Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Romans 9:15
For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
15. For ] The connexion is; “The thought of injustice in these acts of the Eternal Judge is all the more to be rejected because they follow a principle expressed in His own words; for He says to Moses, &c.” That the principle, so expressed, is absolutely right, is taken for granted. To the Apostle, God’s word is final and absolute. With Him nothing indeed can be capricious, but none the less His “judgments” must, to a vast degree, be “past finding out,” just because He is the Eternal.
I will have mercy, &c.] Exo 33:19. Verbatim from LXX. The English exactly represents the Hebrew, if it is noted that “ will ” throughout this verse might equally well be “ shall.” In both Hebrew and Greek there is no explicit reference to “willing,” in the sense of “choosing.” However, the general sense plainly is, “In any case, through human history, wherein I shall be seen to have mercy, the one account I give of the radical cause is this I have mercy.” It is to be thankfully remembered, by the way, that close to this awful utterance occurs that other equally sovereign proclamation, (Exo 34:6, &c.) “The Lord, the Lord God, merciful and gracious, &c.”
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
For he saith to Moses – Exo 33:19.
I will have mercy – This is said by God when he declared expressly that he would make all his goodness pass before Moses Exo 33:19, and when, therefore, it was regarded, not as a proof of stern and inexorable justice, but as the very proof of his benevolence, and the highest which he thought proper to exhibit. When people, therefore, under the influence of an unrenewed and hosthe heart, charge this as an unjust and arbitrary proceeding, they are resisting and perverting what God regards as the very demonstration of his benevolence. The sense of the passage clearly is, that he would choose the objects of his favor, and bestow his mercies as he chose. None of the human race deserved his favor; and he had a right to pardon whom he pleased, and to save people on his own terms, and according to his sovereign will and pleasure.
On whom I will have mercy – On whom I choose to bestow mercy. The mode he does not explain. But there could not be a more positive declaration of these truths,
- That he does it as a sovereign, without giving an account of the reason of his choice to any.
(2)That he does it without regard to any claim on the part of man; or that man is regarded as destitute of merit, and as having no right to his mercy.
(3)That he will do it to any extent which he pleases, and in whatever time and manner may best accord with his own good pleasure.
(4)That he has regard to a definite number and that on that number he intends to bestow eternal life; and,
- That no one has a right to complain.
It is proof of his benevolence that any are saved; and where none have a claim, where all are justly condemned, he has a right to pardon whom he pleases. The executive of a country may select any number of criminals whom he may see fit to pardon, or who may be forgiven in consistency with the supremacy of the laws and the welfare of the community and none has a right to complain, but every good citizen should rejoice that any may be pardoned with safety. So in the moral world, and under the administration of its holy Sovereign, it should be a matter of joy that any can be pardoned and saved; and not a subject of murmuring and complaint that those who shall finally deserve to die shall be consigned to woe.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 15. For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy, c.] The words of God to Moses, Ex 33:19, show that God has a right to dispense his blessings as he pleases for, after he had declared that he would spare the Jews of old, and continue them in the relation of his peculiar people, when they had deserved to have been cut off for their idolatry, he said: I will make all my goodness pass before thee; and I will proclaim the name of the Lord before thee; and I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy; and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. As if he had said: I will make such a display of my perfections as shall convince you that my nature is kind and beneficent; but know, that I am a debtor to none of my creatures. My benefits and blessings are merely from my own good will: nor can any people, much less a rebellious people, challenge them as their due in justice or equity. And therefore I now spare the Jews; not because either you, who intercede for them or they themselves have any claim upon my favour, but of my own free and sovereign grace I choose to show them mercy and compassion. I will give my salvation in my own way and on my own terms. He that believeth on my Son Jesus shall be saved; and he that believeth not shall be damned. This is God’s ultimate design; this purpose he will never change; and this he has fully declared in the everlasting Gospel. This is the grand DECREE of reprobation and election.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
q.d. God is not chargeable with any injustice in electing some, and not others; for this is an act of mere mercy and compassion, and that can be no violation of justice. To prove this, he cites a testimony out of Exo 33:19, which see. There he tells Moses, that the good pleasure of his will was the only rule of all his favourable and merciful dealings with the children of men. The same thing is intended and expressed in two several phrases: and the ingemination imports the freeness of Gods mercy; nothing moves him thereunto, but his own gracious inclination; and also the arbitrariness thereof; it depends only upon his good will and pleasure. The sum is, if God show mercy to some, and not to others, he cannot be accused of injustice, because he injures none; nor is he obliged or indebted to any.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
15. For he saith to Moses (Ex33:19).
I will have mercy on whom Iwill have“on whom I have”
mercy, and I will havecompassion on whom I will have“on whom I have”
compassion“Therecan be no unrighteousness in God’s choosing whom He will, for toMoses He expressly claims the right to do so.” Yet it is worthyof notice that this is expressed in the positive rather than thenegative form: not, “I will have mercy on none but whom Iwill”; but, “I will have mercy on whomsoever Iwill.”
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
For he saith to Moses,…. That is, God said to Moses. The apostle goes on to answer to the above objections, by producing some testimonies out of the writings of Moses, in favour of both branches of predestination; showing, that the doctrine he had advanced, was no other than what God himself had delivered to Moses, whose name and writings were in great esteem with the Jews, whereby the apostle might hope to give full satisfaction in this point. The first passage he cites, is in Ex 33:19.
And will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy. This is produced, in favour of special, particular, and personal election, and to clear it from any charge of unrighteousness; and by it, it appears, that God bestows his grace and mercy in time, on such persons he has willed and determined from all eternity to bestow it; this, is clear from hence, for since all this is dependent on his will, it must be as this was his will from eternity, seeing no new will can possibly arise in God, God wills nothing in time, but what he willed before time; that this grace and mercy are shown only to some persons, and that the only reason of this is his sovereign will and pleasure, and not the works and merits of men; wherefore since this grace and mercy rise out of his own free good will and pleasure, and are by no means the creature’s due, it most clearly follows, that God in determining to bestow his grace and mercy, and in the actual doing of it, whilst he determines to deny it, and does deny it to others, cannot possibly be chargeable with any unrighteousness.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
For he says to Moses ( ). He has an Old Testament illustration of God’s election in the case of Pharaoh (Ex 33:19).
On whom I have mercy ( ). Indefinite relative with and the present active subjunctive of , late verb only here and Jude 1:23 in N.T. “On whomsoever I have mercy.” The same construction in , “on whomsoever I have compassion.”
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
I will have mercy – compassion [ – ] , See Exo 33:19. For mercy see on 2 John 3; Luk 1:50. The former verb emphasizes the sense of human wretchedness in its active manifestation; the latter the inward feeling expressing itself in sighs and tears. Have mercy therefore contemplates, not merely the sentiment in itself, but the determination of those who should be its objects. The words were spoken to Moses in connection with his prayer for a general forgiveness of the people, which was refused, and his request to behold God ‘s glory, which was granted. With reference to the latter, God asserts that His gift is of His own free grace, without any recognition of Moses ‘ right to claim it on the ground of merit or service.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “For he saith to Moses,” (to mousei gar legei) “For to Moses he says,” Paul the new creature in Christ, the Apostle, often quoted Moses as a testator to sustain positions of divine truth, as in this instance from Exo 33:19; Exo 34:6-7.
2) I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy,” (eleeso hon an eleo) “I will have mercy on whomever I have mercy,” or have loving kindness on whomsoever I will, yet it is granted or based upon the degree of respect men have for his laws that they are under, Exo 20:5-6; Exo 32:34-35.
3) “And I will have compassion,” (kai oiktireso) “and I will have pity,” or compassion and care in a time of suffering and need, La 3:22, 23; Psa 40:1-3. This he does, on nations and individuals, as they show sorrow and repent of their wrongs.
4) “On whom I will have compassion,” (hon an oiktiro) “Whomever I pity,” He had compassion on Israel in Egyptian bondage, heard their cry, and delivered them, of his own volition, based on the integrity of his nature and character, Exo 3:6-7; 2Ch 7:13-14; 1Jn 1:8-9; 1Pe 5:7.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
15. For he saith to Moses, etc. (296) With regard to the elect, God cannot be charged with any unrighteousness; for according to his good pleasure he favors them with mercy: and yet even in this case the flesh finds reasons for murmuring, for it cannot concede to God the right of showing favor to one and not to another, except the cause be made evident. As then it seems unreasonable that some should without merit be preferred to others, the petulancy of men quarrels with God, as though he deferred to persons more than what is right. Let us now see how Paul defends the righteousness of God.
In the first place, he does by no means conceal or hide what he saw would be disliked, but proceeds to maintain it with inflexible firmness. And in the second place, he labours not to seek out reasons to soften its asperity, but considers it enough to check vile barkings by the testimonies of Scripture.
It may indeed appear a frigid defence that God is not unjust, because he is merciful to whom he pleases; but as God regards his own authority alone as abundantly sufficient, so that he needs the defence of none, Paul thought it enough to appoint him the vindicator of his own right. Now Paul brings forward here the answer which Moses received from the Lord, when he prayed for the salvation of the whole people, “I will show mercy,” was God’s answer, “on whom I will show mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.” By this oracle the Lord declared that he is a debtor to none of mankind, and that whatever he gives is a gratuitous benefit, and then that his kindness is free, so that he can confer it on whom he pleases; and lastly, that no cause higher than his own will can be thought of, why he does good and shows favor to some men but not to all. The words indeed mean as much as though he had said, “From him to whom I have once purposed to show mercy, I will never take it away; and with perpetual kindness will I follow him to whom I have determined to be kind.” And thus he assigns the highest reason for imparting grace, even his own voluntary purpose, and also intimates that he has designed his mercy peculiarly for some; for it is a way of speaking which excludes all outward causes, as when we claim to ourselves the free power of acting, we say, “I will do what I mean to do.” The relative pronoun also expressly intimates, that mercy is not to all indiscriminately. His freedom is taken away from God, when his election is bound to external causes.
The only true cause of salvation is expressed in the two words used by Moses. The first is חנן, chenen, which means to favor or to show kindness freely and bountifully; the other is רחם, rechem, which is to be treated with mercy. Thus is confirmed what Paul intended, that the mercy of God, being gratuitous, is under no restraint, but turns wherever it pleases. (297)
(296) The quotation is from Exo 33:19, and literally from the Septuagint. The verb ἐλεέω is to be taken here in the sense of showing favour rather than mercy, according to the meaning of the Hebrew word; for the idea of mercy is what the other verb, οἰκτείρω , conveys. [ Schleusner ] renders it here and in some other passages in this sense. The rendering then would be — “I will favour whom I favour,” that is, whom I choose to favour; “and I will pity whom I pity,” which means whom I choose to pity. The latter verb in both clauses is in Hebrew in the future tense, but rendered properly in Greek in the present, as it commonly expresses a present act. — Ed.
(297) These two words clearly show that election regards man as fallen; for favour is what is shown to the undeserving, and mercy to the wretched and miserable, so that the choice that is made is out of the corrupted mass of mankind, contemplated in that state, and not as in a state of innocency. [ Augustine ] says, “ Deus alios facit vasa irae secundum meritus; alios vasa miserieordiae secundum gratiam — God makes some vessels of wrath according to their merit; others vessels of mercy according to his grace.” In another place he says, “ Deus ex eadem massa damnata originaliter, tanquam figulus, fecit aliud vas ad honorem, aliud in contumeliam — God, as a potter, made of the same originally condemned mass, one vessel to honor, another to dishonor.” “Two sorts of vessels God forms out of the great lump of fallen mankind.” — [ Henry ]
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(15) For he saith to Moses.In the most characteristic period of the Old Testament the divine favour was promised in this way to Moses and denied to Pharaoh. The original of the first quotation has reference to the special revelation vouchsafed to Moses on Sinai, I will show grace to whom I will show grace.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
15. For The two fors in this and the seventeenth verse show that Paul gives a reason in each case for maintaining God’s rectitude; first for the bright side, and next for the dark side of the divine dealings in his system of free-agency.
The predestinarian view makes Paul’s answer to the question, Is God unrighteous? be simply this: God is an absolute sovereign, and can do as he pleases, and will as he will, and therefore what he does is right. He can choose men to sin and death “for nothing in them,” and for no fault of theirs; and, because He is almighty, it is right. But,
1. Such a reply is not Pauline, as we have shown, (see note on Rom 3:4-5.) Paul’s doctrine is not that a thing is right because the Absolute One does it; but the Absolute does that which is intrinsically right.
2. The supposed answer is no answer at all. When I ask, Is a given act right? it is no reply to say the actor could do what he pleased, and could will as he willed, and therefore it was right. Power increased infinitely cannot change right. A creature can be supposably wronged by even an infinite being.
3. The predestinarian interpretation makes Paul pretend to give a reason, but really resort to force, and seek to frighten his opponent out of reasoning. Now even if thus silencing instead of convincing were not very mean, the pretending to give a reason when he gives no reason at all would be very mendacious.
4. Mr. Barnes (on Rom 9:15) argues that where all are guilty and worthy of death an executive may pardon a definite number without any just complaint from the unpardoned. Not, we reply, where his own previous decree has plunged the unpardoned into the sin and misery for which he condemns them.
5. Mr. Barnes argues that to predestinate unconditionally a man to sin and damnation is no more unjust than to make him inferior to his fellow “in regard to talents, health, beauty, prosperity, and rank.” It is just as right for God to make me a sinner, and send me to hell for being what he has decretively made me, as it is for him to make me less than a Solomon. (See his notes on Rom 9:12; Rom 9:21.) But,
( 1.) These temporal inferiorities are compensated by a large surplus of happiness that renders life desirable in spite of them; but for eternal damnation there is no compensation. Defenders of God’s benevolence, like Paley, point us to the great surplus of happiness over misery diffused by God among all living beings. Life itself is a happiness; and its cessation, death, is dreaded and avoided as the greatest of evils. Thus do all living beings, however inferior, consent, agree, and covenant with God gladly to accept life as long as he will graciously bestow it upon them. But who ever consents to be brought into existence a necessary sinner just as necessarily as a sparrow is not an eagle, or a zany is not a sage and for that necessity be sent to an eternal hell?
(2.) These varieties of rank and advantage, of superiority and inferiority, are necessary to a grand system of creation. The result is that, while there is disadvantage in the various parts, the highest advantage is attained for the whole, and such a degree of happiness is secured for every part as that part is glad to accept. But to produce one class of beings upon whom sin and damnation are resistlessly fixed ages before they are born, predetermining their wills to sin, and their souls to hell for that sin, is an awful crime to charge upon God. It is only when by wilful, persistent, undecreed, and unnecessary sin, a free agent violates the divine order, and thus deserves eternal expulsion and reprobation, that such a destiny can be justifiable.
(3.) Omnipotently to create an innocent being supremely miserable would be an act of unspeakable despotism; but there may be discerned in it a certain infernal frankness and magnanimity. But to take an innocent nature, such as man is before he is decreed a sinner, and decretively smear sin upon him as a ground of justly damning him to an eternal hell, is as mean and mendacious as it is despotic. The calling such dealings righteousness, justice, is what our moral nature, with all its intensity, pronounces a truly execrable falsity.
(4.) We offer no solution to the problem that amiable and clear intellects, like Albert Barnes, can not only advocate doctrines which are morally so abominable, but can advocate them with reasonings so futile. But we are almost compelled to believe, from such specimens of logic, that the divine penalty imposed upon the ablest intellects for holding the abhorrent dogma, is to be smitten with collapse in defending it.
Saith unto Moses (Exo 33:19.) Moses coming down from Sinai, where he had received the law, finding the people immersed in idolatry, exclaims, Who is on Jehovah’s side? Forthwith the tribe of Levi step forth, draw swords, and execute upon the spot three thousand transgressors.
Next day (Exo 22:22) Moses prays that if Jehovah will not spare the people, his own name may be blotted out from God’s book. Jehovah respects the profound unselfishness of the mistaken prayer, but sternly replies,” Whosoever hath sinned against me, HIM will I blot out of my book.” Such was the conditional rule and reason of the Divine will in inflicting wrath, (Exo 32:15-33.) And this explains the dark side of the antithesis in Rom 9:18.
Moses again stands to intercede with God, (xxxiii, 12-19,) and, meeting a gracious reception, beseeches God, Show me thy glory. God consents, declaring, (the words quoted by Paul,) “I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious,” etc. And this explains the bright side of the antithesis in Rom 9:18.
God thus willed, in spite of Moses’ wish, to punish the guilty, and THE GUILTY ONLY; and he willed, in accordance with Moses’ wish, to show him his glory. Thus did God will as he was supremely pleased to will. Yet let four things be noted: First, this willing as he will does not mean willing without a reason, motive, or rule, but willing with a perfect right, reason, motive, and rule. Second. It does not mean that the reason, motive, or rule is an incomprehensible, mysterious, unrevealed, unknown one, but the fully revealed and perfectly just rule of impartially dealing with men as free agents. Third. The peremptoriness of this willing as he will, while it does not exclude either reason, rule, or a publication of reason or rule, does override the small caprice of the man who (as Moses) would doubt, cavil, or rebel against the infinite reason; and, Fourth, This willing as he will is a willing to deal with men, not “for nothing in them,” but according to their faith, and subsequently to their faith, and conditionally upon their faith. The wrongly praying Moses is the type of the weeping Paul, or even of the cavilling Jew, humanely wishing that God would spare the unfaithful people; yet God will inflexibly act on the known and universally published rules of righteous judgment. He will disregard human dictation, whether in form of prayer, weeping, or cavil, and so will have mercy on whom he will have mercy. And human reason, being finitely in the type of divine reason, when it comes to an understanding of the divine rules and reasons, does in its highest exertions profoundly approve the principles on which they are based. So that Paul’s logic is a full reply to his Jewish opponent.
In this interpretation we make no mistake. We have rightly interpreted God’s words to Moses as they are in the Old Testament. And on the perfectly just rule that, where possible, a quotation in the New from the Old Testament must be taken in its original sense, the passage means from the pen of Paul just what it means from the mouth of Jehovah.
Alford makes the apostle here teach “Divine sovereignty” solely and regardless of human freedom, (freedom, he says, is fully taught in other places,) from Paul’s habit of “insulating the one subject under consideration.” But, 1. Alford entirely mistakes the “subject” which the apostle here “insulates.” “Divine sovereignty” is not the “subject,” nor the question, in any part of the chapter. It is God’s “ unrighteousness,” (Rom 9:14, as there said in our note,) namely, Has not God the right, overruling the Jews, to sink the old narrow Judaic particularism in a new broad conditional universality? Has not God the right to do right? And, 2, Alford’s exposition not only makes the apostle leave human freedom out of view, but forces it out of existence by completely contradicting it, and making any assertion of freedom elsewhere to be false. 3. Alford forgets that in this very chapter the apostle takes care to assert human freedom, and so to assert it as to run it through all these instances, and so deny the absolutist interpretation in each and every case. (See notes on 30-33.)
I will on whom I will This simple assertion, that God will accept whom he pleases, decides not the question, Whom does he please or will to accept? But, taken in its connexions, it plainly means that whereas the Jew wills that God should accept all Jews, God wills and will do as he wills to accept all true believers. Paul thus peremptorily asserts not the divine Will in disregard of reason, or in disregard of “anything in the individual,” or in regard to some unknown reason, or in absolute “divine sovereignty” over all things, but in entire independence of Jewish pedigree, merit, or dictation. The Jew prefers a system of predestinated birth-salvation; God prefers an equalized system of free-agency and will have his way. He will have his way in spite of the cavils of predestinarians, whether Judaistic or Calvinistic.
The rules by which God thus wills, and absolutely pleases, to have mercy, are abundantly revealed in Scripture. To reveal and publish them is, indeed, the great object of Scripture. The decalogue proclaims him a God “showing mercy to thousands that love me and keep my commandments.” “Let the wicked forsake his way, and return to the Lord, and he will have mercy. (Isa 55:7.) The pretence, therefore, that this verse presupposes some no-reason, or some unknowable reason, for his gracious preferences, is a figment and a folly.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion”.’
Paul illustrates his point from Scripture. God had said to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion” (Exo 33:19). Thus God had by this indicated that He would have mercy and compassion on those whom He Himself chose. And Paul emphasises this by adding ‘and whom He will He hardens’. The decision therefore as to who will receive mercy and who will not is to be seen as due to the elective purpose of God, for mercy and judgment are both in His hands, to be exercised as He wills. Furthermore it should be noted that the statement in Exodus is made immediately following an incident where He had said, ‘he who has sinned, him will I blot out of my book’ (Exo 32:33), where Israelites are clearly in mind, some of whom were consequently so punished (Exo 32:35), while others received mercy, at least temporarily.
Someone may then question the morality of this, but the idea here is that as God is speaking of situations requiring mercy and compassion He is not bound by any moral requirement. In the nature of the case no one can be seen as deserving of mercy and compassion. The whole point of mercy and compassion is that they override the demands of justice. The persons in question, who are to receive mercy and compassion, are all clearly deserving of judgment, otherwise they would not require mercy and compassion. They would instead get what was due to them. In consequence, when He chooses to show mercy and compassion in one case and not in another, no question can be raised as to the morality of it. Whether to show mercy or not is solely at the discretion of the judge, and if mercy were shown to all then justice would cease to exist. Strict justice in fact would require that no mercy was shown at all. That was why God had to find a way of maintaining the demands of justice while showing mercy. And He accomplished it through the cross. Thus mercy is not bound by morality. We note the dogmatism of God’s statement. The decision is made solely on the basis of His will, as in the case of the election of Jacob.
It should also be noted that this statement was made concerning those who were ‘under the Law’, indicating that there were at least some who were under the Law who would not find mercy. Indeed on the basis of Rom 9:22 some are vessels of wrath fitted for destruction. This last demonstrates again the fallacy of the extreme Jewish position that no Jew would enter Gehenna. Certainly Paul did not believe that.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Rom 9:15 . Reason assigned for the , not for the legitimacy of the question . . . (Mangold, p. 134), so that the opponent’s language continues , until it “culminates in the audacious exclamation of Rom 9:19 .” after always relates to this . Bengel rightly remarks on : “Nam quod asserimus, Dei assertum est irrefragabile .”
. . (see critical remarks) brings into strong relief the venerated recipient of the word, which makes it appear the more weighty (comp. Rom 10:5 ; Rom 10:19 ). The citation is Exo 33:19 , verbally following the LXX. (which would have more closely translated the Heb. by . . .). In the original text it is an assurance by God to Moses of His favour now directly extended towards him, but expressed in the form of a divine axiom . Hence Paul, following the LXX., was justified in employing the passage as a scriptural statement of the general proposition: God’s mercy, in respect of the persons concerned, whose lot it should be to experience it, lets itself be determined solely by His own free will of grace: “ I will have mercy upon whosoever is the object of my mercy; ” so that I am therefore in this matter dependent on nothing external to myself. This is the sovereignty of the divine compassionating will. Observe that the future denotes the actual compassion, fulfilling itself in point of fact, which God promises to show to the persons concerned, towards whom He stands in the mental relation ( , present ) of pity. The distinction between and is not, as Tittmann, Synon . p. 69 f., defines it, that . denotes the active mercy, and . the compassionate kindness, but that the same notion misereri is more strongly expressed by . See Fritzsche. Comp. Plat. Euthyd . p. 288 D: . The latter denotes originally bewailing sympathy, as opposed to (Xen. Anab . iii. 1. 19). Comp. (to which , Plat. Rep . iii. p. 387 D, corresponds), , . . . On the form , see Lobeck, ad Phryn. p. 741.
] The is that everywhere usual with the relative in the sense of cunque . Hence conditionally expressed: if to any one I am gracious, etc. See generally Hartung, Partikell . II. p. 293 f.; Ellendt, Lex. Soph . I. p. 119. Consequently, not merely the mercy in itself, but also the determination of those who should be its objects, is designated as a free act of God, resting on nothing except on His elective purpose, and affecting the persons according to it; for the emphasis lies in the relative clause on the repeated , as generally has its place after the emphatic word.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
15 For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.
Ver. 15. I will have mercy, &c. ] Dei voluntas est ratio rationum, nec tantum recta, sed regula. The will of God is the rule of his plan, neither only right but his rule.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
15. ] for He saith to Moses, “I will have mercy on whomsoever I have meroy, and [I] will have compassion on whomsoever I have compassion .” The citation is from the LXX, who insert the indefinite , the Heb. being ; the meaning apparently being, ‘whenever I have mercy on any, it shall be pure mercy , no human desert contributing;’ which agrees better with the next verse than the ordinary rendering, which lays the stress on the ; and is not inconsistent with Rom 9:18 , , : because if God’s mercy be pure mercy without any desert on man’s part, it necessarily follows that he has mercy on whom He will, His will being the only assignable cause of the selection.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Rom 9:15 . . is emphatic by position: the person to whom this declaration was made, as well as the voice which made it, render it peculiarly significant to a Jew. The words (exactly as LXX, Exo 33:19 ) occur in the answer to a prayer of Moses, and may have been regarded by Paul as having special reference to him; as if the point of the quotation were, Even one who had deserved so well as Moses experienced God’s mercy solely because God willed that He should. But that is not necessary, and is not what the original means. The emphasis is on , and the point is that in showing mercy God is determined by nothing outside of His mercy itself. is stronger than ; it suggests more strongly the emotion attendant on pity, and even its expression in voice or gesture.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
have mercy = pity.
will. Omit.
have compassion on = compassionate. Greek. oikteiro. Only here. Compare Rom 12:1. See Exo 33:19.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
15.] for He saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whomsoever I have meroy, and [I] will have compassion on whomsoever I have compassion. The citation is from the LXX, who insert the indefinite , the Heb. being ; the meaning apparently being, whenever I have mercy on any, it shall be pure mercy, no human desert contributing; which agrees better with the next verse than the ordinary rendering, which lays the stress on the ; and is not inconsistent with Rom 9:18, , : because if Gods mercy be pure mercy without any desert on mans part, it necessarily follows that he has mercy on whom He will, His will being the only assignable cause of the selection.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Rom 9:15. , for to Moses) Many are of opinion, that the objection extends from this verse to Rom 9:18; in which view the for, is used, as in ch. Rom 3:7, and thus thou wilt say then, Rom 9:19, concludes the objection, which was begun at Rom 9:14. And indeed by this introduction of a person speaking there would be a fitting expression of that (rejoinder of the opponent), which is censured at Rom 9:20, and is subsequently refuted by taking up the words themselves or their synonyms. In the meantime Paul so expresses himself, as to make , the objector whilst replying at the same time answer himself; and therefore the words in this verse may be also taken, without injury to the sense, as spoken in the person of the apostle, as we shall now endeavour to show. Moses, Exodus 33, had prayed for himself and the people by , the grace of the Lord, Rom 9:12-13; Rom 9:16-17, and had concluded with, show me thy glory. The Lord answered: I will make all My goodness pass in the presence of thy face, and I will proclaim the name of the Lord before thy face. , And will be gracious, to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy, to whom I will show mercy, Rom 9:19. The Lord did not disclose even to Moses without some time intervening, to whom He would show grace and mercy, although the question was respecting Moses and the people of Israel alone, not respecting the Gentiles. To this Moses, then, not merely to others by Moses (, says Paul, as presently after, ) the Lord spoke thus: By My proclamation, and by My most abundant working, subsequently, I will designate [mark out] him, as the object of grace and mercy, whosoever he be, whom I make the object of grace and mercy. By these words He intimated, that He would make proclamation [would reveal His own character] as regards grace and mercy; and He shortly after accordingly made proclamation. Exo 34:5, [ … ], merciful and gracious, etc., to thousands; and added [ , , …], and He will not clear the guilty, etc. Therefore according to the subsequent proclamation itself, the following meaning of the previous promise comes clearly out: I will show thee the most abundant grace, even to that degree that thou mayest see concerning Me [see centred in Me] all whatsoever thou dost both desire and canst receive [comprehend] in order that thou mayest furthermore understand, that it is [all of] grace; and for this reason inasmuch as I have once for all embraced thee in grace, which thou acknowledgest to be grace; and as to the rest of the people, I will show them the most abundant mercy, in not visiting them with immediate destruction for their idolatry, that they may further understand it to be mercy; and for this reason inasmuch as I have once for all embraced them in mercy, which thou in their behalf acknowledgest to be mercy. The LXX. Int. and Paul have expressed the meaning of this sentence by the difference between the present and future tense: , , I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion. And there is the figure Ploce [en.], which nearly signifies the same as below, ch. Rom 13:7, and here it expresses the liberty of the Agent, of whom the apostle is speaking, as in Exo 16:23. Moreover, each of the two verbs, placed in the two clauses [i.e. repeated twice], contains the emphasis in the former clause; [i.e. the emphasis is on the verb in each of the two clauses on its first mention, not on it when repeated; I will have mercy, on whom I have mercy, etc.]: although generally in other passages the emphasis is on the verb in the latter clause [i.e. on its repetition] Gen 27:33; Gen 43:14; 2Ki 7:4. That the acknowledgment of grace and mercy, on the part of Moses, and the true Israelites, is entwined together, is evident from this, that Paul, Rom 9:16, speaks, on the opposite side, of the man that willeth and that runneth, to whom grace is not grace, and mercy is not mercy. is put twice, and intimates in the former passage that Moses (to whom the word , grace, is repeated in reply, taken from his own very prayers from Exodus 33. Rom 9:13 : where there occurs the same Ploce), and that in the latter passage, the others, were among the thousands [as to whom God said of Himself, keeping mercy for thousands], to whom sinners, their children, grandchildren, etc., are opposed, Exo 34:7. And thus, this testimony is extremely well fitted to prove, that there is no unrighteousness with God. This sentiment is manifest to believers. But in regard to those, who maintain the efficacy of good works, it sounds too abrupt: the reason why God should be merciful, is none other than His own mercy, for no other is mentioned in the writings of Moses, concerning Moses and Israel. I will have mercy, i.e. no one can extort anything by force; all things are in My hand, under My authority, and dependent on My will, if I act otherwise, no one can charge Me with injustice. This answer is sufficient to give to the defender of good works; and if any farther answer is given to him, it is superfluous.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Rom 9:15
Rom 9:15
For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.-This language was spoken to Moses (Exo 33:19), and is quoted to prove that selection is not after the flesh nor according to the inventions and works of men, but according to the will of God; and God wills to elect these who trust and follow him, not those who trust their fleshly relations nor their own wise works. When the people trusted and obeyed God, he had mercy on them; when they refused to trust and follow him, he refused to have mercy upon them. This was so universally understood to be the law of God that Solomon put it in a proverb: He that covereth his transgressions shall not prosper; but whoso confesseth and forsaketh them shall obtain mercy. (Pro 28:13). The whole dealings of God with man under the patriarchal and Mosaic dispensations illustrate and enforce this truth. When God says, I will have mercy on whom I will, he means that he will have mercy on those who confess and turn from their sins and transgressions, and nothing that others may do will turn him from it.
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
I will have: Rom 9:16, Rom 9:18, Rom 9:19, Exo 33:19, Exo 34:6, Exo 34:7, Isa 27:11, Mic 7:18
Reciprocal: Gen 19:16 – the Lord Neh 9:17 – gracious Psa 31:16 – save Psa 101:1 – I will sing Ecc 7:13 – who Isa 30:18 – therefore Lam 3:37 – saith Eze 16:6 – Live Mat 20:13 – I do Mat 20:15 – it Luk 4:25 – many Act 9:6 – Arise Act 11:17 – as God Eph 2:4 – his 2Ti 1:18 – mercy Heb 10:28 – without Jam 1:18 – his own
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
:15
Romans 9:15. The mercy and compassion of this verse does not refer to the personal treatment of the individuals, but to selecting them for national or official purposes.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Rom 9:15. For he saith to Moses. An exact quotation from the LXX. (Exo 33:19), giving part of Jehovahs answer to Moses, when on Mount Sinai, he said; I beseech thee, show me thy glory. In condescending to grant this request, the Lord would have him understand that nothing in him, notwithstanding all he had hitherto been able to do for the service of God, would merit such a favor. If God accorded it to him, it was not because it was Moses who besought Him, or had any right to it; it was pure grace on His part (Godet).
On whom I have mercy. The present tense is used in this and the corresponding clause (I have compassion), referring to the settled disposition of mercy and compassion. The word whom in both instances might be rendered whomsoever, and has an emphasis here, describing not merely the mercy, but the choice of the individual objects, as the free act of God
Have compassion is stronger than have mercy; it ordinarily includes outward manifestations of compassion. The future tenses (will have mercy; will have compassion) point to the active exercise of Gods mercy and compassion.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
For he saith to Moses [Exo 33:19 . Surely if the Scripture generally was final authority to the Jew, that part of it would be least questioned wherein God is the speaker and Moses the reporter], I will have mercy on whom I have mercy [God chooses both the occasion and the object of mercy, and it is not regulated by anything external to him. That which is bestowed upon the meritorious and deserving is not pure mercy; for, as Shakespeare expresses it, “The quality of mercy is not strained”], and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion. [Compassion is a stronger term than mercy; it is mercy with the heart in it. The words quoted were spoken to Moses when he requested to see God, and his request was in part granted. In expounding Exo 33:19; Keil and Delitzsch speak thus: “These words, though only connected with the previous clause by the copulative vav, are to be understood in a causal sense as expressing the reason why Moses’ request was granted, that it was an act of unconditional grace and compassion on the part of God, to which no man, not even Moses, could lay any just claim.” This interpretation is strengthened by the Old Testament reading, which runs thus: “I will be gracious to whom I will be gracious, and will show mercy on whom I will show mercy,” for the act was one of grace rather than of compassion. Let us remember that Paul is here addressing a hypothetical Jewish objector. The Jew, influenced by false reasoning on his law, held a theory that man’s conduct regulated God’s and that man took the initiative and that God’s actions were merely responsive. Such might, in some measure, have been the case had any man ever kept the law; but as things actually stood, to the subversion of all such things, it was evident from Scripture that Moses, the great lawgiver, himself had never been able to merit a favor at God’s hands, but, on the contrary, God granted that to him as a matter of gracious mercy which he could never claim as a matter of right; viz., not eternal life with God, but the mere momentary glimpse of the passing of God’s glory. Surely, with such a precedent before him, the rational, thoughtful Jew, whether of Paul’s day or of our own, could and can have small hope of gaining heaven by the works of the law. Since it is true that Abraham obtained favor by faith and Moses received it solely by grace, who shall win it by merit under the law?]
Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)
15. For he says to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I do have mercy, and will compassionate whom I do compassionate (Exo 3:19). This progenitorship was a great and signal mercy, yet it did not exclude the reprobated from grace and glory but does imply from a place in the honored Messianic progenitorship.
Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament
Verse 15
This passage, is to be found in Exodus 33:19.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
9:15 {11} For he saith to Moses, I will {o} have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have {p} compassion on whom I will have compassion.
(11) He answers first with regard to those who are chosen to salvation, in the choosing of whom he denies that God may seem unjust, although he chooses and predestinates to salvation those that are not yet born, without any respect of worthiness: because he does not bring the chosen to the appointed end except by the means of his mercy, which is a cause discussed under predestination. Now mercy presupposes misery, and again, misery presupposes sin or voluntary corruption of mankind, and corruption presupposes a pure and perfect creation. Moreover, mercy is shown by her degrees: that is, by calling, by faith, by justification and sanctification, so that at length we come to glorification, as the apostle will show afterwards. Now all these things orderly following the purpose of God, do clearly prove that he can by no means seem unjust in loving and saving his.
(o) I will be merciful and favourable to whom I wish to be favourable.
(p) I will have compassion on whoever I wish to have compassion.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
Then he proceeded to refute the charge. When the whole nation of Israel rebelled against God by worshipping the golden calf (Exodus 32), God took the lives of only 3,000 of the rebels. He could have justly slain the whole nation. His mercy caused Him to do something that appeared to be unjust. Likewise in His dealings with Jacob and Esau God blessed Esau greatly as a descendant of Abraham, as He did all of Abraham’s descendants. Nevertheless He chose to bestow special grace on Jacob.
"The grace of God has been spoken of in this Epistle often before; but not until these chapters is mercy named; and until mercy is understood, grace cannot be fully appreciated." [Note: Newell, p. 355.]