was resistible. Pharaoh resisted it: it would not be moral, and man would not be responsible were it otherwise. We cannot resist the physical power of God, but we can His moral. The Jews did always resist the Holy Ghost.

III. As strikingly manifesting the mercy of God. That My name might be declared, etc. The name of God is frequently employed as expressive of His goodness. Gods dealing with Pharaoh declares throughout all times that it is--

1. Longsuffering. How long the Almighty condescended to strive with this man!

2. Earnest. See how numerous and varied the means employed.

3. Terminable. Mercy at last took her wing, delivered him up to justice, and you know his fate. I know no more impressive commentary than Gods dealing with Pharaoh on As I live, saith the Lord, I have no pleasure in the death of a sinner, etc.

IV. As incidentally hardened by the mercy of god. Verse 18 is Pauls conclusion from Gods declaration. It is nothing more than a strong method of reasserting the principle that the reason of mercy is not in the creature, but in the Creator. How did God harden Pharaohs heart?

1. Not by intention. This is contrary to the purpose stated, which was to show His sin-convicting and soul-saving power in him; and this, too, is repugnant to all our highest and most truthful notions of Gods purity and benevolence.

2. Not by fitness of instrumentality. Examine the means employed, and you will discover a wonderful adaptation to an opposite end.

3. Not by any positive agency for the purpose. This is unnecessary. The sinner is hardened, and harder he will become, if he be ]eft alone. Divine agency is required not to harden, but refine--not to destroy, but to save.

4. How, then? In the same way as He hardens the heart of that man who year after year listens to the most powerful sermons, and still remains in his sin. Pharaohs hardening is a typal fact. The ministry of the prophets had its Pharaohs; so had that of Christ, and of the apostles. The gospel proves the savour of death unto death, as well as of life unto life.

Conclusion: This solemn fact is suggestive of two things:

1. The native energy of soul. It can get good out of evil, and evil out of good; transmute food into poison, and poison into food. It is made to be not the servant, but the sovereign of circumstances.

2. The moral perverseness of soul. Instead of using this power to subordinate evil to good, it does so to subordinate good to evil--makes mercy a destroyer. (D. Thomas, D.D.)

Divine sovereignty and human responsibility

First to the right, then to the left, the road was ever ascending but always twisting, and thus, by easy marches, we were able to reach the summit of the pass; a straight line would have been shorter for the eagles wing, but no human foot could have followed it. Nobody called us inconsistent for thus facing about; we kept the road, and no one could complain. If we honestly desire to gain the heights of Divine truth, we shall find many zigzags in the road: here our face will front Divine sovereignty with all its lofty grandeur, and anon we shall turn in the opposite direction, towards the frowning peaks of human responsibility. What matters it if we appear to be inconsistent, so long as we keep the highway of Scripture, which is our only safe road to knowledge! Angels may, perhaps, be systematic divines; for men it should be enough to follow the Word of God, let its teachings wind as they may. (C. H. Spurgeon.)

Therefore hath He mercy on whom He will have mercy, and whom He will He hardeneth.--

Gods sovereignty

I. Its display in the exercise of--

1. Mercy.

2. Justice.

II. Its harmony with the doctrine of free grace.

III. Its use.

1. For conviction and conversion.

2. He might have hardened you--may yet do it if you repent not. (J. Lyth, D.D.)

Pardon or harden

Since God is not baffled by mens infatuation, but can turn to account even obdurate Pharaohs, we may rest assured that He will either pardon or harden. The English on whom He will is fitted to bring out a volitional idea, but this is not quite so prominent in the Greek. It is wish rather than will that is expressed (see 2Co_11:12; 2Co_11:32; 2Co_12:6; Gal_4:9; Gal_6:12; Gal_4:20). God has mercy on whom He desires to have (verses 15, 16) pardoning mercy. The great alternative is and whom He desires He hardens. There is a sphere of things in which God does not desire to have any recourse to this dread alternative (1Ti_2:4; 2Pe_3:9). In that sphere judgment is His strange act, but there are assuredly circumstances which make it right for God to desire to brand with His hardest stigma persisted-in iniquity. Paul speaks of hardness manifestly because his mind had been brooding over the career of Pharaoh. Hardness when predicated of the neck denotes unyieldingness, but when predicated of the heart, as here, insensibility. This insensibility might be predicated either in respect of the duty of permitting Israel to depart; or in respect of the danger that was impending over him in case of his refusal; or of an interblending of both. Which is the insensibility affirmed of Pharaoh? Before determining the answer it may be noted that whichever it was there can be no real difficulty as to Gods action on the monarchs heart. It is psychologically impossible that such determined impenitence as his can be cherished, and yet produce no effect on the sensibilities of the heart. Faith and penitence always work; so do unbelief and disbelief. In such necessary working Gods hand must needs be imminent, but all the blame must be attached to the man himself. He alone furnished the reason why God hardened him, and hence he is sometimes said to have hardened his own heart, just as believers are said to purify theirs. Whether the induration, then, was such a penal condition as consisted of insensibility to duty, or to danger, or to the two intertwined there is no difficulty in supposing it to be by the hand of God.

1. But there is a critical reason why we give the preference to insensibility to danger. There are three words in Hebrew employed in this case. One is employed twice (Exo_7:3; Exo_13:15), another seven times (Exo_8:15; Exo_8:32 (28), 9:7, 34, 10:1; 1Sa_11:6; see also Exo_7:14). The third occurs twelve times (Exo_4:21; Exo_7:13; Exo_7:22; Exo_8:19; Exo_9:12; Exo_9:35; Exo_10:20; Exo_10:27; Exo_11:10; Exo_14:4; Exo_14:8; Exo_14:17). Now the latter is a term that naturally suggests insensibility to danger, for in its intransitive form it properly means to be strong, and is translated (Jos_23:6; 2Sa_10:12; 2Sa_13:28; 1Ch_19:13; Ezr_10:4; Psa_27:14; Psa_31:24 (25); Isa_41:6) to be of good courage, to be courageous; while in its transitive form, it properly means to make strong, and is actually translated (Deu_1:38; Deu_3:28; 2Sa_11:25; 2Ch_35:2; Psa_64:5 (6); Isa_41:7) to encourage. When such a term is used to denote penal induration, it is natural to suppose that the hardness will be somewhat allied to a spirit of courage, and consequently that it will consist of a kind of dreadnaught spirit. There will be something of hardiness in it; indeed some strong accentuation of foolhardiness.

2. Exegesis warrants the same conclusion. The passages which deal with the monarchs obduracy are more easily explicable on the hypothesis that his hardness was infatuated hardness and insensibility to danger. Look, e.g., at Exo_14:2-9; Exo_14:16-17. Pharaoh was intoxicated with his own high sufficiency. A penal blight had fallen on his reason. Rushing onward in daring recklessness, he and his chivalry were penally swept into destruction. And thus the Lord, by inflicting on them, first the most insensitive obduracy, and secondly the most tragical termination of their career, got Him honour upon Pharaoh and upon all his host. Pharaoh, says Fry, had not, in immediate consequence of his hardiness, any more sinfulness in his heart than he had previously; but he dared to do more. In selecting the word hardens the apostle suggests a parallel between Pharaoh and the Israelites. There was something ominously Pharaonic in the spirit of the unbelieving Jews. (J. Morison, D.D.)

St. Pauls theology

(text, verses 19-21, and Rom_5:5-8):--

1. The former of these two passages read by itself, without anything to qualify it, sounds like a naked assertion of the sovereignty of God; and as based on mere power. It seems as if St. Paul were saving that the might of God is the measure of His right; that, having made us, He is perfectly at liberty to do what He pleases with us. I say, It seems so; because we know that St. Paul cannot mean to assert this, for otherwise he must have forgotten what he had written in our second text.

2. In a passage like this a great deal depends upon the tone which one reads into it, and the feeling with which one reads it. Now this ninth chapter must not be separated from the tenth and the eleventh, which together form one indivisible section, and ought to be, and must be read together, if we are to understand them at all. The tone of the whole is then easily discoverable from its commencement in Rom_9:1-5, and from its conclusion in Rom_11:30-33.

3. The commentators seem generally to take it for granted that, in my first text, St. Paul is arguing with captious objectors and presumptuous cavillers, whom he is putting down with a high hand. But it is, to say the least, worth our while to consider whether St. Paul is not stating frankly his own difficulties and solving them as best he can, and really working his own way, painfully and laboriously, through the darkness into the light. Viewed in this aspect the passage becomes infinitely more interesting, instructive, and pathetic. We should be sorry to think that St. Paul had set an example of that high-handed dealing with doubts and difficulties which has always proved so disastrous. But if he knew, as he seems to have known, what it was not to stifle, but to face and fight, his doubts; then his example may be of the greatest possible service to us, even though his difficulties were not ours.

4. Yet are they not ours? If Gods will acts in this sovereign, arbitrary way--hardening this heart, softening that, as chance or caprice may direct--what then? Is not the ground of human responsibility cut from beneath us? What room is there, then, for moral disapproval, and for retributive justice? Nor do we evade the difficulty by throwing the difficulty back one step, and saying, It is by the operation of a law of mans nature as God created it, that he who will not turn at last cannot. And God, who established that law of mans nature, is said in Scripture to do that which occurs under it, or results from it. He has framed at His pleasure the moral constitution of man, according to which the rebellious sinner is at last obdurate. This is the old, old puzzle, which has haunted mens minds from the very first--now by one name, now by another: liberty and necessity. The moment we begin to reason upon this problem, we are lost in perplexity. The interplay of the Divine will and the human can never have its path determined by any calculus yet discovered. As soon as it is attempted, one or other of the two forces is sure to be omitted from the calculation, and to disappear altogether. We are left either with a naked sovereignty on the Divine side, accompanied by an absolute bondage on the human side; or else we are left with a Divine will which is no will at all.

5. At this point we feel what a difference it makes in our text, whether we regard it as an endeavour to put down objectors, or whether we regard it as a debate in Pauls mind with doubts and difficulties. In the first case we can all see that it only removes the difficulty to a point at which it ceases to press against the reason only to press more vehemently against the conscience and the moral sense. For it may well be asked, Is, then, man, with all his capacity of suffering, and his sense of right and wrong, merely as the passionless clay in the potters hand. If so, what are we to think of the Creator? Does the fact of creation invest the Creator with unlimited rights, unaccompanied by any corresponding responsibilities? Or does it answer most nearly to that earthly relation of parent and child which, whilst establishing the parents claim to the obedience of the child, establishes also the childs claim to the love and care of the parents? St. Pauls reply is very different, if we regard it as a caution, addressed to himself, as he goes sounding on his dim and perilous way, through problems which human reason is all incompetent to solve. It is, then, tantamount to saying, What am I, that I should dare to exercise my speculation upon such a theme as this--I, who am but a finite being in the hands of Infinite power?

6. Now, this attitude of mind is the true philosophic attitude, for The foundation of all true philosophy is humility. And this is the attitude which St. Paul is most careful to inculcate elsewhere, e.g., Now we see through a mirror; the reflection only, not the object itself--darkly; more exactly, in a riddle--but then, face to face. And this is the attitude which our Lord inculcates, bidding us humble ourselves, and become as little children. And this, indeed, is the attitude which, the more earnestly and seriously we inquire into questions of all kinds, the more do we find ourselves compelled to adopt. The more the circle of our knowledge enlarges, the larger becomes the circumference, at every point of which we feel our ignorance, and have the sense of vastness and mystery forced upon us.

7. St. Paul, however, does not leave the matter so. We can leave many problems unsolved--this of the relation of the human will to the Divine amongst others--when we have settled it clearly in our own minds, how we shall think of God--of His character, of His purpose and feeling towards his human creation: not till then. As we read chaps. 9-11., carefully and as a whole, we feel that St. Paul makes little or no progress towards a solution of his doubts, until we reach Rom_11:32-33. He rises above his own efforts to reason the thing out, in the strength of a fresh perception of that unsearchable glory of God, which may be safely trusted to do nothing but what is wise, just, and loving. This perception does not come through any process of reasoning, but breaks upon his soul like light. He escapes at one bound from the trammels of his own logic, in the sense of that grace and love of God in Christ, of which he writes in our second text.

8. Very few of us will be able to follow the course of St. Pauls argument in these three chapters. But all of us can seize that point of view of his, which enables him to trust the future of his beloved Israel--to the unsearchable grace and wisdom of God. Where had he learned that trust? Not at the feet of Gamaliel; not through all his vast stores of Greek and Rabbinical learning; not through any exercise of his own quick intelligence and acute reasoning powers; but at the foot of the Cross. It was there and thence that he had learned the boundless charity of God; had learned to trust himself to that charity; had learned (harder lesson!) to trust his loved ones to that charity. (Dean Vaughan.)

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom 9:17-18. For — Or, moreover, rather, as it seems γαρ ought to be translated, (the passage here quoted being no proof of what immediately goes before,) God has an indisputable right to reject those who will not accept his blessings on his own terms. And this he exercised in the case of Pharaoh; to whom, after many instances of stubbornness and rebellion, he said, as it is recorded in Scripture; For this very thing have I raised thee up — That is, unless thou repent, this will surely be the consequence of my raising thee up, making thee a great and glorious king; that my power will be shown upon thee — As, indeed, it was, by the terrible judgments brought on Egypt, and overwhelming him and his army in the sea; and my name declared through all the earth — As it is at this day. Perhaps this may have a still further meaning. It seems that God was resolved to show his power over the river, the insects, other animals, (with the natural causes of their health, diseases, life, and death,) over meteors, the air, the sun, (all of which were worshipped by the Egyptians, from whom other nations learned their idolatry,) and, at once, over all their gods, by that terrible stroke, of slaying all their priests and their choicest victims, the firstborn of man and beast: and all this with a design, not only to deliver his people Israel, (for which a single act of omnipotence would have sufficed,) but to convince the Egyptians, that the objects of their worship were but the creatures of Jehovah, and entirely in his power; and to draw them and the neighbouring nations who should hear of all these wonders, from their idolatry, to worship the one God. For the execution of this design, (in order to the display of the divine power over the various objects of their worship, in a variety of wonderful acts, which were, at the same time, just punishments for their cruel oppression of the Israelites,) God was pleased to raise to the throne of an absolute monarchy, a man, not whom he had made wicked on purpose, but whom he found so, the proudest, the most daring, and obstinate, of all the Egyptian princes: and who, being incorrigible, well deserved to be set up in that situation, where the divine judgments fell the heaviest. Therefore — Or, so then, upon the whole, we may conclude; he hath mercy on whom he will have mercy — Namely, on those that comply with his terms, on them that repent and believe in Christ; and whom he will — Namely, them that remain in impenitence and unbelief, and who reject his counsel against themselves; he hardeneth — Leaves to the hardness of their hearts.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

CRITICAL NOTES

Rom_9:17.—According to Sir G. Wilkinson, the Pharaoh here meant was Thothmes III., not drowned, but overthrown in the Red Sea. Reigned twenty-five years after that event. So Jewish tradition carried on afterwards a vigorous war with the northern nations. Sculptured records of his successes still preserved in the monuments he erected. Gave encouragement to the arts of peace. Founded numerous buildings in Upper and Lower Egypt and in Ethiopia. Made extensive additions to the temples at Thebes. Improved Coptos, Memphis, and Heliopolis by his taste for architecture. From caprice and love of change made columns with reversed capitals at Karnak. The last king of the nineteenth dynasty, Si Pta Menephtha, ‘the light of the sun,” was not buried in his own tomb, and may have been this Pharaoh. Others say Thothmes II. Two astronomical notes of time on contemporary monuments of his successor, Thothmes III., or Rameses the Great, show the accession of the latter and consequent death of the former to have taken place on the Egyptian day answering to May 4–5, 1515 B.C., or, astronomically verified, the twelfth of the second spring moon, the Hebrew second month (Stones Crying Out).

Rom_9:18.—σκληρύνει, hardens (indurat). Pharaoh’s heart hardened by God in fact by His longsuffering and delay of punishment.

Rom_9:23.—ἐνδείκ. applied to wrath as known before, γνωρ. to grace as yet comparatively unknown.

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.—Rom_9:17-24

Divine liberty.—There must be in all discussions about the divine nature and the divine proceedings questions which can never be satisfactorily settled, in this world at least. This is not to be considered astonishing, if God be infinitely great and men be infinitely little. We can only fringe the boundless realm of the infinite greatness. All we appear to do in the settlement of our difficulties is to push the difficulty a little further back. We explain but never answer fairly the questions: Whence sin? Why moral evil? How is it that a Pharaoh hardens himself against light and reason, and to his own undoing? Why not have humility enough to confess our ignorance, to acknowledge that there must necessarily be much in the infinitely great, in the eternally vast and complex, which must be beyond our comprehension? We at least do not presume to settle points above reason, though, when all is seen, not contrary to reason. We simply pray that some heavenly light may be shed upon our pathway.

I. Let us then observe that divine liberty is not arbitrary.—Not arbitrary in the sense of being despotic or capricious. The God of love is no reasonless despot; the All-wise cannot be capricious. We talk of our fellows as having their little caprices. But if we think of the unchangeable God as being capable of change in any direction, we can never rightly suppose that He changes without sufficient reason. We are not to speak of God as having mercy on whom He will have mercy, as if the divine will were the mere faculty of moving from one being to another in the way of favour without any wise reason. If God is self-determined solely by His own judgment, it is because that judgment is regulated by infinite wisdom and goodness.

II. Divine liberty then is ruled by the great law of right.—What is right? Is it dependent upon the will of Deity? Is it antecedent to that will? We should say, concomitant. The will of God is coeternal with moral right and fitness. However the law of right arises, one thing is certain, that divine liberty is not opposed to the morally right. God is eternally free, but He is not free to do wrong,—free, because God never wishes to do wrong. Divine freedom is never human licentiousness. God does not will “to show His wrath,” either to display His divine liberty or to give vent to revenge. “What if God, willing to show His wrath,” etc. St. Paul does not affirm that God does show His wrath. God makes His power known in the marvellous way in which He endures so much longsuffering. Let us believe in the eternally right, the morally fit. Let us rise above all difficulties by grasping to our hearts the truth that God can do no wrong.

III. Divine liberty is guided by all-wise though inscrutable purposes.—“Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up.” Even with the help of a St. Paul we cannot read the strange language of the divine purposes. The very alphabet we cannot master; the verbs have intricate moods and tenses which we cannot follow. The Pharaohs of time are dark mysteries. The sound of the rolling waters deadens our ears, so that we cannot catch the lessons of divine movements. God’s purposes are inscrutable because of their far-reaching sweep, because of the infinite wisdom according to which they are planned. Let folly bow with reverent head in the presence of all-wise purposes. One purpose is revealed that God’s name may be declared throughout all the earth. God’s name is written in nature. God’s new name of love is written in revelation. God’s name of power and of wisdom is declared in the rise and fall of nations, in the downfall of tyrannies, in the overthrow of unrighteous thrones, in the destruction of foolish and tyrannical Pharaohs. Let us move, regulate our lives, in harmony with the revealed purpose of infinite wisdom.

IV. Divine liberty is directed to gracious ends.—The divine Potter has made known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy which He had afore prepared unto glory. The riches of God’s glory are seen in the vessels of mercy. As the human potter takes pride in the vessels that show his skill and that are raised to positions of honour in the earthly palace, so we venture to assert that the divine Potter glories in the vessels of mercy that are raised to positions of honour in the heavenly mansions. The heart of infinite love must be touched with compassion whenever a poor, blind, misguided Pharaoh is engulfed with his hosts by the resilient waters. Whatever may be our perplexities, whatever may be our creeds, let us hear this song rising clearly above every other sound, and sweetly charming away all our doubts and fears—“There is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth.” This truth we may further learn, that God’s power and glory cannot be declared by numerous vessels showing incompleteness, inadequacy, incompetence, on the part of the divine Potter. Imagine a human potter having his workshop well-nigh full of vessels that none would wish to purchase. Such a potter would soon be bankrupt. Are we to imagine the divine Potter, the infinite Architect of the universe, the essential Goodness, the unerring Wisdom, forming vessels that will for ever redound to His discredit? Vessels of mercy in large numbers will brilliantly reflect infinite goodness and wisdom as they adorn, as so many monumental pillars, the boundless temple of God’s gathered worshippers. Let us learn, not to find fault with divine proceedings, not to suppose that we can understand everything, not even in thought to resist the divine will, for that will is on the side of goodness and moves in mercy to man. Above all things let us heartily obey the divine call. He calls from sin to holiness, from ruin to salvation in Christ Jesus, from the spoiling agency of the satanic potter to the repairing and glorifying agency of the divine-human Potter. Oh to be monumental vessels of divine grace and mercy in the vast storehouse of divine curiosities! Vessels of mércy! What exquisite skill they display! What richness of spiritual texture! What beauty of moral tints! How they shine in the unclouded light that radiates about the eternal throne!

Rom_9:21. The sovereign right of God.—Some aspects of the Deity may be less pleasing to contemplate than others. The pride of man rejoices not at first in the thought of the Majesty which overawes his littleness and compels him to submission. Yet as a hard flint forcibly struck emits a bright spark, and as a rough husk often covers a sweet kernel, so these stern views of the Almighty may, if reverently faced and meditated upon, yield salutary, ennobling, and even comforting reflections.

I. The Potter claims absolute right to deal with the clay as He thinks fit.—His arbitrary power does not signify the absence of proper reasons for His selection. As in the calling of Israel to peculiar service and responsibility and honour, so everywhere can an election be discerned. We do not start in the race of life with exactly similar equipment, though we live in tabernacles of clay. If the physical and spiritual powers are the same in essence, like the particles of “the same lump,” yet the faculties of some have been well trained from the beginning, and their natures have developed under favourable conditions. Here is a lesson of resignation. He is happiest who accepts the will of God as revealed in his lot, assured that God’s decision has ample justification. Even the Stoic philosophy could declare that if man knew the plans of the Superintendent of the universe and saw them in their completeness, he would at once acquiesce in the determinations of the Arbiter of his destiny. This is the truth which mingles with the error of Mohammedan fatalism. We have to do all that lies within our power, and leave the result with Him who is wise and merciful. For the potter is our Father in heaven. How much of the vexation and worry of life is due to a conceit of our capacity, and perhaps to a jealousy of the position and attainments of our neighbours! Be content to fill a lowly place; and the time is at hand when “the pots in the Lord’s house shall be like bowls before the altar.”

II. The Potter has no desire for the destruction of His workmanship.—He cares not to waste His clay, nor to employ it in a manner to secure its speedy extinction. It is a pain to God to see His gifts abused, His image degraded, His work marred. He is said in Rom_9:22 to endure “with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath.” A lesson of hopefulness is here. The Most High will not break His vessels in pieces as long as they are fit for any use, for any post, though humble and insignificant. “Potter and clay endure,” however the wheel of life may turn and fashion the material into altered shapes. If the light of God shines in a vacuum, no brightness is observable. An empty heaven were a dreary home for a God of love, a silent temple for Him who glories in the praises of His people and His works.

III. The Potter prefers to construct the choicest vessels.—The noblest ware pays Him best, and He lovingly exerts His skill on specimens of highest art. Deny not to God the delight which every artist feels in the finest productions of his genius. The most polished mirrors best reflect His glory. A lesson of aspiration therefore. “Covet earnestly the best gifts.” God has made His clay instinct with will and energy; He takes pleasure in the improvement of the vessels, that they may be brought into His sanctuary. It will mightily assist our struggles to be sure that the Captain longs “to bring many sons unto glory.”—S. R. Aldridge.

The parable of the potter and the clay.—Let us notice:—

I. What it does not teach.—Starting from a perfectly sound and correct view as to God’s absolute sovereignty and His right to dispose of men as He pleases, some have thought that St. Paul brings in his reference to the potter and his clay in order to show that in the exercise of that sovereignty God makes some souls to destruction, and that those so made have no ground of complaint. Now whatever truth there may be in such a notion as this, a close examination will show that it is not “the whole truth”—still less is it “nothing but the truth.” God is sovereign Lord, and He has a right to dispose of us all as He will. But that He exercises these rights in any arbitrary or cruel way, reason and Holy Scripture alike lead us to deny. “God is love.” The foreordaining of any creature to everlasting misery is utterly inconsistent with love.

II. Its origin in the sphere of manual industry.—[For description of the potter’s work, see quotation from Thomson’s The Land and the Book on p. 323.] Sometimes it would happen that on account of defect in clay or other cause vessel would be spoiled in process of formation. Potter would crush it up and reduce it once again to shapeless mass, which he would afterwards fashion into perhaps a quite different form. The clay which appeared unfit to make one kind of vessel he would make into another.

III. Its place in Old Testament prophetic teaching.—St. Paul has in his mind the opening verses of Jeremiah 18 (vide Rom_9:1-6). Jeremiah’s parable was spoken of the Jewish nation: “O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the Lord. Behold, as the clay in the potter’s hand, so are ye in Mine hand, house of Israel.” God had a right to mould them as He chose. They rebelled. The vessel was marred in His hand. Yet He strove with them again and again. At length, notwithstanding God’s purposes towards them for good, they so rebelled that they were cut off. In following chap. 19 this terrible fact also foreshadowed in figure. Prophet again receives command from God—this time to take an earthen bottle which has been baked and hardened in the fire. He is to go forth into the valley of Hinnom, and there break the bottle in the sight of the ancients and priests, and in doing so to say, “Even so will I break this people and this city, as one breaketh a potter’s vessel, that cannot be made whole again.” God will strive with sinners again and again, but the hardened and impenitent cannot be allowed to resist His will.

IV. Its bearing upon St. Paul’s argument.—In the opening verses of this chapter the apostle gives expression to his grief that Israel should be hardening their hearts against the gospel. God’s word and promise regarding them have not failed, for all who are Jews naturally are not Jews spiritually, and are therefore not heirs of the promise. Of the seed of Abraham only one son, Isaac, was chosen; of Isaac’s two sons one was utterly rejected. Is God unjust, then? asks the apostle. Impossible! he would reply; God has an absolute right to love and to hate whom He will. And he gives instances illustrating the fact that God has proclaimed pity towards some and meted out retribution to others (Rom_9:17-19). The question next arises, Why doth He yet find fault? If, i.e., wickedness be the result of God’s will, what becomes of man’s responsibility? If a man be bad, can he help it? Who can resist the will of God? This question is stated by the apostle as one which a Jewish objector might and probably would urge. And he treats it as absurd. “Nay but, O man, who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to Him that formed it, Why hast Thou made me thus? Hath not the potter power over the clay, of the same lump to make one vessel unto honour, and another unto dishonour?” Quite true. But St. Paul shrinks back aghast from the horrible supposition that God would predestine any creature to eternal woe. And thus he will not say that God “created vessels of wrath” or “prepared them for destruction”; but he asks: “What if God, willing to show His wrath, and make His power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had afore prepared unto glory, even us, whom He hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?” The vessels of wrath were fitted, not by God, but by themselves, for destruction. Like Pharaoh, they hardened themselves in sin. Their evil character, like Jeremiah’s earthen bottle, had assumed so permanent a shape that no reforming process was possible. The vessels of mercy, on the other hand, were made such by God’s grace moulding and fashioning them into the form that He willed.

V. Its meaning to ourselves.—Clearly this:

1. That God’s purpose is to prepare unto glory all those whom He has called into His Church (Rom_9:21). The potter has a design in view in connection with every lump of clay which he takes into his hand. And God too has a design, a purpose, in every life. He is shaping us into that form which He deems most fitting. Every life has not the same purpose. One is fitted for one sphere of duty, another for another, just as the potter makes vessels of innumerable shapes. And yet each life is successful if only its own particular purpose be fulfilled. A life is no failure because it is lowly and put only to lowly uses, so long as it attains the end for which God designed it. The potter takes the clay into his hand. We are taken in hand by God when made members of His Church; and His first work in us is the forming of our souls aright. The first question is, not as to what we do, but as to what we are—what shape or form our character has taken. The potter makes vessels of various shapes, sizes, tints. God is making characters of various kinds, dealing with souls, fashioning lives, and thus preparing them “unto glory.” Having taken somewhat of the form which God willed, we may then be put to some further end—used for good—employed in the carrying out of some of God’s purposes of grace, and thus the preparation for glory will be advanced a further stage.

2. That we may so resist the will of God as to alter our own destiny, though we can never alter God’s purpose. The potter, when his work is marred, presses the day back again into a shapeless lump, and makes a vessel perhaps of quite another kind. And so, when a man has failed to profit by one kind of earthly discipline, God may subject him to another. There are afflictions which crush a man for a time, soften his heart and make it liable to receive new impressions, and thus he may be led on to begin a new life and be actuated by new aims and hopes. The character which would not assume one good form may thus be made to assume another. Still, the renewed process may fail, for some vessels are “fitted” (alas! by themselves) “to destruction.”

Practical lessons:

1. Thankfulness to God for the revelation of His will towards us. He has willed that a place of honour and usefulness in His kingdom shall be ours. That will shall be done unless we harden ourselves against it. 2 Warning. Beware of resisting God’s Spirit. Beware of the danger of the hardening process. Even if the vessel be remade, if afflictions soften, and the soul be renewed, the process is a terrible one. The preparation for glory is not the work of an instant.

3. Self-examination, Are we earnestly and prayerfully acting out the terms of our baptismal covenant? By our neglect to do so His work is marred, the preparation unto glory ceases to go forward.

4. Heartfelt prayer. Let our petitions ever be offered that God’s will may be done in us and our will conformed to His, so that, under the shaping and fashioning influence of His hand, each may at length become “a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the Master’s use, and prepared unto every good work” (2Ti_2:21).—G. E. P. Reade.

Rom_9:20. The potter and the day.—Two points insisted on:

1. God’s almightiness. He can do whatever He likes. (We do not say He does, but He can do.)

2. Man’s weakness. God allows him to sin.

Two objections made by some men:

1. How can God make on purpose to destroy? Answer: Nowhere stated that He does so.

(1) Similitude looks other way: no potter begins to make anything on purpose to destroy it.

(2) Statement that God is father looks other way.

(3) Statement that all things are made for God’s good pleasure (Rev_4:11) looks other way.

2. Why should God blame us if we are so powerless? How it has been answered: Man, though weak, not an automaton or machine: has a will; can reasonably be blamed for sin. How it is answered here: How can we find fault with absolute Maker, who forms all for good purpose—with absolute Father, who brings all children into the world for good? If they disobey, who can blame Him for punishing them for their good and good of others?

Power, anger (righteous), longsuffering, must be shown. These considerations must be set over against each other: God’s power, God’s purpose; man’s weakness, man’s responsibility.—Dr. Springett.

SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON Rom_9:17-24

The hardening of Pharaoh’s heart.—What effect did all these signs and wonders of God’s sending have upon Pharaoh and his servants? Did they make them better men or worse men? We read that they made them worse men—that they helped to harden their hearts. We read that the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart, so that he would not let the children of Israel go. Now how did the Lord do that? He did not wish and mean to make Pharaoh more hard-hearted, more wicked—that is impossible. God, who is all goodness and love, never can wish to make any human being one atom worse than he is. He who so loved the world that He came down on earth to die for sinners and take away the sins of the world would never make any human being a greater sinner than he was before—that is impossible and horrible to think of. Therefore, when we read that the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart, we must be certain that that was Pharaoh’s own fault; and so we read it was Pharaoh’s own fault. The Lord did not bring all these plagues on Egypt without giving Pharaoh fair warning. Before each plague He sent Moses to tell Pharaoh that the plague was coming. The Lord told Pharaoh that He was his Master, and the Master and Lord of the whole earth; that the children of Israel belonged to Him, and the Egyptians too; that the river, light and darkness, the weather, the crops, the insects, and the locusts belonged to Him; that all diseases which afflict man and beast were in His power. And the Lord proved that His words were true in a way Pharaoh could not mistake, by changing the river into blood, and sending darkness and hailstones, and plagues of lice and flies, and at last by killing the firstborn of all the Egyptians. The Lord gave Pharaoh every chance. He condescended to argue with him as one man would with another, and proved His word to be true, and proved that He had a right to command Pharaoh. And therefore, I say, if Pharaoh’s heart was hardened, it was his own fault, for the Lord was plainly trying to soften it, and to bring him to reason. And the Bible says distinctly that it was Pharaoh’s fault; for it says that Pharaoh hardened his own heart, he and his servants, and therefore they would not let the children of Israel go. Now how could Pharaoh harden his own heart, and yet the Lord harden it at the same time? Just in the same way as too many of us are apt to make the Lord harden our hearts by hardening them ourselves, and to make, as Pharaoh did, the very things which the Lord sends to soften us the causes of our becoming more stubborn, the very things which the Lord sends to bring us to reason the means of our becoming more and more foolish. This is no old story with which we have nothing to do. What happened to Pharaoh’s heart may happen to yours, or mine, or any man’s. Alas! it does happen to many a man’s and woman’s heart every day; and may the Lord have mercy on them before it be too late! And yet how can the Lord have mercy on those who will not let Him have mercy on them? Suppose a man to be going on in some sinful habit. He comes to church, and there he hears the word of God by the Bible or in sermons, telling him that God commands him to give up his sin, that God will certainly punish him if he does not repent and amend. God sends that message to him in love and mercy to soften his heart by the terrors of the law and turn him from his sin. But what does the man feel? He feels angry and provoked: angry with the preacher; ay, angry with the Bible itself, with God’s words. For he hates to hear the words which tell him of his sin; he wishes they were not in the Bible; he longs to stop the preacher’s mouth; and as he cannot do that, he dislikes going to church. He says, I cannot, and, what is more, I will not, give up my sinful ways, and therefore I shall not go to church to be told of them. So he stops away from church, and goes on in his sins. So that man’s heart is hardened just as Pharaoh’s was. Yet the Lord has come and spoken to that sinful man in loving warnings, though all the effect it has had is that the Lord’s message has made him worse than he was before—more stubborn, more godless, more unwilling to hear what is good. But men may fall into a still worse state of mind. They may determine to set the Lord at naught; to hear Him speaking to conscience, and know that He is right and they wrong, and yet quietly put the good thoughts and feelings out of their way, and go on in the course which they know to be the worst. How many, when they come to church, harden their hearts, not caring enough for God’s message to be even angry with it, and take the preacher’s warnings as they would a shower of rain—as something unpleasant, which cannot be helped, and which therefore they must sit out patiently and think about as little as possible! And thus they let the Lord’s message to them harden their hearts.—Charles Kingsley.

The potter at work.—I have been out on the shore again, examining a native manufactory of pottery, and was delighted to find the whole biblical apparatus complete and in full operation. There was the potter sitting at his “frame “and turning the wheel with his foot. He had a heap of the prepared clay near him, and a pan of water by his side. Taking a lump in his hand, he placed it on the top of the wheel (which revolves horizontally) and smoothed it into a low cone, like the upper end of a sugar-loaf; then thrusting his thumb into the top of it, he opened a hole down through the centre, and this he constantly widened by pressing the edges of the revolving cone between his hands. As it enlarged and became thinner he gave it whatever shape he pleased with the utmost ease and expedition. This, I suppose, is the exact point of those biblical comparisons between the human and the divine Potter (Jer_18:6). And the same idea is found in many other passages. When Jeremiah was watching the potter the vessel was marred in his hand, and “so he made it again, another vessel, as seemed good to the potter to make it.” I had to wait a long time for that, but it happened at last. From some defect in the clay, or because he had taken too little, the potter suddenly changed his mind, crushed his growing jar instantly into a shapeless mass of mud, and beginning anew, fashioned it into a totally different vessel.—Thomson, “The Land and the Book,” p. 520

God’s work in shaping our lives.—The wheel of time spins fast, but not carrying us away, changing but not destroying each separate individuality. In providence there are wheels within wheels. We do not understand their meaning. The clay is pressed now below into a solid base, now above into a dainty rim, but it is difficult to see what the final outcome will be till all is finished. So our lives are pressed on one side and on another; something which in our eyes is indispensable is taken away, something which to us seems needless is added. But out of the dizzy whirl, the rush and confusion of life, God is steadily working out His purpose.—W. F. Adeney, “Pulpit Commentary.”

Men harden themselves.—The sins of men are freely committed. They are the effects and indications of evil dispositions of heart; and they are done with the free consent and choice of their wills. No sin could expose to wrath otherwise; nay, otherwise there could be no such thing as sin at all; all sin implying, in the very idea of it, the consent of the will. The very essence of all that is sinful lies in this. If a man were used, either by God or by a fellow-sinner, as a mere physical machine, he could not be a sinner. Now, every man who sins, sins with his will. Make what you like of God’s secret purposes, it is a matter of fact which there is no questioning that they do, in no way and in no degree, interfere with the perfect liberty of the agent. Every sinner is sensible that he acts from choice; that neither, on the one hand, is he constrained to evil, nor, on the other, restrained from good. To say, in regard to the latter—that which is good—that man cannot will it, is to employ terms most inconsiderate and misleading. What hinders him from willing? It is obvious that the word cannot must mean a moral inability. It is neither more nor less than the absence of right dispositions. But the indisposition to that which is good is just, in other words, the want of will to that which is good; and there being no other inability whatever in man than this moral inability—this unwillingness—to say he cannot will resolves itself ultimately into he will not will, inasmuch as he is kept from willing good by nothing but his aversion to good. All that can properly be meant by human freedom is the absence of all constraint and of all restraint. Man is at liberty to do whatever he wills; and if he does not will good, what is it that prevents him but his love of evil? He likes evil, and dislikes good; and therefore, in practice, chooses and does the one, and rejects and refrains from doing the other. These are truths sufficiently plain and simple; and they serve to show the meaning of the expression which follows—“fitted to destruction.”—Dr. Wardlaw.

God’s long-suffering.—It is evident that the idea of “patience and long-suffering” implies the existence of a tendency in a contrary direction, arising from something in the nature or character of the Being by whom it is exercised, and that the difficulty of its exercise bears proportion to the strength of that tendency. Now, the holiness of God is infinitely opposed to all sin. He hates it with a hatred that is properly and absolutely infinite. “He is of purer eyes than to behold evil; neither can He look upon iniquity.” And while His holiness abhors it, His justice calls for its punishment—its punishment to the full extent of its deserts. In proportion, then, to the strength of these principles of the divine character is the difficulty (if it be lawful so to express it) of forbearance with those by whom it is practised—the workers of iniquity. By considering the amount of evil thought and felt, and said and done, in this world of ours every successive moment, I might set the amount of the longsuffering of a holy God before your minds in many and impressive lights. But I must forbear; it would lead me too far away from my one point. Now, by this longsuffering, the great majority of men, alas! are only encouraged in evil—hardened in their unbelief and impenitence and ungodly courses: “Because sentence against an evil work is not executed speedily, therefore the heart of the sons of men is fully set in them to do evil” (Ecc_8:11). They thus criminally, because wilfully, and from the love of evil, abuse the divine goodness; and, by the abuse of it, “fit themselves for destruction”: “Despisest thou the riches of His goodness and forbearance and longsuffering; not knowing that the goodness of God leadeth thee to repentance? But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God” (Rom_2:4-5). Others, dealt with in the same “longsuffering,” are at times, after very protracted and obstinate resistance of the means of grace—of the word and providence of God (His word in all its variety of appeals and motives, and His providence in all its variety of dispensations, prosperous and adverse)—subdued to repentance, “turned to God.” Their hearts relent, they believe, and are saved. Toward both of these classes of persons there has been shown, on the part of God, “much longsuffering.” To many a believer—especially to such as have been converted later in life than others—might I make my appeal for the truth of this. Many a heart would melt, and many an eye would glisten with the tear of shame and of humble and grateful joy, in recollecting the past and comparing it with the present, and reflecting how long they held out against a longsuffering God; ay, and to many an unbelieving sinner, now going on in his trespasses, in despite of the patience of a holy, sin-hating, but merciful God, who is still “waiting to be gracious,” might I make a similar appeal—an appeal to which, whatever impression it might make or fail to make upon his heart, his conscience would secretly and faithfully, and perhaps stingingly, respond.—Dr. Wardlaw.

The hardening of Pharaoh’s heart.—Oh, my friends, this is a fearful thought—that man can become worse by God’s loving desire to make him better! But so it is. So it was with Pharaoh of old. All God’s pleading with him by the message of Moses and Aaron, by the mighty plagues which God sent on Egypt, only hardened Pharaoh’s heart. The Lord God spoke to him, and His message only lashed Pharaoh’s proud and wicked will into greater fury and rebellion, as a vicious horse becomes the more unmanageable the more you punish it. Therefore it is said plainly in Scripture that the Lord hardened Pharaoh’s heart—not, as some fancy, that the Lord’s will was to make Pharaoh hard-hearted and wicked. God forbid! The Lord is the fountain of good only, and not He but we and the devil make evil. But the more the Lord pleaded with Pharaoh and tried to bend his will, the more self-willed he became. The more the Lord showed Pharaoh that the Lord was king, the more he hated the kingdom and will of God, the more he determined to be king himself and to obey no law but his own wicked fancies and pleasures, and asked, “Who is the Lord, that I should obey Him?”—Charles Kingsley.

The potter and clay.—But some may say, Is not that a gloomy and terrible notion of God that He cannot change His purpose? Is not that as much as to say that there is a dark necessity hanging over each of us; that a man must be just what God chooses, and do just what He has ordained to do, and go to everlasting happiness or misery exactly as God has foreordained from all eternity; so that there is no use trying to do right or not to do wrong? If I am to be saved, say such people, I shall be saved whether I try or not; and if I am to be damned, I shall be damned whether I try or not. I am in God’s hands, like clay in the hands of the potter, and what I am like is therefore God’s business and not mine. No! The very texts in the Bible which tell us that God cannot change or repent, tell us what it is that He cannot change in—in showing lovingkindness and tender mercy, longsuffering and repenting of the evil. Whatsoever else He cannot repent of, He cannot repent of repenting of the evil. It is true we are in His hand as clay in the hand of the potter. But it is a sad misreading of Scripture to make that mean that we are to sit with our hands folded, careless about our own way and conduct—still less that we are to give ourselves up to despair because we have sinned against God: for what is the very verse which follows after that? Listen: “O house of Israel, cannot I do with you as this potter? saith the Lord. Behold, as clay is in the hands of the potter, so are ye in My hand, O house of Israel. At what instant I shall speak concerning a kingdom, to pull down and destroy it; if that nation, against whom I have pronounced, turn from their evil, I will repent of the evil which I thought to do to them. And at what instant I shall speak concerning a nation, and concerning a kingdom, to build and to plant it; if it do evil in My sight, that it obey not My voice, then I will repent of the good, wherewith I said I would benefit them.” So that the lesson which we are to draw from the parable of the potter’s clay is just the exact opposite which some men draw. Not that God’s decrees are absolute, but that they are conditional, and depend on our good or evil conduct. Not that His election and His reprobation are unalterable, but that they alter at that instant at which man alters. Not that His grace and will are irresistible, as the foolish man against whom St. Paul argues fancies, but that we can resist God’s will, and that our destruction comes only by resisting His will: in short, that God’s will is no brute, material necessity and fate, but the will of a living, loving Father.—Charles Kingsley.

God’s sovereignty not to be arraigned by men.—There are some persons so partial to what we may call the high doctrines of the gospel that they can scarcely endure to hear anything else: they are like persons whose taste is vitiated by strong drink or highly seasoned food; they have no appetite for anything which does not savour of their favourite opinions. This is a great evil in the Church, not only as injuring the souls in whom it exists, but as tending exceedingly to strengthen the prejudices of others against the doctrines which are so abused. Those who are thus disposed towards “the deep things of God” fancy themselves edified merely because their corrupt taste is gratified; but their edification is not real and scriptural, for if it were it would incline them to receive with meekness and humility every word of God, whereas they treat with contempt everything which seems to savour of plain, practical religion. We regret exceedingly that such persons exist; but we must not on their account run into an opposite extreme, and keep these doctrines altogether out of sight: we must not shun to declare unto men the whole counsel of God. Whatever is revealed in the sacred records must be brought forth in its season; nor are we at liberty to “withhold from men anything that may be profitable unto them.” We therefore address ourselves to every subject in its place, though on such subjects as that which is before us we would do it with fear and trembling, conscious how unable we are to do justice to it, and fearful lest by any means we should make it an occasion of offence to those who are not prepared for the investigation of it. The sovereignty of God is to the proud heart of man an unpalatable subject; but in the passage before us we are called to vindicate it against the objections of those who are disposed, like the Jew in our text, to contend against it. To place the matter in its true light, we shall consider:—

I. The point at issue between the objector and St. Paul.—St. Paul had intimated that the Jews were to be rejected from, and that the Gentiles were to be admitted into, the Church—an offensive subject to the Jews. They are represented as declaring that if God exercise sovereignty in this way, the blame of man’s condemnation must be transferred to God Himself, since it was impossible for a man to resist His will. To this objection we must now reply—

II. The apostle’s determination of it.—St. Paul, hearing such a blasphemous objection as this, “Why doth God yet find fault? for who hath resisted His will?” replies to it in a way of just reprehension. “O man, who art thou that repliest against God?” Consider thyself as a creature; consider thyself as a sinner. In a way of sound argument two things St. Paul proceeds to substantiate against his objector—one, that God had a right to dispose of everything according to His sovereign will and pleasure, and the other was that in the way He had hitherto disposed of them and had determined still to dispose of them He was fully justified. We may conclude with suggesting—

III. The proper improvement of the subject, which offers important hints to objectors. Strange that even Christians should determine what will and what will not consist with the divine attributes! But be assured as the heavens are high above the earth, so are His thoughts and ways higher than yours. There are many who speak of the deep things of God as if they were as plain and intelligible as the simplest truth that can be mentioned. It becomes you doubtless to investigate, and as far as possible to understand, every truth of God; but in things so infinitely above the reach of human intellect it becomes you to be humble, modest, diffident. To all persons without exception, you have other things to do than to be wasting your time about unprofitable disputes—you are now under the hands of the Potter. The question that most concerns you is, For what are you preparing? In order to ascertain this you need not look into the book of God’s decrees, but simply examine the state of your own hearts. Are you diligently seeking after God? Are you living by faith on the Lord Jesus Christ, washing daily in the fountain of His blood, and renewed daily by the operations of His Spirit? This will mark you vessels of honour; and the want of this is sufficient to stamp you vessels unto dishonour.—Simeon.

Predestination of the vessel not its fabrication.—The all-important point for the interpretation of these verses is to decide when the act of forming the vessels took place. Does this operation represent the predestination or the moral government of God in actual time? A word of Rom_9:23 decides this question without giving ground for the least hesitation. This word is the key of the whole passage, and, strange to say, it is omitted by Luther and by the French translations anterior to that of Lausanne. It is the word “afore”—“which He has prepared afore for His glory.” The predestination of the vessel, then, is not its fabrication; it precedes it. Thus, then, when God is compared to a potter who fashions the clay, the question is about His actual treatment of sinners. They are before Him one identical mass, vile and shapeless. To make the one portion vessels unto dishonour, to make them promote His glory without bettering their condition, is to treat them according to their nature; to make the other portion vessels unto honour is to treat them according to His grace which has been given them in Christ before the foundation of the world. As to the vessels of wrath, God is not the author of their nature, but only of their form; He has fashioned them, but He has not “prepared” them; their form is already a merited punishment; He shows therein His wrath. Could one believe that God was irritated against those who would be such as He had wished them to be? Would He need “a grand long-suffering” to endure His own work in the state which He had Himself determined? Has He raised with one hand what He has overturned with the other? Such a doctrine ends by doing violence to that reason in the name of which it has outraged our moral sentiments. It is clear, then, that the potter’s relation to the vessels of wrath is that of the fashioner of material made ready to his hand. He is not to be blamed if the coarse clay will only make a dishonoured vessel. The preparation of the clay, the contraction of its coarse character, has been anterior to the potter’s disposal of it. All he can do is to determine the destination which suits the nature of the provided clay. In the same way God is not to be held responsible for the coarse characters sinners contract in the process of their development. They have exercised their freedom in reaching the condition when, like clay, they lie before the great Potter’s wheel. All that God can be held responsible for is the form as vessels of dishonour they are to take; and if He show His deserved wrath in disposing of them as dishonoured vessels, He is acting well within His rights. It is in the disposal of incorrigible sinners, in suffering long with them, and in at last dooming them to destruction, that He displays the severe side of His character—that side without which He could not ensure our respect. As for this wrath of God, it has been very happily denominated by some of the Germans “the love-pain [Liebesschmerz] of God.” There is in our chapter only one predestination, that of grace; and not only that, but the words of the apostle are weighed and chosen to prevent all misapprehension: the one are ready or fit for perdition, the other are prepared for glory; the first, it is not God who has made them ready—on the contrary, He endures them “with a grand long-suffering”; the latter, it is God who has prepared them. Still more, He has prepared them afore. Were it not for the care with which the idea of reprobation is here put aside, I should never have supposed that such a dogma had presented itself to the spirit of a sacred writer. Paul makes on purpose an antithetic parallelism, as he had done (Rom_6:23) between wages and gift, and this parallelism finds itself in all the members of the sentence. God shows His anger towards the wicked and the riches of His glory towards the saved; but the latter, the mercy, is altogether gratuitous. If He wish to make the power known (Rom_9:22), it is not His power to create evil, but to punish it; and how to punish evil if not by evil, how to show His anger towards the clay unless by making the vessels unto dishonour.—Monsell.

ILLUSTRATIONS TO CHAPTER 9

Rom_9:21. Vessels of honour and dishonour.—A certain minister, having changed his views of some parts of divine truth, was waited upon by an old acquaintance, who wished to reclaim him to his former creed. Finding he could not succeed in his object, he became warm, and told his friend in plain terms that God had given him “up to strong delusion,” and that he was “a vessel of wrath fitted to destruction.” “I think, brother,” replied the one who was charged with the departure from the faith with great calmness—“I think, brother, that you have mistaken the sense of the passage you last referred to. Vessels are denominated according to their contents. A chemist, in conducting a stranger through his laboratory, would say, ‘This is a vessel of turpentine, that of vitriol,’ etc., always giving to the vessel the name of the article it contains. Now when I see a man full of the holy and lovely Spirit of Christ, devoted to His service, and imitating His example, I say that man is a vessel of mercy, whom God hath afore-prepared unto glory; but when I see a man full of everything but the spirit of the Bible—opposed to the moral government of God, seeking his own things rather than those which are Christ’s—and filled with malice, wrath, and all uncharitableness. I am compelled to consider him ‘a vessel of wrath fitted to destruction.’ ”

The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.

9:17 God told Pharaoh: At God’s direction, Moses had asked Pharaoh to let the people of Israel leave Egypt for their own land (Exod 9:16). When Pharaoh stubbornly refused, God displayed miracle after miracle to convince Israel, Pharaoh, and the Egyptians of God’s power and authority (see Exod 6:7; 7:5; 9:14-16; 14:31).

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Rom 9:17. Λέγει) saith, i.e. exhibits God speaking in this manner, comp. ch. Rom 10:20, saith.—γὰρ, for) He proves, that it is of Him who shows mercy, even God.—τῷ Φαραὼ, to the Pharaoh) who lived in the time of Moses.—ὅτι εἰς αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐξήγειρὰ σε, ὅπως ἐνδείξωμαι ἐν σοὶ τὴν δὑναμίν μον κ.τ.λ.) Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up that I might show my power in thee. The LXX, Exo 9:16, καὶ ἒνεκεν τοὺτον διετηρήθης ἔως τοῦ νῦν, ἳνα ἐνδείξωμαι ἐν σοὶ τὴν ἰσχύν μου κ.τ.λ. For this cause, thou hast been preserved until now, that I might show my power, etc.—ἐξήγειρά σε) העמדתיך LXX. Int. διετηρήθης (as Exo 21:21, עמד, διαβιοῦν, to pass one’s life), but Paul according to his custom says more significantly, ἐξήγειρά σε: but it should be carefully observed, that by ἐξεγείρω here the meaning of the word הקים is not expressed, as it is used in Zec 11:16, but העמיד, which in all cases presupposes the subject previously produced. See the difference of these two Hebrew verbs in 1Ki 15:4. The meaning then is this: I have raised thee up to be a king very powerful (in whom I might show My power) and illustrious (by means of whom [owing to whom] My name might be proclaimed throughout all the earth). Therefore this ἐξέγερσις, raising up, includes the διατηρεῖν, preserving, as the LXX. render it, using the milder term: and also includes the ἐνεγκεῖν, which in Rom 9:22, is introduced from this very passage of Moses. The predecessor [the former Pharaoh] had previously begun rather to oppress Israel; Exo 2:23: nor yet did the successor repent. The Ordo Temporum, p. 161 [Ed. II. 142], determines his reign to have been very short, and therefore his whole administration was an experiencing of the Divine power. It must be added, that this was told to Pharaoh not at first, but after he had been frequently guilty of excessive obstinacy, and it was not even then intended to discourage him from acknowledging Jehovah and from letting the people go, but to bring about his reformation.—δύναμιν, power) by which Pharaoh with all his forces was drowned.—διαγγελῇ, might be declared) This is being done even to the present day.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom_9:17. Γάρ] Establishment of this doctrine e contrario, as the inference of Rom_9:18 shows.

ἡ γράφη] for in it God speaks; comp. Gal_3:8; Gal_3:22.

τῷ Φαραώ] Paul has selected two very striking contemporaneous and historically connected examples, in Rom_9:15 of election, and here of rejection. The quotation is Exo_9:16, with a free and partly intentional variation from the LXX.

ὅτι] does not form part of the declaration, but introduces it, as in Rom_9:12.

ΕἸς ΑὐΤῸ ΤΟῦΤΟ] brings the meaning into stronger relief than the ἝΝΕΚΕΝ ΤΟΎΤΟΥ of the LXX.: for this very purpose (for nothing else). Comp. Rom_13:6; 2Co_5:6; 2Co_7:11; Eph_6:22; Col_4:8.

ἐξήγειρά σε] The LXX. translates הֶעֱמַדְתִּיךָ by ΔΙΕΤΗΡΉΘΗς, i.e. vivus servatus es, and so far, leaving out of view the factitive form of the Hebrew word (to which, however, a reading of the LXX. attested in the Hexapla with ΔΙΕΤΉΡΗΣΆ ΣΕ corresponds), correctly in the historical connection (see Exo_9:15). Paul, however, expands the special sense of that Hebrew word to denote the whole appearance of Pharaoh, of which general fact that particular one was a part; and he renders the word according to this general relation, which lies at the bottom of his view, and in reference to which the active form was important, by: I have raised thee up, that is, caused thee to emerge; thy whole historical appearance has been brought about by me, in order that, etc. Comp. the current use of ἐγείρειν in the N. T., as in Mat_11:11; Mat_24:11; Joh_7:52, et al.; Sir_10:4; 1Ma_3:49; and the Hebrew הֵקִים. So, in substance, Theophylact (ΕἸς ΤῸ ΜΈΣΟΝ ἬΓΑΓΟΝ), Beza, Calvin, Piscator, Bengel, and various others, including Reiche, Olshausen, Rückert, Beck, Tholuck, Philippi; formerly also Hofmann; comp. Beyschlag: I have allowed thee to arise. The interpretation: vivum te servavi (Vorstius, Hammond, Grotius, Wolf, and many, including Koppe, Morus, Böhme, Rosenmüller, Nösselt, Klee, Reithmayr), explains the Hebrew, but not the expression of the apostle; for Jam_5:15 ought not to have been appealed to, where the context demands the sense of erigere de lecto graviter decumbentem. Yet even now Hofmann compares Jam_5:15, and explains accordingly: I have suffered thee to rise from sickness. But this would only be admissible, provided it were the sense of the original text, which was assumed by Paul as well known; the latter, however, simply says: I allow thee to stand for the sake of, etc. (comp. Knobel, in loc.), with which also the LXX. agrees. Others explain: I have appointed thee to be king (Flatt, Benecke, Glöckler). Others: I have stirred thee up for resistance (Augustine, Anselm, Köllner, de Wette, Fritzsche, Maier, Bisping, Lamping, comp. Umbreit), as ἐγείρειν and ἘΞΕΓΕΊΡ. denote, in classical usage, to incite, both in a good and bad sense; comp. 2Ma_13:4; Hist. Sus. 45. But these special definitions of the sense make the apostle say something so entirely different both from the original and from the LXX., that they must have been necessitated by the connection. But this is not the case; not even in respect to the view of Augustine, etc., since in Rom_9:18 ὃν δὲ θέλει, σκληρύνει is not inferred from the verbal sense of ἐξήγ. σε, but from the relation of the ὍΠΩς Κ.Τ.Λ. to the ἘΞΉΓΕΙΡΆ ΣΕ (ΕἸς ΑὐΤῸ ΤΟῦΤΟ evinces this),a relation which would presuppose a hardening of Pharaoh on the part of God, and for the reader who is familiar with the history (Exo_4:21; Exo_7:3; Exo_11:10; Exo_14:4, et al.), actually presupposes it.

ὅπως ἐνδείξ. κ.τ.λ.] namely, by means of thy final overthrow; not: by means of the leading out of Israel (Beyschlag), against which is ἘΝ ΣΟΊ.

ἘΝΔΕΊΞ.] may show, may cause to be recognised in thy case. Comp. Rom_3:25; Eph_2:7; 1Ti_1:16.

δύναμιν] LXX.: ἸΣΧΎΝ. With Paul not an intentional alteration, but another reading according to the Hexapla (in opposition to Philippi).

ΔΙΑΓΓ.] might be thoroughly published. Comp. Luk_9:60; Plat. Protag. p. 317 A; Pind. Nem. v. 5; Herodian, i. 15. 3, ii. 9. 1; Plutarch. Camill. 24.

τὸ ὄνομά μου] As naming Him who has shown Himself so mighty in the case of Pharaoh. For the opposite, see Rom_2:24; 1Ti_6:1.

ἐν πάσῃ τῇ γῇ] in the whole earth; a result, which in the later course of history (comp. Eusebius, praep. ev. ix. 29), especially was fulfilled in the dispersion of the Jews and the spread of Christianity, and continues to be fulfilled. The explanation: in the whole land (van Hengel), is less in keeping with the tendency of the original text than the all-comprehensive destination of this great judgment of God.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom 9:17 f. But Paul goes further, and explains the contrary phenomenon that of a man who does not and cannot receive mercy in the same way. λέγει γὰρ ἡ γραφή : it is on Scripture the burden of proof is laid here and at Rom 9:15 . A Jew might answer the arguments Paul uses here if they were the Apostle’s own; to Scripture he can make no reply; it must silence, even where it does not convince. τῷ φαραὼ : All men, and not those only who are the objects of His mercy, come within the scope of God’s sovereignty. Pharaoh as well as Moses can be quoted to illustrate it. He was the open adversary of God, an avowed, implacable adversary; yet a Divine purpose was fulfilled in his life, and that purpose and nothing else is the explanation of his very being. εἰς αὐτὸ τοῦτο ἐξήγειρά σε . The LXX in Exo 9:16 read: καὶ ἕνεκεν τούτου διετηρήθης , the last word, answering to the Hebrew הֶֽעֱמַדְתִּיךָ , being used in the sense of “thou wast kept alive” the sense adopted by Dillmann for the Hebrew; probably Paul changed it intentionally to give the meaning, “for this reason I brought thee on the stage of history”: cf. Hab 1:6 , Zec 11:16 , Jer. 27:41 (S. and H.). The purpose Pharaoh was designed to serve, and actually did serve, on this stage, was certainly not his own; as certainly it was God’s. God’s power was shown in the penal miracles by which Pharaoh and Egypt were visited, and his name is proclaimed to this day wherever the story of the Exodus is told.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom_9:17

For the Scripture saith unto Pharaoh, etc. The connection of this verse is with the 14th, rather than with the one immediately preceding. Paul is still engaged in answering the objection proposed in the 14th verse. There is no injustice with God, because he saith to Moses, I will have mercy, etc. Rom_9:15, and because the Scripture saith to Pharaoh, for this purpose, etc. Rom_9:17. His second answer to the objection is, that God, in point of fact, does exercise this sovereignty, as is evident from the case of Pharaoh. Pharaoh was no worse than many other men who have obtained mercy; yet God, for wise and benevolent reasons, withheld from him the saving influences of his grace, and gave him up to his own wicked heart, so that he became more and more hardened, until he was finally destroyed. God did nothing to Pharaoh beyond his strict deserts. He did not make him wicked; he only forbore to make him good, by the exertion of special and altogether unmerited grace. The reason, therefore, of Pharaohs being left to perish, while others were saved, was not that he was worse than others, but because God has mercy on whom he will have mercy; it was because, among the criminals at his bar, he pardons one and not another, as seems good in his sight. He, therefore, who is pardoned, cannot say it was because I was better than others; while he who is condemned must acknowledge that he receives nothing more than the just recompense of his sins. In order to establish his doctrine of the divine sovereignty, Paul had cited from Scripture the declaration that God shows mercy to whom he will; he now cites an example to show that he punishes whom he will.

Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up. This is what God said to Pharaoh, as recorded in Exo_9:16. The meaning of the declaration may be variously explained.

1. In the Old Testament, the Hebrew word used in the passage quoted, means literally, I have caused thee to stand. This is understood by some as meaning, I have called thee into existence.

2. By others, I have preserved thee.

3. By others, I have raised thee up as king.

4. By others, I have placed and continued thee in thy post.

Either of these interpretations admits of being defended on philological grounds more or less satisfactory. The first is sufficiently suitable to the word used by the apostle, but does not agree so well with the original. The Hebrew word דדמַעָ, in Hiphil, is used not only in the literal sense, to cause to stand, but also in the sense, to continue, to preserve, as in 1Ki_15:4, and also to appoint (to office). The lxx (changing the person) have, in Exo_9:16, διετηρήθης, equivalent to vivus servatus es, thou hast been kept alive. Paul renders the Hebrew, ἐξήγειρά σε, which answers to the use of the word in Neh_6:7, Thou hast appointed (caused to appear) prophets; and Dan_11:11, The king of the south shall set forth a great multitude. In no case, however, is the Hebrew word used for calling into existence in the sense of creating. For the second, it may be urged that verbs in the form (Hiphil) used in the passage quoted, signify frequently the continuance of a thing in the state which the simple form of the verb expresses. Thus the verb meaning to live, in this form, signifies to preserve alive, Gen_6:19, Gen_6:20, Gen_19:19, etc. Besides, the particular word used in Exo_9:16, signifies to preserve, to canse to continue, in 1Ki_15:4; 2Ch_9:8; Pro_29:4, etc. The third interpretation is too definite, and supplies an idea not in the text. The fourth, which is only a modification of the second, is perhaps the nearest to the apostles intention. For this purpose have I raised thee up, and placed thee where thou art; and instead of cutting thee off at once, have so long endured thy obstinacy and wickedness. It is not the design of Pharaohs creation that is here asserted; but the end for which God determined his appearance and position in the history of the world. Nor does the apostle refer Pharaohs wickedness to God as its author, but his appearance at that period, the form in which the evil of his heart developed itself, and the circumstances attending its manifestation, were all determined by the providence of God, and ordered for the promotion of his infinitely wise and benevolent purposes.

That I might show my power in thee, and that my name might be declared in all the earth. This is the reason why God dealt with Pharaoh in the manner described. It was not that he was worse than others, but that God might be glorified. This is precisely the principle on which all punishment is inflicted. It is that the true character of the divine lawgiver should be known. This is of all objects, when God is concerned, the highest and most important; in itself the most worthy, and in its results the most beneficent. The ground, therefore, on which Pharaoh was made an object of the divine justice, or the reason why the law was in his case allowed to take its course, is not to be sought in any peculiarity of his character or conduct in comparison with those of others, but in the sovereign pleasure of God. This result of the argument Paul formally states in the next verse.

Charles Hodge — Commentary on Romans (1835), First Corinthians (1857), and Ephesians (1856) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Now he answereth concerning the reprobate or them whom God hateth being not yet born, and hath appointed to destruction, without any respect of unworthiness. And first of all he proveth this to be true, by alleging the testimony of God himself touching Pharaoh, whom he stirred up to this purpose, that he might be glorified in his hardening and just punishing.

God so speaketh unto Pharaoh in the Scripture, or, the Scripture bringeth in God, so speaking to Pharaoh, Exodus 9:16.

Brought thee into this world.

Secondly, he bringeth the end of God’s counsel, to show that there is no unrighteousness in him. Now this chiefest end, is not properly and simply the destruction of the wicked, but God’s glory which appeareth in their rightful punishment.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

For the scripture saith to Pharaoh--observe here the light in which the Scripture is viewed by the apostle.

Even for this same--"this very"

purpose have I raised--"raised I"

thee up, &c.--The apostle had shown that God claims the right to choose whom He will: here he shows by an example that God punishes whom He will. But "God did not make Pharaoh wicked; He only forbore to make him good, by the exercise of special and altogether unmerited grace" [HODGE].

that I might--"may"

show my power in thee--It was not that Pharaoh was worse than others that he was so dealt with, but "in order that he might become a monument of the penal justice of God, and it was with a view to this that God provided that the evil which was in him should be manifested in this definite form" [OLSHAUSEN].

and that my name might--"may"

be declared--"proclaimed"

in all the earth--"This is the principle on which all punishment is inflicted, that the true character of the Divine Lawgiver should be known. This is of all objects, where God is concerned, the highest and most important; in itself the most worthy, and in its results the most beneficent" [HODGE].

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 17. For the Scripture saith unto Pharaoh] Instead of showing the Israelites mercy he might justly have suffered them to have gone on in sin, till he should have signalized his wisdom and justice in their destruction; as appears from what God in his word declares concerning his dealings with Pharaoh and the Egyptians, Ex 9:15, Ex 9:16 : For now, saith the Lord, I had stretched forth my hand, (in the plague of boils and blains,) and I had smitten thee and thy people with the pestilence; and thou hadst (by this plague) been cut off from the earth; (as thy cattle were by the murrain;) but in very deed for this cause have I raised thee up-I have restored thee to health by removing the boils and blains, and by respiting thy deserved destruction to a longer day, that I may, in thy instance, give such a demonstration of my power in thy final overthrow, that all mankind may learn that I am God, the righteous Judge of all the earth, the avenger of wickedness. See this translation of the original vindicated in my notes on Ex 9:15; Ex 9:16; and, about the hardening of Pharaoh, see the notes on those places where the words occur in the same book.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

17. For the Scripture saith, etc. He comes now to the second part, the rejection of the ungodly, and as there seems to be something more unreasonable in this, he endeavours to make it more fully evident, how God, in rejecting whom he wills, is not only irreprehensible, but also wonderful in his wisdom and justice. He then takes his proof from Exodus 9:16, where the Lord declares that it was he who raised up Pharaoh for this end, that while he obstinately strove to resist the power of God, he might, by being overcome and subdued, afford a proof how invincible the arm of God is; to bear which, much less to resist it, no human power is able. See then the example which the Lord designed to exhibit in Pharaoh!

There are here two things to be considered, — the predestination of Pharaoh to ruin, which is to be referred to the past and yet the hidden counsel of God, — and then, the design of this, which was to make known the name of God; and on this does Paul primarily dwell: for if this hardening was of such a kind, that on its account the name of God deserved to be made known, it is an impious thing, according to evidence derived from the contrary effect, to charge him with any unrighteousness.

But as many interpreters, striving to modify this passage, pervert it, we must first observe, that for the word, “I have raised,” or stirred up, (excitavi,) the Hebrew is, “I have appointed,” (constitui,) by which it appears, that God, designing to show, that the contumacy of Pharaoh would not prevent him to deliver his people, not only affirms, that his fury had been foreseen by him, and that he had prepared means for restraining it, but that he had also thus designedly ordained it, and indeed for this end, — that he might exhibit a more illustrious evidence of his own power. Absurdly then do some render this passage, — that Pharaoh was preserved for a time; for his beginning is what is spoken of here. For, seeing many things from various quarters happen to men, which retard their purposes and impede the course of their actions, God says, that Pharaoh proceeded from him, and that his condition was by himself assigned to him: and with this view agrees the verb, I have raised up. But that no one may imagine, that Pharaoh was moved from above by some kind of common and indiscriminate impulse, to rush headlong into that madness, the special cause, or end, is mentioned; as though it had been said, — that God not only knew what Pharaoh would do, but also designedly ordained him for this purpose. It hence follows, that it is in vain to contend with him, as though he were bound to give a reason; for he of himself comes forth before us, and anticipates the objection, by declaring, that the reprobate, through whom he designs his name to be made known, proceed from the hidden fountain of his providence.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(17) The converse proposition is also true, that God also uses the wickedness of men as a means of exhibiting His power and justice.

Raised thee up.—Brought into the world and on to the scene of history.

Show my power.—By the plagues of Egypt and by the overthrow of Pharaoh and his host in the Red Sea.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

17. For] See on Rom_9:15. In this verse St Paul recurs to the question “Is there unrighteousness, &c.?” and replies to it, by citing not now a general Divine utterance (as in Rom_9:15) but a special utterance, to an individual.

the Scripture saith] For a similar personification of the inspired word see Gal_3:8; Gal_3:22. Such phrases are a pregnant indication of the apostolic view of Scripture. (See below, on Rom_10:6.)

unto Pharaoh] Here quoted as an example of Divine Sovereignty. He appears as one who might (in human judgment) have been dealt with and subdued by a process of grace and mercy, but who was left to his own evil will. No evil was infused into him; but good influences were not infused, and his evil took its course.—It is instructive, and a relief in a certain sense, to read this passage in the light of the history of Exodus, where it is remarkable that the “hardening” (expressed in the Hebrew by three different verbs) seems to be attributed in ten places to the Lord and certainly in ten to Pharaoh himself; and where the narrative, in its living simplicity, at least shews how perfectly real was the action of the human consciousness and will.—But we must not think that this solves the mystery, nor must we lose sight of St Paul’s object in quoting Pharaoh’s case here—viz. to establish the fact of the sovereignty with which God shews, or does not shew, mercy.

Even for this, &c.] The quotation (Exo_9:16) is mainly with LXX., but the first clause in LXX. runs, “and for this purpose thou wast preserved,” or “maintained.”

have I raised, &c.] Or, did I raise thee up. Lit. made thee stand. And this is better, for the special meaning seems to be that Pharaoh was not so much exalted to be king, as raised up and sustained under the plagues.—Here the Eternal gives “His glory” as a sufficient account of His action toward this individual soul and will.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will,.... These are the express words of the former testimony: it follows,

and whom he will he hardeneth; which is the just and natural consequence of what is contained in the latter; for if God could, or he did, without any injustice, raise up Pharaoh, and harden his heart against him and his people, that he might rise up against him and destroy him by his power for his own glory, then he may harden any other person, and even whom he will: now this hardening of men's hearts may be understood in perfect agreement with the justice and holiness of God: men first harden their own hearts by sinning, as Pharaoh did; what God does, is by leaving them to the hardness of their hearts, denying them that grace which only can soften them, and which he is not obliged to give, and therefore does them no injustice in withholding it from them; by sending them both mercies and judgments, which through the corruption of their hearts, are the means of the greater hardening of them; so judgments in the case of Pharaoh, and mercies in the case of others; see Isa 6:10; by delivering them up into the hands of Satan, and to their own lusts, which they themselves approve of; and by giving them up to a judicial blindness and hardness of heart, as a just punishment for their impieties.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

17 For the scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.

Ver. 17. Raised thee up] For a vessel of wrath, and an instance of my justice.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

For the Scripture saith - Exo 9:16. That is, God saith to Pharaoh in the Scriptures; Gal 3:8, Gal 3:22. This passage is designed to illustrate the doctrine that God shows mercy according to his sovereign pleasure by a reference to one of the most extraordinary cases of hardness of heart which has ever occurred. The design is to show that God has a right to pass by those to whom he does not choose to show mercy; and to place them in circumstances where they shall develope their true character, and where in fait they shall become more hardened and be destroyed; Rom 9:18.

Unto Pharaoh - The haughty and oppressive king of Egypt; thus showing that the most mighty and wicked monarchs are at his control; compare Isa 10:5-7.

For this same purpose - For the design, or with the intent that is immediately specified. This was the leading purpose or design of his sustaining him.

Have I raised thee up - Margin in Exo 9:16, “made thee stand,” that is, sustained thee. The Greek word used by the apostle (ἐξήγειρα exēgeira), means properly, I “have excited, roused, or stirred” thee up. But it may also have the meaning, “I have sustained or supported thee.” That is, I have kept thee from death; I have preserved thee from ruin; I have ministered strength to thee, so that thy full character has been developed. It does not mean that God had infused into his mind any positive evil, or that by any direct influence he had excited any evil feelings, but that he had kept him in circumstances which were suited to develope his true character. The meaning of the word and the truth of the case may be expressed in the following particulars:

(1) God meant to accomplish some great purposes by his existence and conduct.

(2) He kept him, or sustained him, with reference to that.

(3) He had control over the haughty and wicked monarch. He could take his life, or he could continue him on earth. As he had control over all things that could affect the pride, the feelings, and the happiness of the monarch, so he had control over the monarch himself.

(4) “he placed him in circumstances just suited to develope his character.” He kept him amidst those circumstances until his character was fully developed.

(5) He did not exert a positive evil influence on the mind of Pharaoh; for,

(6) In all this the monarch acted freely. He did what he chose to do. He pursued his own course. He was voluntary in his schemes of oppressing the Israelites. He was voluntary in his opposition to God. He was voluntary when he pursued the Israelites to the Red sea. In all his doings he acted as he chose to do, and with a determined “choice of evil,” from which neither warning nor judgment would turn him away. Thus, he is said to have hardened his own heart; Exo 8:15.

(7) Neither Pharaoh nor any sinner can justly blame God for placing them in circumstances where they shall develope their own character, and show what they are. It is not the fault of God, but their own fault. The sinner is not compelled to sin; nor is God under obligation to save him contrary to the prevalent desires and wishes of the sinner himself.

My power in thee - Or by means of thee. By the judgments exerted in delivering an entire oppressed people from thy grasp. God’s most signal acts of power were thus shown in consequence of his disobedience and rebellion.

My name - The name of Yahweh, as the only true God, and the deliverer of his people.

Throughout all the earth - Or throughout all the land of Egypt; Note, Luk 2:1. We may learn here,

That a leading design of God in the government of the world is to make his power, and name, and character known.

(2)That this is often accomplished in a most signal manner by the destruction of the wicked.

(3)That wicked people should be alarmed, since their arm cannot contend with God, and since his enemies shall be destroyed.

(4)It is right that the incorrigibly wicked should be cut off. When a man’s character is fully developed; when he is fairly tried; when in all circumstances, he has shown that he will not obey God, neither justice nor mercy hinders the Almighty from cutting him down and consigning him to death.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

For the Scripture saith to Pharao, &c. St. Paul had shewn that there was no injustice in God by his giving special graces to the elect; now he shews that God cannot be accounted unjust for leaving the reprobate in their sins, or for punishing them as they deserve; for this purpose he brings the example of Pharao, who remained hardened against all the admonitions and chastisements of him and his kingdom. --- Have I raised thee up, placed thee king over Egypt; I have done so many miracles before thee, I have spared thee when thou deservedst to be punished with death, and at last shall punish thee with thy army in the Red Sea, that my name may be known over all the earth. (Witham)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

This verse shows, that God is not unjust in rejecting others of equal condition with the elect; for the proof of which, he cites a testimony out of Exo 9:16. This verse must be joined with Rom 9:14.

God forbid; for the Scripture saith, i.e. God saith in the Scripture:

Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up; i.e. I have created or promoted thee to be king in Egypt. Or, (as some), I have raised or stirred thee up to oppress my people. Or, I have hardened thee, as it follows in the next verse, and given thee up to thy own rebellious and obstinate mind.

That I might show my power in thee, &c.: I have done what I have done for this very end, that the whole world may ring of my power and glory. And this shows, that it is not unjust in God to reject sinners of the children of men, because thereby he furthers his own glory. For this end all things are made, and all things are accordingly ordered and disposed, Pro 16:4.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

17. Scripture saith—In the words of Jehovah, (Exo_9:16.)

Pharaoh—Who claimed, like Paul’s Jew, to overrule God; and who, if human power could have overruled God, was the man of his age to do it; yet who was most peremptorily overruled by God, and reduced, like our Jew, to the level of a just probationary free-agency, under the most equitable divine administration.

Raised thee up—Hebrew, Made thee to stand. The context in the Old Testament would seem to imply the causing thee to stand or survive amid the past destroying plagues. Though the greatest criminal in Egypt, he had been preserved alive, amid repeated plagues, for the purpose here announced. He had attained the acme of sin; he had forfeited life, and passed the day of grace. Hence it is that Paul selects him as a specimen and monument of wrath.

Show my power— Years there had been in which God was earnest to show his mercy in Pharaoh; those years are past; the hour now is when he is made to live on earth, when he should be in hell, that God may reveal his true omnipotence in the land, and over the rulers, and over the gods of Egypt.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Vers. 17, 18. For the Scripture saith unto Pharaoh, Even for this same purpose (rather, for this very purpose) did I raise thee up, that I might show in thee my power, and that my Name might be declared throughout all the earth. The conclusion follows: So then he hath mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth. The passage quoted in ver. 17, taken (as it is intended to be) in conjunction with the whole history as given in Exodus and especially with the passages in which God himself is said to have hardened Pharaoh"s heart, so that he would not let the children of Israel go shows that not only the deliverance of Israel, but also the obduration of Pharaoh, was due to the determination of God that it should be so, in accordance with his own righteous purpose, which cannot be called in question by man. The particular declaration of Exo_9:16 appears to be selected for quotation because of its relevancy to the case in hand, which it is intended to illustrate; viz. the present rejection of the majority of the Jews from gospel privileges. How this is will appear below. Now, this whole passage has been used in support of Calvinistic views of the original absolute reprobation of individuals irrespectively of their deserts. Calvin himself draws this conclusion from it, very decidedly, thus: "Neque enim praevideri ruinam impiorum a Domino Paulus tradit, sed ejus consilio et voluntate ordinari; quemadmodum et Solomon docet (Pro_16:4) non mode praecognitum fuisse impiorum interitum, sed impios ipsos fuisse destinato creates, ut perirent". ("In Epist. Pauli ad Romans," on Rom_9:18) It is, therefore, important to consider carefully both the original meaning of the verse, quoted from Exodus, and the apostle"s application of it. First, with reference to Pharaoh himself, what is meant by "I raised thee up (exhgeira)"? Not "created thee;" nor (as in the Vulgate, and as Augustine, Calvin, and some others interpret) excitavi te, i.e. "stirred thee up" to resist my will, that I might exhibit my power in confounding thee. Whether or not St. Paul"s exhgeira would bear this sense, it is quite inadmissible in the LXX (from which, in this expression, he varies), and also in the Hebrew, of which the proper rendering is, "I made thee to stand." The LXX has eneken toutou diethrhyhv , meaning that Pharaoh had been kept alive instead of being at once cut off, that God"s power might be displayed in him. (The idea thus expressed, it may be observed, accords closely with that of ver. 22 below, where the case of Pharaoh is still in view; "endured with much long-suffering," etc. Thus, though the rendering diethrhyhv may be incorrect, and varied by St. Paul, yet he still seems to recognize the idea which it expresses.) St. Paul"s rendering, which is closer to the Hebrew than the LXX, seems to mean, "raised thee to thy present position of power and greatness" (or possibly, as Meyer explains, "caused thee to emerge," i.e. in history: "Thy whole historical appearance has been brought about by me, in order that," etc.). Thus the expression cannot mean, either that God had brought Pharaoh originally into existence for the sole purpose of destroying him, or that he had from the first irresistibly incited him to obduracy in order to condemn him, and so destroy him. The Lord says in effect to him, "Thou art now great and powerful; but it is! that made thee so, or still keep thee so: and this, not that thou mayest accomplish thine own will, but subserve mine, and that my power to work out my own purposes of mercy or of judgment may be the more notably displayed." For how is God"s purpose in so raising Pharaoh up defined? "That I might show in thee my power, and that my Name might be declared throughout all the earth;" i.e., as is evident from the history, by the deliverance of Israel in spite of Pharaoh"s opposition through the judgments sent on him and his people to that end. There is plainly nothing in the original history to imply Pharaoh"s individual reprobation with regard to his own eternal salvation, but only his discomfiture in his opposition to the Divine purpose of mercy to Israel. But still, with a view to such execution of his purposes, God himself is said to have hardened Pharaoh"s heart; and it is to this that the apostle draws special attention in conclusion, as denoting that which it is his design to show. It is thus certainly declared that this hardening was from God. But even so, it is nowhere said that God had made Pharaoh"s heart hard from the first, so that he had been all along incapable of acting otherwise than he did. The inference rather is that, after wilful resistance to appeals, final obduracy was sent on him as a judgment. And it is further to be observed that in some verses in Exodus (Exo_8:15, Exo_8:19, 32 9:34) Pharaoh is said to have hardened his own heart, with the addition, in Exo_9:34, of "he sinned yet more;" while in others (Exo_7:14, 22 9:7, 35) it is only said generally that "his heart was hardened." The two forms of expression seem to denote two aspects of final obduracy in man according to one as being self-induced, according to the other as judicial. Thus also in 1Ki 22 the Lend himself is said to have sent the lying spirit into the heart of Ahab"s prophets, in order that he might rush to his ruin, though it was obviously due to his own sins that he was thus finally doomed. A striking instance of the two aspects of human obduracy is found in Isa_6:9, etc., and the reference to the passage by our Lord in Mat_13:15. In Isaiah it is, "Make the heart of this people fat," etc.; but in our Lord"s reference, "For this people"s heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed;" as if the closing had been their own doing. (cf. Mar_4:12 Luk_8:10) The following lines express a like conception of judicial blindness"For when we in our viciousness grow hard (O misery on"t!), the wise gods seal our eyes, In our own filth drop our clear judgments, make us Adore our errors, laugh at us while we strut To our confusion.

We may compare also the Latin saying, Quem Deus vult, perdere prius dementat, which by no means implies that the divinely dementated persons have not deserved destruction. Such, then, seems the view to be taken of what is said about Pharaoh himself. But the important thing to be kept in view for a proper understanding of the drift of the passage is that, though Pharaoh was himself an individual, his case is adduced in no connection with the question of individual predestination, but in illustration of the principle on which nations, or races of men, are elected to or rejected from the enjoyment of Divine favour. This is the real subject of the whole chapter; and hence to build on this part of it a doctrine of individual election or reprobation is to bring into it what is not there. The drift of the passage before us is this: Moses and the Israelites of old illustrate the position of the faithful remnant of the Jews together with all Christian believers now. Pharaoh illustrates the position of the obdurate majority of the Jewish nation now. As he, in setting himself against the Divine purpose, and relying on his own strength, was unable to thwart God"s design of mercy to his chosen, and was himself hardened and rejected, so the Jews as a nation now. And as then, so now, both the election and the rejection are to be referred entirely to the will of God, having mercy on whom he will and hardening whom he will, his justice in doing both being nevertheless unimpeachable.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Moreover - God has an indisputable right to reject those who will not accept the blessings on his own terms. And this he exercised in the case of Pharaoh; to whom, after many instances of stubbornness and rebellion, he said, as it is recorded in scripture, For this very thing have I raised thee up - That is, Unless thou repent, this will surely be the consequence of my raising thee up, making thee a great and glorious king, that my power will be shown upon thee, (as indeed it was, by overwhelming him and his army in the sea,) and my name declared through all the earth - As it is at this day. Perhaps this may have a still further meaning. It seems that God was resolved to show his power over the river, the insects, other animals, (with the natural causes of their health, diseases, life, and death,) over the meteors, the air, the sun, (all of which were worshipped by the Egyptians, from whom other nations learned their idolatry,) and at once over all their gods, by that terrible stroke of slaying all their priests, and their choicest victims, the firstborn of man and beast; and all this with a design, not only to deliver his people Israel, (for which a single act of omnipotence would have sufficed,) but to convince the Egyptians, that the objects of their worship were but the creatures of Jehovah, and entirely in his power, and to draw them and the neighbouring nations, who should hear of all these wonders, from their idolatry, to worship the one God. For the execution of this design, (in order to the display of the divine power over the various objects of their worship, in variety of wonderful acts, which were at the same time just punishments for their cruel oppression of the Israelites,) God was pleased to raise to the throne of an absolute monarchy, a man, not whom he had made wicked on purpose, but whom he found so, the proudest, the most daring and obstinate of all the Egyptian princes; and who, being incorrigible, well deserved to be set up in that situation, where the divine judgments fell the heaviest. Exod. ix, 16.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

Our apostle here proceeds to remove another objection, namely, the seeming injustice or severity of rejecting the Jews, and reserving them to wrath, giving them up to an obdurate heart, because they would not accept of the way which the wisdom of God had appointed for their justification; namely, faith in his Son Jesus Christ. This he clears by another instance; to wit, that of Pharoah, who had so often hardened his own heart obstinately, and provoked God at last to harden him judicially. For this cause, says God, have I raised thee up; in the original it is, I have made thee stand; that is, "I have sustained thee, and kept thee alive, when thou deservedst, and mightest justly have expected, to be cut off by the several plagues inflicted on thee for thy obstinate hardness of heart, that I might shew my power in thee, &c.

Or, "I have patiently borne thy stubbornness for a long time, that my power and justice might more illustriously appear at last in that conspicuous judgment, which I will execute upon thee in the sight of all the nations of the earth."

Learn hence, That some sinners, whom the patience of God has long waited upon, are preserved of him, and raised out of great and imminent dangers by him, for this end; namely, to make them examples of his just indignation against stubborn and obdurate rebels, and that in the most illustruous and signal manner. For this cause have I raised thee up, that my name might be declared throughout all the earth.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

17. “For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, that for this very thing have I raised thee up, that I may show forth my power in thee, in order that my name may be proclaimed in all the earth.” At that time Pharaoh was absolute monarch of the only organized government on the globe. He built the pyramids, the world’s greatest wonder to this day; there being no mechanical powers on the earth at the present day competent to erect them.

It has been estimated that it would take twenty thousand men one hundred years to build Cheops. When I climbed to the top and stood on its pinnacle, five hundred and fifty feet above the earth, and looked down the huge mass covering thirteen acres of ground, I no longer doubted the estimate. God did not mock Pharaoh. He sent him His two best preachers, Moses and Aaron, to preach the gospel. to him that he might be saved. Of course the gospel resisted hardened his heart, as in every other case. The same sun that softens the wax, hardens the clay; so the same gospel that saves those who receive it, hardens and augments the damnation of all who reject it. Hence souls lost in Christendom reach a hotter hell than the heathens. If Pharaoh had been converted, he was the very man to glorify God in all the earth, by sending the gospel to the ends of the earth. He had the men and the money, and was competent to preach the gospel and proclaim the true God in all the earth. Pharaoh did like millions of other sinners, rejected the gospel and plunged into ruin for time and eternity, defeating the purposes of God for which He had raised him up, that he might be converted under the preaching of Moses and Aaron and preach the gospel of God’s truth and righteousness to all the earth.

William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

For the scripture [Paul is still answering the question at verse 14 by Scripture citation] saith unto Pharaoh [We have had election choosing between Ishmael and Isaac, and Esau and Jacob: we now have it choosing between a third pair, Moses and Pharaoh. In the first case God blessed both Isaac, and Ishmael with promises ( Gen_17:20 ; Gen_21:13 ; Gen_21:18 ; Gen_21:20 ); in the second case he blessed Jacob and withheld his promise from Esau; in the third case he granted favor to Moses, and meted out punishment to Pharaoh. Thus there is a marked progress in reprobation in the three non-elect characters, which is suggestive, since Israel was thrice given over to a reprobate mind, and each punishment was more intense. First, all were rejected in the wilderness, but all their children were permitted to enter the promised land-time, forty years; second, all were rejected at the carrying away into Babylon, and only a small body were permitted to return--time, seventy years; third, the race as a race was rejected in Paul's day and only a remnant will, even at the end, be restored ( Isa_10:22-23 ; Isa_1:9 )--time, about nineteen hundred years], For this very purpose did I raise thee up [caused thee to occupy a time and place which made thee conspicuous in sacred history], that I might show in thee my power, and that my name might be published abroad in all the earth . [For the publishing of God's name, see Exo_15:14-16 ; Jos_2:9-10 ; Jos_9:9 . The dispersion of the Jews and the spread of Christianity have kept God's name glorified in the history of Pharaoh to this day. Paul is still establishing by Scripture God's freedom of choice. He chose the unborn in preference to the born; he chose between unborn twins; he chose between the shepherd Moses and Pharaoh the king. In this last choice Moses was chosen as an object of mercy, and Pharaoh as a creature of wrath, but his latter choice in no way violates even man's sense of justice. Instead of raising up a weak and timid owner of the Hebrew slaves, God exalted Pharaoh, the stubborn, the fearless. And who would question God's right to do this? Having put Pharaoh in power, God so managed the contest with him that his stubbornness was fully developed and made manifest, and in overcoming his power and stubbornness through the weakness of Moses, God showed his power. The transaction is very complex. God starts by stating the determined nature of Pharaoh ( Exo_3:19 ) and follows the statement with the thrice repeated promise, "I will harden his heart" ( Exo_4:21 ; Exo_7:3 ; Exo_14:4 . Comp. Exo_14:17 ). Once Jehovah says, "I have hardened his heart" ( Exo_10:1 ). Thrice it is said that his "heart was hardened as Jehovah had spoken" ( Exo_7:13 ; Exo_8:19 ; Exo_9:35 ). Once it reads that his "heart was hardened, and he hearkened not unto them; as Jehovah had spoken" ( Exo_7:22 ). Five times we read that "Jehovah hardened" his heart (Exo 9:12; Exo_10:20 ; Exo_10:27 ; Exo_11:10 ; Exo_14:8 ). Thus thirteen times (with Exo_8:15 ; fourteen times) Pharaoh's hardness of heart is said to be the act of God. (Comp. Deu_2:30 ; Jos_11:20 ; Isa_63:17 ; Joh_12:40 ; Joh_9:39 ; Mar_4:12 ) Inexorably so? By no means: God would have gotten honor had he relented before matters reached extremes. Hence Pharaoh is called upon to repent ( Exo_10:3 ), and several times he is near repenting, and might have done so had not God been too ready to show mercy ( Exo_8:28 ; Exo_9:27 ; Exo_10:24 ). So there was sin in Pharaoh. We read that his "heart is stubborn" ( Exo_7:14 ); "was stubborn" ( Exo_9:7 ). "Pharaoh hardened his heart, and hearkened not unto them, as Jehovah had spoken" ( Exo_8:15 ). "Pharaoh hardened his heart" ( Exo_8:32 ; 1Sa_6:6 ). "Pharaoh sinned yet more, and hardened his heart" ( Exo_9:34 ). As the hardening was the joint work of Pharaoh and God, and as Pharaoh sinned in hardening his heart, God's part in the hardening was not an absolute, overmastering act. It was not even a persuasive act, as in cases of conversion. God hardened Pharaoh's heart by providing opportunity and occasion, as the narrative shows, and Pharaoh did the rest by improving the opportunity in the service of the devil. The same act of patience, forbearance and mercy which softens one heart, hardens another by delaying punishment, as we may see every day. The same sunshine that quickens the live seed, rots the dead one. The Jews approved God's course toward Pharaoh, but resented the same treatment when turned upon themselves, ignoring the natural law that like causes produce like effects. God found Pharaoh hard and used him for his glory negatively. He found Israel hard and made the same negative use of them, causing the gospel to succeed without them, thus provoking them to jealousy-- Rom_10:19 ]

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

17. The Scripture saith to Pharaoh. Exod. 9:16. It is not said that Pharaoh was born for, but was raised to the throne for a particular purpose. That purpose was that I might shew my power in thee. It is not said that God raised him up to destroy him. His power might have been shown by Pharaoh yielding to his power. Pharaoh's conduct made it necessary to abase him. Here, again, the election is not of an individual to destruction, but of a man to be a king for a particular purpose. The destruction came upon him because, in that position, he resisted God.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

For the scripture says

Here the scripture is personified as if God were talking to Pharaoh. AT: "The scripture records that God said" (See: Personification)

I ... my

God is referring to himself.

you

singular (See: Forms of You)

I raised you up

"Raised" here is an idiom for "to cause something to be what it is." AT: "I made you the powerful man that you are" (See: Idiom)

so that my name might be proclaimed

You can translate this in an active form. AT: "that people might proclaim my name" (See: Active or Passive)

my name

This metonym refers either 1) to God in all of his being. AT: "who I am" or 2) To his reputation. AT: "how great I am" (See: Metonymy)

in all the earth

"wherever there are people"

whom he wishes, he makes stubborn

God makes stubborn whoever he wishes to make stubborn.

translationWords

word of God

Pharaoh

power

preach

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

17. λέγει γὰρ κ.τ.λ. Exo 9:16 (LXX[183] ἕνεκεν τούτου διετηρήθης ἵνα … ἰσχύν …): apparently an independent translation of the Hebrew. εἰς τοῦτο points forward to ὅπως: ἐξήγειρα, “used of GOD calling up the actors on the stage of history; cf. Hab 1:6; Zec 11:16; Jer 27:21,” S. H. So Lipsius, Zahn, alibi Cf. ἀνέστησεν, Act 9:41. Giff. takes ἐξηγ. = ‘I raised thee from thy sickness.’ Pharaoh is cited as an unwilling instrument of GOD’S mercy: in his case and person the purposes of GOD’S mercy and the revelation of His character (ὄνομα.) are secured, although the process involves for him a ‘hardening’: that is due to his attitude towards GOD’S purpose.

[183] LXX. the Septuagint Version of the Old Testament

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

17.] The same great truth shewn on its darker side:—not only as regards God’s mercy, but His wrath also.

For (confirmation of the universal truth of the last inference) the Scripture (identified with God, its Author: the case, as Thol. remarks, is different when merely something contained in Scripture is introduced by ἡ γραφὴ λέγει: there ἡ γρ. is merely personified. The justice of Thol.’s remark will be apparent, if we reflect that this expression could not be used of the mere ordinary words of any man in the historical Scriptures, Ahab, or Hezekiah,—but only where the text itself speaks, or where God spoke, or, as here, some man under inspiration of God) saith to Pharaoh, For this very purpose (ὅτι recitantis; the LXX have καὶ ἕνεκεν τούτου) did I raise thee up (LXX διετηρήθης, ‘thou wert preserved to this day:’ Heb. הֶֽעֱמַדְתִּיךָ from עָמַד, stetit, in Hiph. stare fecit; hence taken to signify (1) ‘constituit, muneri præfecit,’ as 1Ki 12:32; Isa 21:6 (LXX σεαυτῷ στῆσον σκόπον); Est 4:5,—(2) ‘confirmavit,’ as 1Ki 15:4 al.,—and (3) ‘prodire fecit, excitavit,’ Dan 11:11; Neh 6:7: the meaning ‘incolumem prœstitit,’ given in the Lexicons, seems to be grounded on the following of the LXX in this passage, who apparently understood it of Pharaoh being kept safe through the plagues. This has been done by modern interpreters [perhaps] to avoid the strong assertion which the Apostle here gives, purposely deviating from the LXX, that Pharaoh was ‘raised up,’ called into action in his office, to be an example of God’s dealing with impenitent sinners. The word chosen by the Apostle, ἐξεγείρω, in its transitive sense, is often used by the LXX for ‘to rouse into action:’ see besides reff. Psa 56:8; Psa 79:2; Son 4:16 al. So that the meaning (3) given above for the Heb. verb—‘prodire fecit, excitavit,’ was evidently that intended by ἐξήγειρα), that I may shew in thee (‘in thee as an example,’—‘in thy case,’—‘by thee’) my power (τ. ἰσχύν μου LXX-B: δύν. (which is read in A) is perhaps chosen by the Apostle as more general, ἰσχύς applying rather to those deeds of miraculous power of which Egypt was then witness), and that my Name may be proclaimed in all the earth (compare as a comment, the words of the song of triumph, Exo 15:14-16).

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

17. λέγει γὰρ ἡ γραφή: ‘and as an additional proof showing that the principle just enunciated (in ver. 16) is true not merely in an instance of God’s mercy, but also of His severity, take the language which the Scripture tells us was addressed to Pharaoh.’ On the form of quotation cf. Gal 3:8, Gal 3:22; there was probably no reason for the change of expression from ver. 15; both were well known forms used in quoting the O. T. and both could be used indifferently.τῷ φαραώ. The selection of Moses suggested as a natural contrast that of his antagonist Pharaoh. In God’s dealings with these two individuals, St. Paul finds examples of His dealings with the two main classes of mankind.εἰς αὐτὸ τοῦτο, κ. τ. λ.: taken with considerable variations, which in some cases seem to approach the Hebrew, from the LXX of Exo 9:16 (see below). The quotation is taken from the words which Moses was directed to address to Pharaoh after the sixth plague, that of boils. ‘For now I had put forth my hand and smitten thee and thy people with pestilence, and thou hadst been cut off from the earth; but in very deed for this cause have I made thee to stand for to show thee my power, and that my name may be declared throughout all the earth.’ The words in the original mean that God has prevented Pharaoh from being slain by the boils in order that He might more completely exhibit His power; St. Paul by slightly changing the language generalizes the statement and applies the words to the whole appearance of Pharaoh in the field of history. Just as the career of Moses exhibits the Divine mercy, so the career of Pharaoh exhibits the Divine severity, and in both cases the absolute sovereignty of God is vindicated.ἐξήγειρα: ‘I have raised thee up, placed thee in the field of history.’ There are two main interpretations of this word possible. (1) It has been taken to mean, ‘I have raised thee up from sickness,’ so Gif and others, ‘I have preserved thee and not taken thy life as I might have done.’ This is in all probability the meaning of the original Hebrew, ‘I made thee to stand,’ and certainly that of the LXX, which paraphrases the words διετηρήθης. It is supported also by a reading in the Hexapla διετήρησά σε, by the Targum of Onkelos Sustinui te ut ostenderem tibi, and the Arabic Te reservavi ut ostenderem tibi. Although ἐξεγείρειν does not seem to occur in this sense, it is used 1Co 6:14 of resurrection from the dead, and the simple verb ἐγείρειν in Jas 5:15 means ‘raising from sickness.’ The words may possibly therefore have this sense, but the passage as quoted by St. Paul could not be so interpreted. Setting aside the fact that he probably altered the reading of the LXX purposely, as the words occur here without any allusion to the previous sickness, the passage would be meaningless unless reference were made to the original, and would not justify the deduction drawn from it ὃν δὲ θέλει σκληρύνει.

(2) The correct interpretation (so Calv. Beng. Beyschlag Go. Mey. Weiss. Lips. Gore) is therefore one which makes St. Paul generalize the idea of the previous passage, and this is in accordance with the almost technical meaning of the verb ἐξεγείρειν in the LXX. It is used of God calling up the actors on the stage of history. So of the Chaldaeans Hab 1:6 διότι ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ ἐξεγείρω τοὺς Χαλδαίους: of a shepherd for the people Zec 11:16 διότι ἰδοὺ ἐγὼ ἐξεγείρω ποιμένα ἐπὶ τὴν γῆν: of a great nation and kings Jer. 27:41 ἰδοὺ λαὸς ἔρχεται ἀπὸ βορρᾶ, καὶ ἔθνος μέγα καὶ βασιλεῖς πολλοὶ ἐξεγερθήσονται ἀπʼ ἐσχάτου τῆς γῆς. This interpretation seems to be supported by the Samaritan Version, subsistere te feci, and certainly by the Syriac, ob id te constitui ut ostenderem; and it expresses just the idea which the context demands, that God had declared that Pharaoh’s position was owing to His sovereign will and pleasure—in order to carry out His Divine purpose and plan.

The interpretation which makes ἐξεγείρειν mean ‘call into being,’ ‘create,’ has no support in the usage of the word, although not inconsistent with the context; and ‘to rouse to anger’ (Aug de W. Fri &c.) would require some object such as θυμόν, as in 2 Macc. 13:4.

The readings of the Latin Versions are as follows: Quia in hoc ipsum excitavi te, d e f, Vulg.; quia ad hoc ipsum te suscitavi, Orig.-lat. quia in hoc ipsum excitavi te suscitavi te, g; quia in hoc ipsum te servavi, Ambrstr., who adds alii codices sic habent, ad hoc te suscitavi. Sive servavi sive suscitavi unus est sensus.

The reading of the LXX is καὶ ἕνεκεν τούτου διετηρήθης ἵνα ἐνδείξωμαι ἐν σοὶ τὴν ἰσχύν μου, καὶ ὅπως διαγγελῇ τὸ ὄνομά μου ἐν πάσῃ τῇ γῇ. St. Paul’s variations are interesting.

(1) εἰς αὐτὸ τοῦτο is certainly a better and more emphatic representation of the Hebrew than the somewhat weak τούτου ἔνεκεν. The expression is characteristically Pauline (Rom 13:6; 2Co 5:5; Eph 6:18, Eph 6:22; Col 4:8).

(2) ἐξήγειρά σε represents better than the LXX the grammar of the Hebrew, ‘I made thee to stand,’ but not the sense. The variants of the Hexapla (διετήρησα) and other versions suggest that a more literal translation was in existence, but the word was very probably St. Paul’s own choice, selected to bring out more emphatically the meaning of the passage as he understood it.

(3) ἐνδείξωμαι ἐν σοί. St. Paul here follows the incorrect translation of the LXX. The Hebrew gives as the purpose of God’s action that Pharaoh may know God’s power, and as a further consequence that God’s name may be known in the world. The LXX assimilates the first clause to the second and gives it a similar meaning.

(4) ὅπως … ὅπως. Here St. Paul obliterates the distinction which the LXX (following the Hebrew) had made of ἵνα … ὅπως. But this alteration was only a natural result of the change in the LXX itself, by which the two clauses had become coordinate in thought.

(5) For δύναμιν the LXX reads ἰσχύν. The reading of St. Paul appears as a variant in the Hexapla.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Saith. Present tense. "There is an element of tirelessness in the utterance. If the scripture ever spoke at all, it continued and continues to speak. It has never been struck dumb" (Morison).

Pharaoh. The original meaning of the word is now supposed to be the double house or palace. Compare the Sublime Porte.

Raised thee up [εξηγειρα] . Hebrew, caused thee to stand. Sept., diethrhqhv thou wast preserved alive. Only once elsewhere in the New Testament, 1Co 6:14, of raising from the dead. The meaning here is general, allowed thee to appear; brought, thee forward on the stage of events, as Zec 11:16. So the simple verb in Mt 11:11; Joh 7:52. Other explanations are, preserved thee alive, as Sept., excited thee to opposition, as Hab 1:6; creded thee.

Might be declared [διαγγελη] . Published abroad, thoroughly [δια] . So Rev. See on Luk 9:60. "Even to the present day, wherever throughout the world Exod. is read, the divine intervention is realized" (Godet).

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Vv. 17, 18. “For the Scripture saith unto Pharoah, Even for this same purpose have I raised thee up, that I might show my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth. Therefore hath He mercy on whom He will, and whom He will He hardeneth.”

Having given an instance of the liberty with which God dispenses grace, Paul gives an example of the way in which He hardens. This example is the more appropriately chosen, because the two personages brought on the scene are, in the Bible history, as it were the counterparts of one another. The logical connection expressed by for is this: There is nothing strange in Scripture ascribing to God the right of dispensing grace, since it ascribes to Him even the yet more incomprehensible right of condemning to hardness. These two rights indeed mutually suppose one another. The God who had not the one would not have the other. The passage quoted is Exo 9:16. God pronounces this sentence after the sixth plague. The verb ἐξεγείρειν (Osterv.: I have called thee into being; Oltram.: I have raised thee up) signifies properly: to bring out of a state of insensibility or inaction; from sleep, for example, as in Xenophon: “having seen this dream, he awoke (ἐξηγέρθη);” or from death, as 1Co 6:14 : “God will also raise up us by His power” (ἐξεγερεῖ). This passage is, with the one before us, the only place where this word is used in the N. T.

But it is employed in the LXX. in the sense of raising up, causing to be born, thus Zec 11:16: “I raise you up (ἐξεγείρω) a shepherd;” Hab 1:6 : “I raise up (I cause to come) against you the Chaldeans.” It is in this last sense that the simple ἐγείρειν is used in the N. T., Mat 11:11: “There hath not been raised up (ἐγήγερται)...a greater than John the Baptist;” Joh 7:52 : “Out of Galilee no prophet hath been raised up (ἐγήγερται).” The simple verb ἐγείρειν is likewise used, Jas 5:15, to signify to cure of a disease: “And the Lord will raise him up (ἐγερεῖ).” All these different shades of meaning have been applied by commentators to our passage. According to some (Aug., Fritzs., De Wette), the meaning is: “I aroused thee to resistance against me.” Reuss also says: “Pharaoh acts as he does in regard to the Israelites, because God excites him thereto. In this case the apostle must have departed completely from the meaning of the Hebrew word héémid (not héir), which simply signifies: to cause to stand up. And would there not be something revolting to the conscience in supposing that God could have Himself impelled Pharaoh inwardly to evil? Comp. Jas 1:12. Others (Hofmann, Morison), fixing on the sense of the Hebrew word, according to which the LXX. have translated (διετηρήθης, thou hast been preserved), as on that of the simple verb ἐγείρειν, Jas 5:15, think that God is thereby reminding Pharaoh that He could have left him to die (in one of the previous plagues), or that He could at that very moment visit him with death with all his people; comp. Rom 9:15. But in the former case God would be made to allude to a fact which there is nothing to indicate; and in the second, the verb employed would not be suitable; for it expresses more than the idea of simple preservation, as is acknowledged by Hofmann himself. A third set give the word the meaning of: “I have established thee as king” (Flatt, for example). But so special a qualification as this would require to be expressed more precisely. This last meaning, however, comes near what seems to us to be the true one. We think, indeed, that we should here apply the meaning raise up in all its generality. “I have caused thee to appear at this time, in this place, in this position” (Theoph., Beza, Calv., Beng., Olsh., Rück., Thol., Philip., Beyschl.). The subject in question is not the wicked disposition which animates Pharaoh, but the entire situation in which he finds himself providentially placed. God might have caused Pharaoh to be born in a cabin, where his proud obstinacy would have been displayed with no less self-will, but without any notable historical consequence; on the other hand, He might have placed on the throne of Egypt at that time a weak, easy-going man, who would have yielded at the first shock. What would have happened? Pharaoh in his obscure position would not have been less arrogant and perverse; but Israel would have gone forth from Egypt without éclat. No plagues one upon another, no Red Sea miraculously crossed, no Egyptian army destroyed; nothing of all that made so deep a furrow in the Israelitish conscience, and which remained for the elect people the immovable foundation of their relation to Jehovah. And thereafter also no influence produced on the surrounding nations. The entire history would have taken another direction. God did not therefore create the indomitable pride of Pharaoh as it were to gain a point of resistance and reflect His glory; He was content to use it for this purpose. This is what is expressed by the following words: ὅπως, that thus, not simply that (ἵνα). Comp. Exo 15:14-15, those words of the song chanted after the passage of the Red Sea: “The nations heard it; terror hath taken hold on the inhabitants of Palestina. The dukes of Edom have been amazed; trembling hath taken hold upon the mighty men of Moab; the inhabitants of Canaan have melted away.” Also the words of Rahab to the spies sent by Joshua, Jos 2:9-10 : “Terror hath taken hold of us, the inhabitants of the land have fainted; for we have heard how the Lord dried up the waters of the Red Sea from before you...; the Lord your God, He is God in heaven above and in earth beneath.” Read also the words of the Gibeonites to Joshua, Jos 9:9 : “From a very far country thy servants are come, because of the name of the Lord thy God; for we have heard the fame of Him, and all that He did in Egypt.” Thus it was that the catastrophes which distinguished the going out from Egypt, provoked by Pharaoh’s blind resistance, paved the way for the conquest of Canaan. And even to the present day, wherever throughout the world Exodus is read, the divine intention is realized: “to show my power, and make known my name throughout all the earth.”

Frédéric Louis Godet — Commentaries on Luke, John, Romans, and 1 Corinthians — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1870s–1890s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.