Miles de Libros Cristianos Gratis. Accede a nuestra Biblioteca Virtual

Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Romans 9:22

Para un estudio avanzado de: “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Romans 9:22” utilice nuestra app.

[What] if God, willing to show [his] wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:

22. What if God, &c.] The Gr. construction in Rom 9:22-23 is broken and peculiar. Rendered nearly lit., the verses run: But if God, choosing to demonstrate His wrath, and make known what He can do, bore with much longsuffering vessels of wrath, fitted unto ruin; and that He might make known the wealth of His glory on vessels of mercy, which He fore-prepared unto glory? The general drift of the passage, though thus grammatically peculiar, is yet clear. The “ but ” suggests a certain difference between the potter’s work and that of the Creator and Judge; q. d., “If the potter’s right is so absolute, while the clay is mere matter and so has no demerit, the right of God over guilty humanity is at least as absolute; and meantime, even so, it is exercised with longsuffering.”

willing ] having the will to. The Gr. verb is frequent of the sovereign Divine will and pleasure. See e.g. Mat 8:3 ; 1Co 12:18.

to shew ] to demonstrate. Same word as Rom 9:17 (“ shew my power”), and Rom 3:25 (“to declare,” &c.). The justice and energy of His wrath against sin are both demonstrated in the doom of the impenitent.

endured, &c.] The special case of Pharaoh is in St Paul’s view, and is to be taken as an example. There we see on the one hand the sovereign will permitting sin to run its course, but on the other hand, in equal reality, warnings and appeals are addressed by God to a human conscience and will, time after time. From our point of view the two things are incompatible; but the Apostle assures us that both are real, and therefore compatible.

the vessels ] Lit. vessels. But the article is rightly supplied. The two classes of “vessels” are exhaustive of mankind. The word “vessel” is doubtless suggested here by the language of Rom 9:21. See next note.

of wrath ] i.e. “ connected with, devoted to, wrath.” So below, “ connected with, marked out for, mercy.” The genitive need not imply a metaphor, as if the “vessels” were “ filled with ” wrath or mercy; such an explanation would be needlessly remote. The same word in same construction occurs Act 9:15, where lit. “a vessel of choice;” and probably the metaphor does there appear in the next words “to bear my Name.” Cp. also 2Co 4:7; 1Th 4:4, (where “vessel” = “body”;) 1Pe 3:7. In those passages the metaphor is traceable to the idea of the body as the receptacle and casket, as it were, of the spirit. Here, as above said, the whole reference appears to be to the imagery of the potter’s work.

fitted ] Made ready, suitable. Such indeed every “vessel of wrath” will prove to have been. It is remarkable that St Paul does not say “which He fitted.” A seemingly rigid logic may say that the lost must be as truly predestined to death as the saved to life; but such logic is faulty in its premisses: we do not know enough of the Eternal Mind and the nature of things to reason so [42] . It is at least to be noted that here, while the “preparation” of the saved for glory is expressly ascribed to God, that of the lost for ruin is so stated as to avoid such ascription. Meanwhile the deepest consciousness of human hearts, awakened to eternal realities, acquits God and accuses self. St Paul, however, does not dwell on this. To relieve mystery is only a passing aim with him here.

[42] See further, Appendix H.

destruction ] Ruin, perdition, the loss of the soul. See note on Rom 2:12 (on the word “perish;” where the Gr. is the verb cognate to the noun here).

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

What if God … – If God does what the apostle supposes, what then? Is it not right? This is the second point in the answer to the objection in Rom 9:19. The answer has respect to the two classes of people which actually exist on the earth – the righteous and the wicked. And the question is, whether in regard to these two classes God does in fact do wrong? If he does not, then the doctrine of the apostle is established, and the objection is not valid. It is assumed here, as it must be, that the world is in fact divided into two classes – saints and sinners. The apostle considers the case of sinners in Rom 9:22.

Willing – Being disposed; having an inclination to. It denotes an inclination of mind toward the thing proposed. If the thing itself was right; if it was proper to show his wrath, then it was proper to be willing to do it. If it is right to do a thing, it is right to purpose or intend to do it.

His wrath – ten orgen. This word occurs thirty-five times in the New Testament. Its meaning is derived from the idea of earnestly desiring or reaching for an object, and properly denotes, in its general sense, a vehement desire of attaining anything. Hence, it comes to denote an earnest desire of revenge, or of inflicting suffering on those who have injured us; Eph 4:31, Let all bitterness and wrath, etc. Col 3:8; 1Ti 2:8. Hence, it denotes indignation in general, which is not joined with a desire of revenge; Mar 3:5, He looked round about on them with anger. It also denotes punishment for sin; the anger or displeasure of God against transgression; Note, Rom 1:18; Luk 3:7; Luk 21:23, etc. In this place it is evidently used to denote severe displeasure against sin.sin is an evil of so great magnitude, it is right for God to be willing to evince his displeasure against it; and just in proportion to the extent of the evil. This displeasure, or wrath, it is proper that God should always be willing to show; nay, it would not be right for him not to show it, for that would be the same thing as to be indifferent to it, or to approve it. In this place, however, it is not affirmed,

That God has any pleasure in sin, or its punishment; nor,
That he exerted any agency to compel man to sin. It affirms only that God is willing to show his hatred of incorrigible and long-continued wickedness when it actually exists.

To make his power known – This language is the same as what was used in relation to Pharaoh; Rom 9:17; Exo 9:16. But it is not probable that the apostle intended to confine it to the Egyptians only. In the following verse he speaks of the vessels of mercy prepared unto glory; which cannot be supposed to be language adapted to the temporal deliverance of the Jews. The case of Pharaoh was one instance, or illustration of the general principle on which God would deal with people. His government is conducted on great and uniform principles; and the case of Pharaoh was a development of the great laws on which he governs the universe.

Endured – Bore with; was patient, or forbearing; Rev 2:3. And hast borne, and hast patience, etc. 1Co 13:7, charity, (love) beareth all things. Luk 18:7, will not God avenge his elect. though he bear long with theme?

With much long-suffering – With much patience. He suffered them to live while they deserved to die. God bears with all sinners with much patience; he spares them amid all their provocations, to give them opportunity of repentance; and though they are suited for destruction, yet he prolongs their lives, and offers them pardon, and loads them with benefits. This fact is a complete vindication of the government of God from the aspersions of all his enemies.

Vessels of wrath – The word vessel means a cup, etc. made of earth. As the human body is frail, easily broken and destroyed, it comes to signify also the body. 2Co 4:7; we have this treasure in earthen vessels. 1Th 4:4, that everyone of you should know how to possess his vessel in sanctification and honor – that everyone should keep his body from the indulgence of unlawful passions; compare Rom 9:3. Hence, also it means the man himself. Act 9:15, he is a chosen vessel unto me, etc. compare Isa 13:5. In this place there is doubtless, allusion to what he had just said of clay in the hands of the potter. The phrase vessels of wrath denotes wicked people against whom it is fit or proper that wrath should be shown; as Judas is called the son of perdition, see the note at Joh 17:12. This does not mean that people by their very creation, or their physical nature, are thus denominated; but people who, from long continuance in iniquity, deserve to experience wrath; as Judas was not called son of perdition by any arbitrary appointment, or as an original designation, but because in consequence of his avarice and treason this was the name which in fact actually described him, or suited his case.

Fitted – katertismena. This word properly means to restore; to place in order; to render complete; to supply a defect; to fit to, or adapt to, or prepare for; see Mat 4:21, Were mending their nets. Gal 6:1, restore such an one, etc. In this place it is a participle, and means those who are suited for or adapted to destruction; those whose characters are such as to deserve destruction, or as to make destruction proper. See the same use of the word in Heb 11:3, Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed – beautifully suited up in proper proportions, one part adapted to another – by the Word of God. Heb 10:5, a body hast thou prepared for me; suited, or adapted to me; compare Psa 68:10; Psa 74:16. In this place there is not the semblance of a declaration that God had prepared them, or fitted them for destruction. It is a simple declaration that they were in fact suited for it, without making an affirmation about the manner in which they became so.

A reader of the English Bible may, perhaps, sometimes draw the impression that God had suited them for this. But this is not affirmed; and there is an evident design in not affirming it, and a distinction made between them and the vessels of mercy which ought to be regarded. In relation to the latter it is expressly affirmed that God suited or prepared them for glory; see Rom 9:23, Which he had afore prepared unto glory. The same distinction is remarkably striking in the account of the last judgment in Mat 25:34, Mat 25:41. To the righteous, Christ will say, Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you, etc. To the wicked, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels; not said to have been originally prepared for them. It is clear, therefore, that God intends to keep the great truth in view, that he prepares his people by direct agency for heaven; but that he exerts no such agency in preparing the wicked for destruction.

For destruction – eis apoleian. This word occurs in the New Testament no less than 20 times; Mat 7:13, Which leadeth to destruction. Joh 17:12, son of perdition. Act 8:20, thy money perish with thee; Greek, be for destruction with thee, Act 25:16; Phi 1:28, Token of perdition. Phi 3:19, whose end is destruction. 2Th 2:3, the son of perdition. 1Ti 5:9, which drown men in destruction and perdition. Heb 10:39, which draw back into perdition; see also 2Pe 2:1, 2Pe 2:3; 2Pe 3:7, 2Pe 3:16, etc. In these places it is clear that the reference is to the future punishment of wicked people, and in no instance to national calamities. No such use of the word is to be found in the New Testament; and this is further clear from the contrast with the word glory in the next verse. We may remark here, that if people are suited or prepared for destruction; if future torment is adapted to them, and they to it; if it is fit that they should be subjected to it; then God will do what is fit or right to be done, and, unless they repent, they must perish. Nor would it be right for God to take them to heaven as they are; to a place for which they are not suited, and which is not adapted to their feelings, their character, or their conduct.

Rom 9:23

And that he might make known – That he might manifest or display. The apostle had shown (in Rom 9:22) that the dealings of God toward the wicked were not liable to the objection made in Rom 9:19. In this verse he proceeds to show that the objection could not lie against his dealings with the other class of people – the righteous. If his dealings toward neither were liable to the objection, then he has met the whole case, and the divine government is vindicated. This he proves by showing that for God to show the riches of his glory toward those whom he has prepared for it, cannot be regarded as unjust.

The riches of his glory – This is a form of expression common among the Hebrews, meaning the same as his rich or his abundant glory. The same expression occurs in Eph 1:18.

On the vessels of mercy – People toward whom his mercy was to be displayed (see Rom 9:22); that is, on those toward whom he has purposed to display his mercy.

Mercy – Favor, or pity shown to the miserable. Grace is favor to the undeserving; mercy, favor to those in distress. This distinction is not, however, always strictly observed by the sacred writers.

Which he had afore prepared – We are here brought to a remarkable difference between Gods mode of dealing with them and with the wicked. Here it is expressly affirmed that God himself had prepared them for glory. In regard to the wicked, it is simply affirmed that they were fitted for destruction, without affirming anything of the agency by which it was done. That God prepares his people for glory – commences and continues the work of their redemption – is abundantly taught in the Scriptures; 1Th 5:9, God hath appointed us, to obtain salvation by our Lord Jesus Christ. 2Ti 1:9, who hath saved us and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began. See also Eph 1:4-5, Eph 1:11; Rom 8:28-30; Act 13:48; Joh 1:13. As the renewing of the heart and the sanctifying of the soul is an act of goodness, it is worthy of God, and of course no objection could lie against it. No man could complain of a course of dealings designed to make people better; and as this is the sole design of the electing love of God, his deal, ings with this class of people are easily vindicated. No Christian can complain that God has chosen him, renewed him, and made him pure and happy. And as this was an important part of the plan of God, it is easily defended from the objection in Rom 9:19.

Unto glory – To happiness; and especially to the happiness of heaven Heb 2:10, It became him, in bringing many sons unto glory, etc. Rom 5:2, we rejoice in hope of the glory of God. 2Co 4:17, our light affliction worketh for us a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory, 2Th 2:14; 2Ti 2:10; 1Pe 5:4. This eternal state is called glory, because it blends together everything that constitutes honor, dignity, purity, love, and happiness. All these significations are in various places attached to this word, and all mingle in the eternal state of the righteous. We may remark here,

(1) That this word glory is not used in the Scriptures to denote any external national privileges; or to describe any external call of the gospel. No such instance is to be found. Of course the apostle here by vessels of mercy meant individuals destined to eternal life, and not nations externally called to the gospel. No instance can be found where God speaks of nations called to external privileges, and speaks of them as prepared unto glory.

(2) As this word refers to the future state of individuals, it shows what is meant by the word destruction in Rom 9:22. That term stands contrasted with glory; and describes, therefore, the future condition of individual wicked people. This is also its uniform meaning in the New Testament.

On this vindication of the apostle we may observe:

(1) That all people will be treated as they ought to be treated. People will be dealt with according to their characters at the end of life.

(2) If people will suffer no injustice, then this is the same as saying that they will be treated justly. But what is this? That the wicked shall be treated as they deserve. What they deserve God has told us in the Scriptures. These shall go away into everlasting punishment.

(3) God has a right to bestow his blessings as he chooses. Where all are undeserving, where none have any claim, he may confer his favors on whom he pleases.

(4) He actually does deal with people in this way. The apostle takes this for granted. He does not deny it. He most evidently believes it, and labors to show that it is right to do so. If he did not believe it, and meant to teach it, he would have said so. It would have met the objection at once, and saved all argument. He reasons as if he did believe it; and this settles the question that the doctrine is true.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Verse 22. What if God, willing to show his wrath] The apostle refers here to the case of Pharaoh and the Egyptians, and to which he applies Jeremiah’s parable of the potter, and, from them, to the then state of the Jews. Pharaoh and the Egyptians were vessels of wrath-persons deeply guilty before God; and by their obstinate refusal of his grace, and abuse of his goodness, they had fitted themselves for that destruction which the wrath, the vindictive justice of God, inflicted, after he had endured their obstinate rebellion with much long-suffering; which is a most absolute proof that the hardening of their hearts, and their ultimate punishment, were the consequences of their obstinate refusal of his grace and abuse of his goodness; as the history in Exodus sufficiently shows. As the Jews of the apostle’s time had sinned after the similitude of the Egyptians, hardening their hearts and abusing his goodness, after every display of his long-suffering kindness, being now fitted for destruction, they were ripe for punishment; and that power, which God was making known for their salvation, having been so long and so much abused and provoked, was now about to show itself in their destruction as a nation. But even in this case there is not a word of their final damnation; much less that either they or any others were, by a sovereign decree, reprobated from all eternity; and that their very sins, the proximate cause of their punishment, were the necessary effect of that decree which had from all eternity doomed them to endless torments. As such a doctrine could never come from God, so it never can be found in the words of his apostle.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

In this and in the next verse, is a real answer to the cavil in Rom 9:19. The apostle having spoken before of Gods absolute right and power over his creatures, to dispose of them at his pleasure, as the potter doth his clay; lest any should tax God with tyranny and partiality towards his creatures, he subjoineth the reasons of his different proceedings with the one and with the other. q.d. What hast thou to answer or object against God, if he take a severe course with some? Seeing:

1. He thereby manifesteth his great displeasure against sin, and his power to take vengeance of sinners. Seeing:

2. He bears long with them in their sins; exerciseth great patience towards them in the midst of their provocations, giving them space to repent, if they call or will. And seeing:

3. They are vessels of wrath, fitted to destruction; partly by themselves, and their own sensual courses; partly by Gods righteous judgment, who gives them up thereunto.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

22, 23. What if God, willing toshow“designing to manifest”

his wrathHis holydispleasure against sin.

and to make his powertopunish it

known endured with muchlong-suffering the vessels of wraththat is, “destined towrath”; just as “vessels of mercy,” in Ro9:23, mean “vessels destined to mercy”; compare Eph2:3, “children of wrath.”

fitted for destructionItis well remarked by STUARTthat the “difficulties which such statements involve are not tobe got rid of by softening the language of one text, while so manyothers meet us which are of the same tenor; and even if we give upthe Bible itself, so long as we acknowledge an omnipotent andomniscient God we cannot abate in the least degree from any of thedifficulties which such texts make.” Be it observed, however,that if God, as the apostle teaches, expressly “designed tomanifest His wrath, and to make His power (in the way of wrath)known,” it could only be by punishing some, while He pardonsothers; and if the choice between the two classes was not to befounded, as our apostle also teaches, on their own doings but onGod’s good pleasure, the decision behooved ultimately to rest withGod. Yet, even in the necessary punishment of the wicked, as HODGEobserves, so far from proceeding with undue severity, the apostlewould have it remarked that God “endures with muchlong-suffering” those objects of His righteous displeasure.

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

What if God, willing to show his wrath,…. The apostle proceeds to clear God from any charge of cruelty and unmercifulness, by observing his conduct in time, both towards those he passes by, and towards those he chooses; for in this and the following verse, nothing is said relating to any act of God before time, everything of that kind being considered already. In this verse, the apostle considers the conduct of God towards the vessels of dishonour; and let it be observed, that these are called

vessels of wrath fitted for destruction; they are said to be vessels, and so no longer considered in the clay, in the mass and heap of creatureship, but as creatures formed and made, and brought into being; and so to be used as instruments in God’s hands, to subserve his ends and purposes, and therefore called “vessels”; and not only so, but “vessels of wrath”, fallen sinful creatures, and so deserving of the wrath of God, and objects of his vindictive justice, in whom he may righteously display his wrath and vengeance: hence they may be so called, being as vessels filled with his wrath; as such who are the instruments and executioners of his wrath are called, in Isa 13:5, , “vessels of his wrath”; and in

Jer 50:25; where the Septuagint use the same phrase as here: and they are moreover said to be “fitted for destruction”, as Haman is said to be by the Jews o; whom they affirm to be the same with Memucan, and ask why is his name called Memucan? and answer,

, “because he was fitted for punishment”: so these are said to be “fitted for destruction”, that is, eternal damnation; not by God, for this does not respect God’s act of ordination to punishment; but by Satan, the god of this world, that blinds them, who works effectually in them, and leads them captive at his will; and by themselves, by their own wickedness, hardness of heart, and impenitence, do they treasure up to themselves wrath, against the day of wrath, so that their destruction is of themselves: a phrase somewhat like this is used in Ps 31:12, where the Psalmist, under some dismal apprehensions of himself, says, that he was like , “a perishing vessel”, or “a vessel of perdition”; the Septuagint render it, , “a lost vessel”. Now what is the method of the divine conduct towards such persons? he

endures [them] with much longsuffering; as he did the old world, before he destroyed it; and as he did Pharaoh, before he cut him off: God not only supports such persons in their beings, amidst all their impieties and iniquities, but follows and fills them with his providential goodness, insomuch that many of them have more than heart can wish; nay, to many he affords the outward means of grace, which they slight and despise; externally calls them, but they refuse, loving darkness rather than light, and therefore are inexcusable: now if after all this patience, indulgence, and forbearance, when he could in justice have sent them to hell long ago, he is “willing to show his wrath”; his displicency at sin and sinners, his vindictive justice, his righteous vengeance:

and to make his power known; what it is he can do, by the utter destruction and damnation of such persons; what man in his senses can ever find fault with such a procedure, or charge it with tyranny, cruelty, and unmercifulness?

o T. Bab. Megilia, fol. 12. 2.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

Willing (). Concessive use of the participle, “although willing,” not causal, “because willing” as is shown by “with much long-suffering” ( , in much long-suffering).

His power ( ). Neuter singular of the verbal adjective rather than the substantive .

Endured (). Constative second aorist active indicative of the old defective verb , to bear.

Vessels of wrath ( ). The words occur in Jer 50:25 (LXX Jer 27:25), but not in the sense here (objective genitive like , Eph 2:3, the objects of God’s wrath).

Fitted (). Perfect passive participle of , old verb to equip (see Matt 4:21; 2Cor 13:11), state of readiness. Paul does not say here that God did it or that they did it. That they are responsible may be seen from 1Th 2:15f.

Unto destruction ( ). Endless perdition (Matt 7:13; 2Thess 2:3; Phil 3:19), not annihilation.

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

Willing [] . Although willing, not because. Referring not to the determinate purpose of God, but to His spontaneous will growing out of His holy character. In the former sense, the meaning would be that God ‘s long – suffering was designed to enhance the final penalty. The emphatic position of willing prepares the way for the contrast with long – suffering. Though this holy will would lead Him to show His wrath, yet He withheld His wrath and endured.

Vessels of wrath [ ] . Not filled with wrath, nor prepared to serve for a manifestation of divine wrath; but appertaining to wrath. Such as by their own acts have fallen under His wrath. Compare Psa 2:9. Fitted [] . Lit., adjusted. See on mending, Mt 4:21; perfect, Mt 21:16; Luk 6:40; 1Pe 5:10. Not fitted by God for destruction, but in an adjectival sense, ready, ripe for destruction, the participle denoting a present state previously formed, but giving no hint of how it has been formed. An agency of some kind must be assumed. That the objects of final wrath had themselves a hand in the matter may be seen from 1Th 2:15, 16. That the hand of God is also operative may be inferred from the whole drift of the chapter. “The apostle has probably chosen this form because the being ready certainly arises from a continual reciprocal action between human sin and the divine judgment of blindness and hardness. Every development of sin is a net – work of human offenses and divine judgments”

Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament

1) “What if God willing”, (ei de thelon ho theos) “But if God strongly wills;” what shall we say, who rightfully can complain? find fault with God for exercising his own will in his purpose in saving, judging, chastening his own people?

2) “To show his wrath,” (endeiksasthai ten orgen) “to show forth “his wrath”; if the potter has the right to form, mold, or break inanimate (lifeless) clay into vessels as he pleases, does not God have a corresponding right to judge and punish the guilty? or exercise longsuffering? Exo 9:13-17.

3) “And to make his power known,” (kai gnorisai to dunaton autou) “and to make known (make to be recognized) his dynamic ability,” He did this to Pharaoh, in his rebellion and abuse of God’s mercy to him, and the Egyptians, again and again, Exo 5:1 to Exo 14:31.

4) “Endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath,” (enegken en polle vessels of wrath,” such as the pre-flood people who gave no heed to Noah’s preaching, the people of Sodom and Gomorrah. Pharaoh and his armies, and the unbelieving Jews, Gen 15:16; Pro 1:22-31; 1Pe 3:20; 2Pe 3:9; 1Th 2:16.

5) “Fitted to destruction,” (katertismena eis apoleian) “Having been fitted with reference to wrath,” having been fitted or fitted themselves, personally rejecting the counsel of God to and for them; See Rom 9:19, comment. 1Th 5:9; Jud 1:4; Mat 5:13. God’s primary will is that none perish, 2Pe 3:9; But his corresponding counsel-will is that those who obstinately defy his will and resist his call and disobey his commands, shall be damned, Mar 16:16; Luk 13:3; Rom 2:4-5.

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

22. And what, etc. A second answer, by which he briefly shows, that though the counsel of God is in fact incomprehensible, yet his unblamable justice shines forth no less in the perdition of the reprobate than in the salvation of the elect. He does not indeed give a reason for divine election, so as to assign a cause why this man is chosen and that man rejected; for it was not meet that the things contained in the secret counsel of God should be subjected to the judgment of men; and, besides, this mystery is inexplicable. He therefore keeps us from curiously examining those things which exceed human comprehension. He yet shows, that as far as God’s predestination manifests itself, it appears perfectly just.

The particles, εἰ δὲ, used by Paul, I take to mean, And what if? so that the whole sentence is a question; and thus the sense will be more evident: and there is here an ellipsis, when we are to consider this as being understood, — “Who then can charge him with unrighteousness, or arraign him? ” for here appears nothing but the most perfect course of justice. (307)

But if we wish fully to understand Paul, almost every word must be examined. He then argues thus, — There are vessels prepared for destruction, that is, given up and appointed to destruction: they are also vessels of wrath, that is, made and formed for this end, that they may be examples of God’s vengeance and displeasure. If the Lord bears patiently for a time with these, not destroying them at the first moment, but deferring the judgment prepared for them, and this in order to set forth the decisions of his severity, that others may be terrified by so dreadful examples, and also to make known his power, to exhibit which he makes them in various ways to serve; and, further, that the amplitude of his mercy towards the elect may hence be more fully known and more brightly shine forth; — what is there worthy of being reprehended in this dispensation? But that he is silent as to the reason, why they are vessels appointed to destruction, is no matter of wonder. He indeed takes it as granted, according to what has been already said, that the reason is hid in the secret and inexplorable counsel of God; whose justice it behoves us rather to adore than to scrutinize.

And he has mentioned vessels, as commonly signifying instruments; for whatever is done by all creatures, is, as it were, the ministration of divine power. For the best reason then are we, the faithful, called the vessels of mercy, whom the Lord uses as instruments for the manifestation of his mercy; and the reprobate are the vessels of wrath, because they serve to show forth the judgments of God.

(307) Critics have in various ways attempted to supply the ellipsis, but what is here proposed is most approved. [ Beza ] considered the corresponding clause to be at Rom 9:30, and viewed the intervening verses as parenthetic, “And if God,” etc., — “What then shall we say?” [ Grotius ] subjoined, “Does God do any wrong?” [ Elsner ] ,” Has he not the power?” and [ Wolfius ],” What canst, thou say against God?” [ Stuart ] proposes to repeat the question in Rom 9:20, “Who art thou?” etc. Some connect this verse with the question in Rom 9:20, and include the latter part of it and Rom 9:21 in a parenthesis. Whatever way may be adopted, the sense is materially the same. It has also been suggested that εἰ δὲ is for εἴπερ, since, seeing, 2Th 1:6; 1Pe 2:3. In this case no apodosis is necessary. But we may take εἰ as meaning since, and δὲ as an iliatire, and render the three verses thus, —

22. “Since then God willed (or, it was God’s will) to show His wrath and to make known his power, he endured with much forbearance the vessels of wrath, fitted for destruction;

23. So he willed to make known the riches of his glory towards the vessels of mercy, whom he has fore-prepared for glory,

24. Even us, whom he has called not only from the Jews but also from the Gentiles.”

The verb ἐστι, or ἦν, is often understood after participles, especially in Hebrew; and καὶ has the meaning of ‘so’ in some instances, Mat 6:10; Act 7:51; Gal 1:9; and in some cases, as [ Schleusner ] says, without being preceded by any particle of comparison, such as Mat 12:26, and 1Jo 2:27; but εἰ; here stands somewhat in that character.

The beginning of Rom 9:23 presents an anomaly, if, with [ Stuart ] and others, we consider “willing:” or wills to be understood, as it is followed in the preceding verse by an infinitive, and here by a subjunctive mood. But [ Beza ] , [ Grotius ] , and [ Hammond ] , seem to regard the verb “endured,” to be here, as it were, repeated, which gives the same meaning to the passage as that which is given to it by [ Calvin ] — Ed.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

(22) What if . . .The sentence in the original is incomplete. In its full form it would run, If God willing to show His wrath . . . (what can man reply?) This latter clause is dropped or lost in the course of the argument. The best and simplest expedient to supply its place is that adopted in the Authorised version, inserting what in italics at the beginning: What if, &c. There is a second suppression later in the sentence. At the end of Rom. 9:23 we should have to insert some such clause as He reserved His glory for them, in order to make the sentence strictly grammatical. These irregularities are due to the Apostles habit of dictating, and to the lively flow of his thoughts.

Willing.While His will was (ultimately) to execute His wrath and display His sovereign judicial power, nevertheless He bore with evildoers, and gave them time for repentance.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

(22-29) These verses supply the concluding section of the vindication. All this scheme of Gods dealings, apparently so severe, is really most merciful. To those who really deserved His wrath, He showed longsuffering. While for us who now believe, Gentiles as well as Jews, He had mercy and glory in store. But in both cases the final result was strictly in accordance with prophecy. Hosea had foretold the admission of the Gentiles. Isaiah the exclusion of the greater part of the Jews.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

22, 23. Of these two vessels, the perverse vessel and the obedient vessel, Paul now unfolds, in less figurative phrase, the different treatment at the hand of God. Of the former vessel, the original representative instance still is the Jews of Jeremiah, (chapters 18, 19,) who persist in their perversity, and are again (Jer 19:1) typified by Jeremiah as a broken potter’s vessel, (passages which our readers should carefully study,) while their antitype is the unbelieving Jews of Paul’s day, with a specimen of whom Paul is now reasoning. Of the latter or obedient vessel, the primitive type is naturally Jeremiah and the few faithful of his day; and their antitype is the us of Rom 9:24, namely, Paul and his brother believers.

In these two vessels God unfolds by his dealings the absolute rectitude of his government and character. The perversity of the one he endures (not decrees or foreordains) for a due time in order that the world may duly read the lesson; in the latter he displays the riches of his glory in anticipation of final glory.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

22. God The Almighty Potter.

Willing That is, will -ing, determining.

Show Not merely to feel, but to reveal in action, and in conspicuous cases, like Pharaoh, to make it memorable in history.

Wrath Of a perfectly just Being the wrath must be perfect justice, exerted in executive action. The Almighty Potter determines to show his wrath consequently upon the vessel’s determining persistently to show his perversity. So in Jeremiah 18, 19, the potter’s vessel is broken after its living impersonations had persevered in final hardness.

Power known In penalty like a God.

Endured longsuffering Both these expressions contradict the dogma that God predestinates the obduracy of the vessel of wrath. The apostle’s theory is not predetermination, but non-prevention of the sin. God endured, not decreed, with much longsuffering, not with a hypocritical “secret will” in its favour. The words endured, and in the next verse prepared, are instances of Paul’s aoristic tenses as explained in our notes on Rom 3:23; Rom 4:12; Rom 8:29.

Vessels of wrath Because persistent vessels of perversity.

Fitted Alike by their own obduracy and God’s forbearance. Mark St. Paul’s caution in saying that God himself prepared the obedient vessel for glory, (Rom 9:23.) He does not say that God prepared the vessel of wrath. As Fletcher of Madeley says, “Our salvation is of God; our damnation is of ourselves.”

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

‘What if God, willing to show his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering vessels of wrath fitted to destruction,’

Paul then directly applies his illustration of the Potter to God Himself. The idea of likening God to a Potter comes directly from the Old Testament Scriptures (Isa 45:9; Isa 29:16; Jer 18:6). And the idea behind it is that just as a Potter chooses what he will do with what he makes, so in the same way no man has the right to challenge God’s decisions as to what to do with His creatures, with the proviso, of course, that we know that He will do what is morally right.

Here he applies that concept to God as One Who, willing to demonstrate His wrath (antipathy to sin) and make His powers known (as He had done with Pharaoh), delays applying that wrath to the guilty immediately, but rather puts up with them with much longsuffering, even though they are vessels ‘fitted for destruction’. In context this latter does not just mean that they are of a kind that deserves destruction (fit for destruction), but rather that they have actually been made that way by ‘the Potter’, they have been ‘fitted for destruction’. He has made them with destruction in mind. They are dishonourable vessels, vessels which are made to fulfil dishonourable purposes, and then to be broken. These vessels basically represent all unbelievers, but especially in the context Jews who have refused to believe in Jesus as the Messiah.

Note that there is a purpose in what God does here. It is in order to make known His sovereign power. If man is not aware of God’s sovereign power the way he behaves is quickly affected. Thus it was necessary that through some examples man is made to recognise that he stands under the judgment of God, and in order to do this God gives men a certain license, as He did with Pharaoh. (Nevertheless that delay also gives man the opportunity to repent (Rom 2:4-5), and he can be sure that if he does so, God will show him compassion).

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

God’s power exerted in the interest of men:

v. 22. What if God, willing to show His wrath, and to make His power known, endured with much long-suffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction,

v. 23, and that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which He had afore prepared unto glory,

v. 24. even us, whom He hath called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles?

v. 25. As He saith also in Hosea, I will call them My people which were not My people, and her beloved which was not beloved.

v. 26. And it shall come to pass that in the place where it was said unto them, Ye are not My people, there shall they be called the children of the living God.

v. 27. Isaiah also crieth concerning Israel, Though the number of the children of Israel be as the sand of the sea, a remnant shall be saved;

v. 28. for He will finish the work, and cut it short in righteousness, because a short work will the Lord make upon the earth.

v. 29. And as Esaias said before, Except the Lord of Sabaoth had left us a seed, we had been as Sodom, and been made like unto Gomorrah.

If the question is one merely of right on the part of God, then the answer can be only that which St. Paul gave, vv. 19-21. But a different question entirely is that, whether God makes use of this absolute sovereignty and power with regard to the eternal fate of man, his salvation or condemnation. But if God, desiring to show His wrath and to make known His power, has borne in much long-suffering the vessels of wrath destined to condemnation! Will the reasonable objections still be maintained? Although God, in carrying out the judgment of hardening and condemnation upon the sinners, thus wanted to exhibit His wrath and make known His power, yet He bore the vessels of this wrath previously with the greatest patience. Men had incurred God’s wrath, they deserved the full measure of His indignation and anger. But the Lord was full of mercy and long-suffering; His patience had the purpose of leading the sinners to repentance, 2Pe 3:9. Even though the sinners were altogether fitted for destruction, still God had patience with them; the measure of their transgression is full to overflowing, and yet God does not pour out upon them the vials of His wrath. He leaves no stone unturned in the effort to bring them to their senses. This is the other side of the essence of God, in which His love and mercy comes into consideration. This is the manner in which the patience of God is manifested, as many examples from history will demonstrate. And these facts take away all strength from the opponent’s argument.

But God had also a second object in view in enduring the vessels of wrath: in order to make known the wealth of His glory upon the vessels of mercy which He has prepared before unto glory, us, whom He also has called, not only of Jews, but also of Gentiles. The very fact that God showed such an abundance of patience in the case of the vessels of wrath incidentally had the object to give a proof and manifestation of His glory upon the vessels of mercy, the believers, in whom His glorious purpose is realized. By calling the believers from the midst of both the Jews and the Gentiles, by converting them to Christ, He has glorified Himself, Eph 1:6; His work has redounded to His own praise and honor. For by the call of God the vessels of mercy have received His mercy, He has made them the recipients and bearers of His grace in Jesus Christ. And the same people have been prepared beforehand for the glory of heaven, Mat 25:34: both their call and their entrance into glory is a result of God’s counsel of grace. Thus God glorified Himself upon the vessels of mercy through the manifestation of His grace, and at the same time He gathered for Himself, from Jews and Gentiles, a people that here sees and enjoys the abundance of His goodness and mercy and will finally behold His glory in all eternity.

These facts St. Paul now substantiates by a reference to the Old Testament Scriptures, giving first of all a free quotation from Hosea, chap. 2:3, to show that God’s people were to be gathered from the Gentiles also: I will call that which is not My people My people, and her who is not beloved, beloved; and it will be in the place where it was said to them, My people you are not, there will they be called the sons of the living God. See 1Pe 2:10. Although the prophet refers to the readmission of Israel as the people of God, Paul’s quotation of the passage in favor of the acceptance of the Gentiles is fully justified, for the words incidentally indicate the manner in which God at all times accepts strangers into communion with Him. Out of the land of the heathen, from out of the midst of the Gentiles, from all nations on earth, the Lord wanted to gather and is gathering to Himself His Church. He is extending His mercy, calling, converting the heathen also, making them His own, to live under Him in His kingdom, to serve Him in everlasting righteousness, innocence, and blessedness.

But St. Paul brings quotations also to substantiate His statement that God is calling the members of His Church from the midst of the Jews. He refers to Isa 10:22-23, where Isaiah calls out over Israel: If the number of the children of Israel were like the sand of the sea, the remnant will be saved; for the word, the oracle of God, is brought to an end and fully decided upon in righteousness; for the judgment will be quickly carried out. It is a final and decisive work which the Lord executes in the land by saving the remnant of Israel in the midst of the general destruction which comes upon the obstinate sinners. When the great mass of Israel is struck by the tidal wave of God’s judgment of destruction, the Lord will save a remnant, will bring a few of them to the knowledge of their Savior, the true Messiah. The second quotation from Isaiah. chap. 1:9, is in verbal agreement with the Greek translation: If the Lord of Sabaoth had not left us a seed, as Sodom we should have become and been made like unto Gomorrah. Over the great majority of the Jewish people the judgment of God was poured out from the time of Isaiah to the final destruction of Jerusalem in A. D. 70. According to man’s judgment, the end would have been the annihilation of the Jewish race, as in the fate which overtook Sodom and Gomorrah. But the Lord preserved for Himself a seed, an escaped part, a remnant, saved for future growth, the little band of true Israelites that accepted Jesus as their Redeemer. And thus, just as Paul contends, the Lord has chosen His own from both Gentiles and Jews, gathering them unto Himself into His Church. Therefore, also, every objection to the work of God must be withdrawn, all offense must be acknowledged to be wrong and foolish. The facts here presented are bound to remove all false conceptions of God. If we but keep the love and mercy of God before our eyes, as we have experienced them so abundantly, then the only sentiment to be found in our hearts will be a feeling of joy and gratitude over the miracles of God’s grace, as shown to us daily.

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann

Rom 9:22. What if God, willing, &c. See on ch. Rom 1:18. Immediately after the instance of Pharaoh, whom God declared that he raised up to shew his power in him, Rom 9:17 it is subjoined, Rom 9:18, And whom he will he hardeneth; plainly with reference to the history of Pharaoh, who is said to harden himself, and whom God is said to harden, as may be seen in the parallel places of Exodus. What God’s part in hardening is, we find in the words, Endured with much long-suffering. God sends Moses to Pharaoh with signs; Pharaoh’s magicians do the like; and so he is not prevailed with. God sends a plague:while the plague is upon him, Pharaoh is mollified, and promises to let the people go: but as soon as God takes off the plague, he returns to his obstinacy, and refuses; and this repeatedly. God’s being intreated by him to withdraw the severity of hishand, and his gracious compliance with Pharaoh’s desire, was what God did in the case; and this was all goodness and bounty. But Pharaoh and his people made such ill use of his forbearance and long-suffering, as still to harden themselves the more for God’s goodness and gentleness to them;till they brought on themselves exemplary destruction, from the visible power and hand of God employed in it. This behaviour of theirs God foresaw, and so made use of their obstinate temper for his ownglory, as he himself declares, Exo 7:3-5; Exo 8:18; Exo 8:32. The Apostle, by the instance of a potter’s power over his clay, having demonstrated that God, by his dominion and sovereignty, had a right to set up or pull down what nation he pleased, and might, without any injustice, take onerace into his favour to be his peculiar people, or reject them, as he thought fit, in this general sense of privilegesIn this verse he applies it to the subject in hand; namely, the rejection of the Jewish nation; whereof he speaks here in terms, which plainly make a parallel betweenthis and his dealing with the Egyptians, mentioned Rom 9:17.: and therefore that history, will best explain this verse, which will thence receive its full light. For it seems, at first sight, a somewhat strange sort of reasoning to say that God, to shew his wrath, endured with much long-suffering those who deserved his wrath, and were fit for destruction. But he who will read in Exodus God’s dealings with Pharaoh and the Egyptians,and how he passed over provocation upon provocation, and patiently endured those who by their first refusal, nay, by their former cruelty and oppression of the Israelites, deserved his wrath, and were fitted for destruction, that by a more signal vengeance on the Egyptians, and glorious deliverance of the Israelites, he might make his power and his goodness known,will easily see the strong and natural sense of this and the following verse. See Locke and Doddridge.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

Rom 9:22 f. forms a conditional interrogative sentence, the apodosis of which is not expressed, but is gathered from the context, viz.: Wilt thou still be able to venture the of Rom 9:20 f.? Must thou not utterly become dumb with thy replies? Comp. on Joh 6:61 ; Act 23:9 ; Luk 19:41 : see also Calvin and Calovius, in loc.; Fritzsche, Conject . p. 30; Hartung, Partikell . II. p. 212; Dissen, ad Dem. de cor . p. 297. This aposiopesis with corresponds perfectly to our: but how if , etc. It is to be translated: “ But how if God, although minded to manifest His wrath and to make known His power, has endured with much long-suffering vessels of wrath, which are nevertheless adjusted for destruction, in order also to make known the riches of His glory on vessels of mercy, which He has prepared beforehand for glory? ” Paraphrased , the sense is: “ But if God, notwithstanding that His holy will disposes Him not to leave unmanifested His wrath and His power, but practically to make them known, has nevertheless hitherto, full of long-suffering, endured such as are objects of His wrath, and spared them from the destruction, to incur which they are nevertheless constituted and fitted like a vessel by the potter endured them and spared them not merely as a proof of such great long-suffering towards them, but also with the purpose in view of making known, during the period of this forbearance, the fulness of His glorious perfection in respect to such as are objects of His mercy, whom He, as the potter fashions a vessel, has prepared beforehand, and put in order for eternal glory , how, in presence of that self-denying long-suffering of God towards vessels of wrath , and in presence of this gracious purpose, which He withal, at the same time, cherishes towards the vessels of mercy , must any desire to dispute with God completely depart from thee!”

In detail the following points are to be observed: is neither equivalent to , nor resumptive, but the simple , making the transition to something further, namely , from the previous dismissal of the objector to the refutation which puts him to shame. Tholuck (comp. also Weiss, Reithmayr, and others) takes it antithetically , so that the sequence of thought would be: “I assert this as God’s absolute right against you, if you choose to take your stand on the point of right; but how if God has not so much as even dealt thus , etc.?” But such an interpretation, which would require the contrast to be much more strongly marked than by the mere , is at variance with the retention in the sequel of the figurative and their preparedness; because it is thence evident, that what Paul had previously said concerning the freedom of God to prepare men of different character and destiny like potters’ vessels, he by no means intended to cancel, as if God had not thus dealt . is, with Fritzsche, Philippi, Lamping, and several others, to be resolved by although , because only thus is there yielded the logically correct preparation for the notion of , which is a self-denying one; the . . . is the constant essential characteristic of the holy God, and yet He has borne, etc. The analysis: because God willed (so most, including de Wette, Rckert, van Hengel), yields the sense that God has, in order thereupon to issue all the more evident a penal judgment, endured patiently, etc.; but this would not amount to a , but in fact to a delay occasioned by an ungodlike motive, and having in view the heaping up of wrath. Unworthy of God, and only rendered possible by the importation of parenthetical thoughts, is the sense which Hofmann educes: God has not so borne with those men, that He would first see how it would be with them , in order then to deal with them accordingly ; but He has done so with the will already withal firmly settled , to prove, etc. That negative and this already firm settlement of will are read between the lines.

is placed at the head of the sentence, in order by contrast the more forcibly to prepare the mind for the notion for which it is intended to prepare, that of the . is what is possible to Him , what He is in a position to do . Comp. Rom 8:3 , . Xen. Hell . i. 4. 13, . As to the matter itself, see Mal 2:6Mal 2:6 . The aorist does not refer to the long forbearance with Pharaoh (Chrysostom, de Wette, and most); the reference to him has been already concluded with Rom 9:18 ; but Paul intends generally the time hitherto (which will in like manner run on under this divine long-suffering up to the Parousia ), when God has still restrained the will of His holiness, and has not yet accomplished the destruction of the objects of His wrath, which He will do for the first time in judgment. The , without the article, vessels of wrath , denotes not some , but such generally, qualitatively understood, namely, vessels which are prepared (Rom 9:20 f.) to experience God’s wrath on themselves, to be the objects of it. The effect of this wrath, which will go forth at the judgment, is everlasting destruction ; hence . ., adjusted for destruction (not “ ripe for destruction,” as Weiss and Hofmann explain), serves to bring the into still clearer relief, which is not that which waits for the self-decision of human freedom (Beyschlag), especially for amendment (in opposition to Bengel, Tholuck, and others), but that which delays the penal judgment (comp. on Luk 18:7 ), the prolongatio irae , Jer 15:15 , et al . The passage Rom 2:4 f. is no protest against this view, since the apostle does not there, as in the present passage, place himself at the standpoint of the absolute divine will. The subject who has adjusted those concerned for is God ; and any saving clause whereby the passive sense is made to disappear, or the passive expression which, after Rom 9:20 f., not even a certain refinement of piety is to be suggested as underlying is made to yield the sense that they had adjusted themselves for destruction, or had deserved it (see Chrysostom, Theodoret, Oecumenius, Theophylact, Grotius, Calovius, Bengel, and many; also Steudel, Olshausen, Reithmayr, Beck, Hofmann, and Krummacher), is opposed to the literal meaning and to the context (Rom 9:21 ). See also Lamping, p. 213. Hofmann’s interpretation especially: “who had advanced to that point, and found themselves therein,” is wrecked on his incorrect explanation of , Rom 9:20 . In . . ., is also, introducing , in addition to the object involved in the previous , that accessory object which God had in view in enduring the vessels of wrath in reference to vessels of mercy (the use of the genit. corresponds to that of , Rom 9:22 ). Besides His great long-suffering towards those , He would also make known how rich in glory He was towards these . For had He not so patiently tolerated the , but already caused the penal judgment to set in upon them (which is to be thought of as setting in along with the Parousia , not antecedently to this, like the destruction of Jerusalem), He would have had no space in which to make known His glory on . But this purpose was to be served exactly by that long period of forbearance, during which such as were prepared beforehand by God for eternal should through their calling (Rom 9:24 ) be led to Christ, and thereby the fulness of the divine glory should be made known in respect to them; which making known is matter of fact (Eph 3:10 ). In . , the context directs us to think of the divine majesty in relation to its beneficent glory, its glory in the bestowal of blessing; but , as the opposite of ., denotes the everlasting Messianic glory (Rom 8:21 ; Rom 8:30 ). The verbs and are not as different from one another as existence ( Dasein ) is from mode of existence ( Sosein ), an assertion of Hofmann’s as incorrect as it is devoid of proof, but also denotes to constitute qualitatively , to prepare in the corresponding quality (1Co 2:9 ; Eph 2:10 ; Phm 1:22 ; Mat 3:3 ; Luk 1:17 ; Luk 2:31 ; Joh 14:2 , et al .). Comp. here especially 2Ti 2:21 . Against such an error the well-known reflexive use of (Rev 8:6 ; Rev 19:7 ) should have warned him, as well as the equivalent use of the middle ( 1Ma 5:11 ; 1Ma 12:27 , and very frequently in the classics). It is solely with a view to variety and illustration that Paul uses for the same notion the two verbs, of which Hofmann rationalizes the to mean: “that it is God who has caused those who attain to glory to come into being for the end of possessing the glory, to which they thereupon attain by the fact that He pours forth His own upon them.” Nor is there anything peculiar to be sought behind the change from passive to active; the transition to the active was more readily suggested by the thought of the activity of love . The in is not to be disregarded (see on Eph 2:10 ); nor is it to be referred to the time before birth, nor to the aeterna electio (the latter is the act of God, which before time preceded the praeparatio ); but to the fact that God has so previously fashioned the , before He makes known His glory on them (just as the potter fashions the vessel), that is, has constituted in them that ethical personality, which corresponds to their destination to obtain eternal through Christ. In the act of making known is contemplated as extending over the men, who are its objects. If, with Beza and Fritzsche ( Conject . p. 29; not abandoned in his Comment . p. 343 f., but placed alongside of the ordinary mode of connection), we should make . . . dependent, if not simply on (Rckert), yet on . (so also Beyschlag), in which case would have to be taken most simply as and , the entire balance of the discourse would be deranged, inasmuch as the important thought . . ., on which the whole sequel depends, would be subordinated to a mere secondary definition. The centre of gravity of the argument lies in the bearing with the vessels of wrath on the part of the divine long-suffering; and thereof in Rom 9:23 there is brought forward an explanation glorifying God, which is added in respect to the . The connection above referred to would also certainly yield a severity of thought, a rigour of telic view, which, granting all the boldness of deduction with which Paul follows out the idea of predestination, yet finds nothing further in accord with it in the whole treatise; the thought, namely, that God has made ready the for destruction, in order, through the effect of the contrast , the more fully to make known His glory in the .

It is further to be remarked, (1) That the interrogative conditional sentence forming an aposiopesis terminates with Rom 9:23 , and is not (with Fritzsche) to be extended to Rom 9:24 , since all that follows from Rom 9:25 onward belongs to the topic started in Rom 9:24 . (2) That we are not , following Reithmayr and older commentators with Philippi, to supply a second between and in Rom 9:23 , and to assume that Paul had intended at the close of Rom 9:23 to say , but that he at once directed his glance at the concretes, and therefore wrote instead of . Thereby a rambling and confusion in the presenting of his thoughts is, quite unnecessarily, imputed to the apostle, which would be very glaring, particularly in a dialectic passage so stamped throughout with clearness, definiteness, and precision as the present. Similarly, but still more confusedly, Tholuck. The language in Rom 9:22-23 is condensed and rich in thought, but runs on according to plan and rule in its form. (3) The apodosis (which on our understanding is not expressed) is not to be found in Rom 9:23 , because this would only be possible by arbitrarily supplying hoc fecit , or the whole preceding chief sentence. So Ewald: “ so He did that also , in order that He might make known, on the other hand, the riches of His glory, etc.;” so also Th. Schott and Hofmann.

With our explanation agree substantially Calvin, Grotius, and several others; including Winer, p. 530 [E. T. 713]; Baur, in the Theol. Jahrb . 1857, p. 200; Lamping and van Hengel, whilst Umbreit educes something which has no existence in the passage, as though it ran: . . . (He has, on the contrary, endured, etc.)

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

Rom 9:22-29 . Fourth part of the Theodice: God, full of long-suffering, has borne with vessels of wrath, in order withal to make known His glory on vessels of mercy, as which He has also called us Christians both out of the Jews and out of the Gentiles . Comp. on Rom 9:22-23 ; Wis 12:20-21 . These two kinds of are necessarily the same as those meant in Rom 9:21 (in opposition to Weiss, p. 66 f., and bibl . Theol . p. 383). This is shown by the retention of , as well as by the attributes and corresponding to the of Rom 9:21 , just as aptly corresponds to the , and to the , Rom 9:21 . The former vessels as are necessarily , for the divine and are correlates, which suppose one another. But the guilt, which is supposed by the notion of , is, in the entirely consistent connection of our passage, presented by the which precedes the guilt, and in virtue of which God has made them such as they are and not otherwise as the consequence of the moral development conditioned by this previous preparation. Weiss fails to recognise the onesidedness of the mode of view here necessarily intended and boldly carried out by the apostle, which will not, moreover, bear the attempts of Hofmann to explain it away, or those of Beyschlag to twist the notion; the latter least of all, on the subjective ground that the strictly understood notion of is incapable of fulfilment , which at the absolute standpoint of the text it is not .

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

22 What if God, willing to shew his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction:

Ver. 22. Fitted to destruction ] Non dicit Deum eos aptasse ad interitum, ne videretur dicere Deum eis indidisse peccatum, quo ad exitum praeparentur. (Molinaeus.)

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

22 .] But what if (by the elliptical the answer to the question of the objector, Rom 9:19 , seems to be introduced; occurs in a similar connexion Joh 6:62 ; and , Soph. d. Col. 590, ; See Hartung, Partikellehre, ii. 212. 6) (1) God, purposing to shew forth His wrath, and to make known His power (that which He could do), endured with much long-suffering vessels of wrath fitted [prepared, made complete and ready] for destruction; and (what if this took place) (2) that He might make known the riches of His glory on (not to , as De Wette, who joins it with , but ‘ toward ,’ on , ‘with regard to,’ dependent on , as , ch. Rom 10:12 ) the vessels of mercy, which He before prepared for glory ? I have given the whole, that my view of the construction might be evident: viz. that (1) and (2) are parallel clauses, both dependent on ; giving the purpose of the 1st, and . that of the 2nd. They might be cast into one form by writing the 1st ., . . , or the 2nd, . Only I do not, as Calv., Beza, Grot., Bengel, De Wette, Meyer, and Winer, understand the same . ., as belonging to both, but only to the 1st, and supply before the 2nd, ‘What if this took place,’ viz. this , . Other constructions have been, to make depend on ‘ prepared to destruction for this very purpose, that &c.’ So Fritz. and Rckert, Exo 2 ; but this seems to overlook , or to regard it as = : to take Rom 9:23 as a new sentence, supplying , as Tholuck.

Stuart supplies before ., and before . This in fact amounts to nearly the same as my own view, but appears objectionable, inasmuch as it joins Rom 9:24 to Rom 9:23 ; see below.

The argument is, ‘What if God, in the case of the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, has, in willing to manifest His power and wrath, also exhibited towards them long-suffering (to lead them to repentance, ch. Rom 2:4 , a mystery which we cannot fathom), and in having mercy on the vessels of mercy prepared for glory, has also made manifest the riches of His glory?’ Then in both these dispensations will appear, not the arbitrary power, but the rich goodness of God.

The theological difficulties in and (in both cases God is the agent; not they themselves, as Chrys., Theophyl., Olsh. Bengel, however, rightly remarks, “non dicit qu , cum tamen ver. seq. dicat ‘qu prparavit.’ Cf. Mat 25:34 cum v. 41, et Act 13:46 cum v. 48”) are but such as have occurred repeatedly before, and, as Stuart has well observed, are inherent, not in the Apostle’s argument, nor even in revelation, but in any consistent belief of an omnipotent and omniscient God . See remarks on Rom 9:18 .

and are vessels prepared to subserve , as it were to hold , His and : hardly, as Calvin, instruments to shew forth : that is done , over and above their being , but is not necessary to it.

The . . and . . are not to be, with a view to evade the general application, confined to the instances of Pharaoh and the Jews: these instances give occasion to the argument, but the argument itself is general, extending to all the dealings of God.

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

Rom 9:22-29 . Paul’s argument, to speak plainly, has got into an impasse . He is not able to carry it through, and to maintain the sovereign freedom of God as the whole and sole explanation of human destiny, whether in men or nations. He does, indeed, assert that freedom to the last, against the presumptuousness of man; but in this third section of his theodicy, he begins to withdraw from the ground of speculation to that of fact, and to exhibit God’s action, not as a bare unintelligible exercise of will, which inevitably provokes rebellion, but as an exercise of will of such a character that man can have nothing to urge against it. : the marks the transition to the new point of view. It is as if Paul said: You may find this abstract presentation of God’s relations to man a hard doctrine, but if His actual treatment of men, even of those who are . , is distinguished by longsuffering and patience, what can you say against that? has been rendered (1) because it is His will; (2) although it is His will. In the former case, God bears long with the vessels of wrath in order that the display of His wrath and power may be more tremendous at last. But ( a ) such an idea is inconsistent with the contrast implied in : it is an aggravation of the very difficulty from which the Apostle is making his escape; ( b ) it is inconsistent with the words ; it is not longsuffering if the end in view is a more awful display of wrath; there is no real longsuffering unless the end in view is to give the sinner place for repentance. Hence the other view (2) is substantially right. Although it is God’s will to display His wrath and to show what He can do, still He does not proceed precipitately, but gives ample opportunity to the sinner to repent and escape. We are entitled to say “the sinner,” though Paul does not say so explicitly, for , the wrath of God, is relative to sin, and to nothing else: except as against sin, there is no such thing as wrath in God. In the word is perhaps prompted by the previous verse, but the whole associations of the potter and the clay are not to be carried over: they are expressly precluded by . Paul does not say how the came to be what they are, the objects upon which the wrath and power of God are to be revealed; he only says that such as they are, God has shown great patience with them. It seems a mistake in W. and H. to print as a quotation from Jer 50 (LXX 27):25; for there the words mean “the instruments by which God executes His wrath,” les armes de sa colre (Reuss). : (Phi 1:28 ; Phi 3:19 ) means perdition, final ruin; by what agency the persons referred to have been fitted for it Paul does not say; what he does say is, that fitted for such a doom as they are, God has nevertheless endured them in much longsuffering, so that they at least cannot say, Why dost thou find fault? For = perfected, made quite fit or ripe, see Luk 6:40 , 1Co 1:10 : cf. also 2Ti 3:17 .

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

if. App-118.

power. Greek. to dunaton.

with. App-104.

the. Omit.

fitted = pieced up together, as a broken vessel. App-125.

to. App-104.

destruction = perdition, as in Joh 17:12. From this is it not clear that in the resurrection the unjust come forth from the grave in the self-same bodies in which they entered it (Joh 5:28, Joh 5:29)?

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

22.] But what if (by the elliptical the answer to the question of the objector, Rom 9:19, seems to be introduced; occurs in a similar connexion Joh 6:62; and , Soph. d. Col. 590,- ; See Hartung, Partikellehre, ii. 212. 6) (1) God, purposing to shew forth His wrath, and to make known His power (that which He could do), endured with much long-suffering vessels of wrath fitted [prepared, made complete and ready] for destruction; and (what if this took place) (2) that He might make known the riches of His glory on (not to, as De Wette, who joins it with ,-but toward, on, with regard to, dependent on , as , ch. Rom 10:12) the vessels of mercy, which He before prepared for glory? I have given the whole, that my view of the construction might be evident: viz. that (1) and (2) are parallel clauses, both dependent on ; giving the purpose of the 1st, and . that of the 2nd. They might be cast into one form by writing the 1st ., . . ,-or the 2nd, . Only I do not, as Calv., Beza, Grot., Bengel, De Wette, Meyer, and Winer, understand the same . ., as belonging to both, but only to the 1st, and supply before the 2nd, What if this took place, viz. this , . Other constructions have been,-to make depend on -prepared to destruction for this very purpose, that &c. So Fritz. and Rckert, ed. 2; but this seems to overlook , or to regard it as = :-to take Rom 9:23 as a new sentence, supplying , as Tholuck.

Stuart supplies before ., and before . This in fact amounts to nearly the same as my own view, but appears objectionable, inasmuch as it joins Rom 9:24 to Rom 9:23; see below.

The argument is, What if God, in the case of the vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, has, in willing to manifest His power and wrath, also exhibited towards them long-suffering (to lead them to repentance, ch. Rom 2:4,-a mystery which we cannot fathom), and in having mercy on the vessels of mercy prepared for glory, has also made manifest the riches of His glory? Then in both these dispensations will appear, not the arbitrary power, but the rich goodness of God.

The theological difficulties in and (in both cases God is the agent; not they themselves, as Chrys., Theophyl., Olsh. Bengel, however, rightly remarks, non dicit qu , cum tamen ver. seq. dicat qu prparavit. Cf. Mat 25:34 cum v. 41, et Act 13:46 cum v. 48) are but such as have occurred repeatedly before, and, as Stuart has well observed, are inherent, not in the Apostles argument, nor even in revelation, but in any consistent belief of an omnipotent and omniscient God. See remarks on Rom 9:18.

and are vessels prepared to subserve, as it were to hold, His and : hardly, as Calvin, instruments to shew forth: that is done, over and above their being , but is not necessary to it.

Fuente: The Greek Testament

Rom 9:22. , but if) This particle has this as its apodosis to be supplied at the end of Rom 9:23 from Rom 9:20 : God has much greater cause to complain concerning man, and man has less cause to expostulate with God [than the potter concerning the clay, and the clay with the potter]. Comp. , Joh 6:62, where also the apodosis is to be supplied. It is a question, but one implied, not expressed, with an ellipsis, What reply hast thou to make [if God willing to show, etc., endured, etc.].-, willing) Corresponds to the, His will, Rom 9:19, and to, He will, Rom 9:18. Paul speaks , [after the manner of man: or, taking advantage of his opponents unavoidable admission] in the words of his opponent; and so signifies whereas, [since, as you must grant]. At the same time, we must observe that what he says of the vessels of wrath is more scanty, and of the vessels of mercy more copious; willing to show, he says, not, [willing, putting forth His will] that he might show, comp. next verse [where in the case of the vessels of mercy, he says, , though here Rom 9:22 in the case of the vessels of wrath, he says, ], and Eph 2:7– , to show His power) These words are repeated from Rom 9:17.- , wrath) He does not say, the riches of his wrath; comp. Rom 9:23.- ) This signifies, what He can do (potentiam might) not what He may do (potestatem right []).-, endured) as He endured Pharaoh.- , with much long-suffering) viz: in order that it might allure the wicked [the reprobate] from their state of alienation from Him to repentance, ch. Rom 2:4; 2Pe 3:9. God endures many bad men, in the enjoyment of great and long continued good fortune in this life, when He might at the very first have consigned them to death. The gate of mercy and grace is still open to them. This long-suffering, humanly speaking, precedes His will to show His wrath, nor does it merely follow it. His enduring is not wont to be exercised until He is about to show His wrath]: wherefore should be translated, had endured [previous to His will to show His wrath.] By this very circumstance the question, who hath resisted? Rom 9:19, is most powerfully refuted.-) of wrath, which is not indeed without cause, but presupposes sins; he does not say, of disgrace, nor unto wrath, but of wrath, [i.e. the fault is in themselves.]-, fitted) It denotes the disposition [fitness] internal and full, but now no longer free [no longer now liable to change], not the destination; he does not say, which He , previously fitted, although he says in the next verse, which he prepared, comp. Rom 9:19, ch. Rom 11:22, note; Mat 25:34, with Mat 25:41, and Act 13:46, with Act 13:48. This is distinct from the efficient cause; what is said merely refers to the state in which God finds the reprobate, when He brings upon them His wrath.- , to destruction) The antithesis is, Rom 9:23, unto glory.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

Rom 9:22

What if God, willing to show his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering vessels of wrath fitted unto destruction:-Why should it be thought strange if God, in order to show his hatred of sin and his determination to punish it, should endure for a long time those Israelites, who, like Pharaoh, fitted themselves as vessels of wrath for destruction, and then visited ruin upon them, so that the whole world should see it? This he applies to the Israelites, who, under the dealing of God, had so marred their characters as to fit themselves for destruction? Concerning Gods exercising long-suffering unto these same vessels of wrath Paul says: Or 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 for thyself wrath in the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God. (Rom 2:4-5). Here we see that these persons became vessels of wrath in spite of Gods effort to save them through the exercise of his goodness and long-suffering, which was intended to lead them to repentance.

To make this still clearer, let us read the comment of Peter on Pauls understanding of the purpose of God in the exercise of long-suffering: The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some count slackness; but is longsuffering to you-ward, not wishing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. (2Pe 3:9). In this he gives his own inspired interpretation of Gods purpose in the exercise of long- suffering. He refers to Pauls use of the term as identical with the way in which he himself explains it; hence, he adds: Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for these things, give diligence that ye may be found in peace, without spot and blameless in his sight. And account that the longsuffering of our Lord is salvation; even as our beloved Brother Paul also, according to the wisdom given to him, wrote unto you; as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things. (2Pe 3:14-16). Unquestionably, then, we see that, according to Peters inspired exposition of Pauls teaching of Gods long-suffering, God was striving to save these vessels of wrath by leading them to repentance, while they on their part were treasuring up for themselves wrath in the day of wrath by despising the riches of his goodness and forbearance and longsuffering. Accordingly, when Pauls opponent is supposed to ask, Why doth he still find fault? For who with- standeth his will? it is clear that the argument in the passage before us is intended to show that the captious question of the opponent is founded on a false assumption-that the actual ground of his objection is the very fact that he persists in withstanding the will of God. The apostle forcibly illustrates the long-suffering of God and the perverse resistance on the part of Israel when he says: All the day long did I spread out my hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people. (Rom 10:21).

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary

willing: Rom 9:17, Rom 1:18, Rom 2:4, Rom 2:5, Exo 9:16, Psa 90:11, Pro 16:4, Rev 6:16, Rev 6:17

endured: Num 14:11, Num 14:18, Psa 50:21, Psa 50:22, Ecc 8:11, Ecc 8:12, Lam 3:22, 1Pe 3:20, 2Pe 2:3, 2Pe 2:9, 2Pe 3:8, 2Pe 3:9, 2Pe 3:15, Jud 1:4, Rev 6:9-11

the vessels: The Apostle, by employing the appellation of the vessels of wrath, carries on the similitude of the potter, by which he had illustrated the sovereignty of God. Rom 9:21, 1Th 5:9, 2Ti 2:20

fitted: or, made up, Gen 15:16, Mat 23:31-33, 1Th 2:16, 1Pe 2:8, Jud 1:4

Reciprocal: Exo 11:10 – the Lord Exo 14:4 – I will be Exo 34:7 – that will by no means clear the guilty Jos 11:20 – it was 2Ch 25:16 – determined Job 31:3 – destruction Psa 31:12 – a broken vessel Psa 88:11 – in destruction Psa 101:1 – I will sing Pro 14:32 – driven Isa 22:24 – vessels of small Isa 30:18 – wait Jer 44:22 – could Jer 48:38 – broken Hos 8:8 – a vessel Mat 7:13 – that Mat 25:41 – prepared Joh 3:7 – Ye Rom 2:8 – indignation Rom 11:22 – therefore Eph 2:3 – children Rev 2:21 – space

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

-23

Romans 9:22-23. A potter might delay his decision about a vessel, when an onlooker would think it very clear as to which vessel deserved to be retained and which discarded. Yet he would not know the mind of the potter, neither would it be his affair.

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

Rom 9:22. But what if God. The construction is elliptical: the original is simply: but if. We may supply, as follows: But what will be said, if, i.e., How can the objection raised be urged, if, as is the case, God, etc. But thus introduces an additional thought, which forms the main answer to the objection.

Although willing, etc. The participle willing may mean either, since He is willing, or, although He is willing. We prefer the latter, for (1.) the former view gives to willing the sense of purposing, which it does not necessarily have; (2.) it obscures the logical relation between showing wrath and enduring; (3.) it relieves somewhat the difficult construction of Rom 9:23. On this view, willing refers to the spontaneous will of God, growing out of His moral character, not to His fixed purpose. This will would lead Him to show his wrath, etc.

His power. This peculiar expression, meaning what is possible to him, suits the view we take of willing.

Endured with much long-suffering. That the Apostle means to assert the fact of such endurance is plain. But how does this stand related to the previous clause? Our view accepts a contrast; yet He endured; the other interpretation makes this the result of His purpose to show His wrath, etc. This raises a new difficulty, while the former explanation really answers the objection of Rom 9:19, by showing that the sovereign God had withheld the exercise of a power in accordance with His holy will, so that the endurance was really with much long-suffering. Comp. chap. Rom 3:25.

Vessels of wrath. Gods wrath is meant, and these vessels are to be its objects. It is not necessary to carry out the figure and explain a vessel full of wrath. This phrase is suggested by the corresponding one in Rom 9:21 (vesselunto dishonor).

Fitted for destruction; everlasting destruction is meant, as the contrasted word (glory; Rom 9:23) plainly shows, as well as the mention of Gods enduring with much long-suffering. The participle, fitted, expresses the permanent present result of past action. It is not said that God has fitted them for destruction, although Meyer thinks this is implied Others think that they are represented as having fitted themselves for destruction, by deserving it. Probably the mediate agency of God is not to be excluded, but the obvious differences between the two phrases (fitted for destruction and which He before prepared for glory, see below) point unmistakably to such a difference as should guard the passage against fatalistic interpretations. Every development of sin is a network of human offences and divine judgments, that are related to each other.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

As if the apostle had said, “What though God doth not presently punish the obstinate and unbelieving Jews according to their desert, but beareth with them, and exercises forbearance towards them, and they go on by their continual rebellions to make themselves fit objects of his wrath; but he is pleased still with great gentleness and patience to bear with them as he did with Pharaoh; and if after all they be more hardened, as he was, by God’s forbearance, what show of injustice, I pray, is it, of he punishes them at last with greater severity, as God did him? If he swallow up their nation, destroy their temple, ruin thier city, what injustice is it to destroy those, who, by making themselves objects of God’s wrath, are fitted for destruction?”

Here note, That the vessels of wrath fitted for destruction, are such as, the apostle sayeth, God endured with much long suffering; and therefore they were not made vessels of wrath by God, but by themselves; after they had filled up the measure of their sins, and thereby fitted themselves as vessels for destruction. God endured them with much long-suffering, though judgment at last took hold upon them to the uttermost.

Learn hence, That Almighty God may, without the least suspicion of injustice or unrighteousness, punish with the utmost severity such a person or a people, whom he hath long endured with much forbearance, to go on in course of sinning, if at last they repent not. This was the manner of God’s dealing with the Jews here. His lenity towards the Gentiles is next expressed, ver. 22 That he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessels of mercy, &c.

As if the apostle had said, Can God be taxed with unrighteousness, in showing the riches of his glorious grace and mercy towards the despised Gentiles, whom he hath called to the faith of Christ, and thereby fitted and prepared them to be vessels of mercy? Hath he not just right to show his mercy to such persons who have submitted to the terms upon which he hath promised favour and acceptance, and to own them as his peculiar people, although they be not the natural seed of Abraham, seeing they are his spiritual?

Note here, That as the unbelieving Jews were called, in the former verse, vessels of wrath; so the believing Gentiles are called, in this verse, vessels of mercy; because as vessels are fitted and formed by the hand of the artificer for the use to which they are designed, in like manner are believers wrought by God and framed by his Holy Spirit, and made meet to receive the mercy of God, that is, the fruits and effects of his mercy, especially pardon of sin and peace with God.

Concerning the vessels of wrath, the apostle speaks passively; they are fitted for destruction: concerning the vessels of mercy, he speaks actively, that God has prepared them unto glory; that is, made them meet and fit by grace here for glory hereafter.

Learn thence, That the new creation of the saints, and all the spiritual workmanship that is found upon them, is to be ascribed unto God, and to the effectual working of his grace: He hath afore prepared them unto glory.

Learn, 2. That the fullest measures of glory hereafter shall be the portion of such, and only such, as are first prepared by grace and holiness to receive them here.

Learn, 3. That those only are vessels of mercy, prepared by God unto glory, who upon the evangelical call have been prevailed with, by faith and repentance, to answer the command and call of God: That he might make known the riches of his glory on the vessesl of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory, even us whom he hath called.

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament

Rom 9:22-23. What if God, willing, &c. Referring to Rom 9:18-19. That is, Although it were now his will, because of their obstinate unbelief; to show his wrath Which necessarily presupposes sin; and to make his power known This is repeated from Rom 9:17; yet endured As he did Pharaoh With much long-suffering Which should have led them to repentance; the vessels of wrath Those who had moved his wrath, by still rejecting his mercy; fitted for destruction By their own wilful and final impenitence: is there any injustice in this? And that he might make known What if, by showing such long-suffering even to the vessels of his wrath, he did the more abundantly show the greatness of his glorious goodness, wisdom, and power; on the vessels of mercy On those whom he had himself, by his grace; prepared for glory Is this injustice? By vessels of mercy he means such persons as were formerly miserable by being dead in trespasses and sins, but had afterward, through believing the gospel, obtained mercy, even the great mercy of the forgiveness of sins, with the fruits and consequences of it; and by the term , he means, Gods fitting them for glory, by working in them true repentance and living faith, by justifying and sanctifying them, and giving them all those qualifications necessary for the attainment of it.

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

Vv. 22-24. Now if God, willing to show His wrath, and to make His power known, endured with much long-suffering the vessels of wrath fitted to destruction: And [if] that He might make known the riches of His glory on the vessels of mercy, which he had afore prepared unto glory, us, whom he also called, not of the Jews only, but also of the Gentiles…

Many commentators, Tholuck for example, find in the , now, which they translate by but, the indication of a strong contrast, and think that Paul is setting over against God’s abstract right, expounded in Rom 9:19-21, the real use which He has made of it in the history of the Jewish people: Thou, O man, art in any case incompetent to dispute God’s right; but what, when I shall prove to thee that He has not used it rigorously, and that His conduct toward thee is still marked with the most wonderful long-suffering! But such a contrast would have demanded a stronger adversative particle (, but); and this notion of a purely abstract right is rather philosophical than religious. Is it not simpler to take Rom 9:19-21 as giving the figure, and Rom 9:22-24 the application? It is evident that the figure of vessels unto dishonor, Rom 9:21, finds its corresponding expression in vessels of wrath, Rom 9:22, as the figure of vessels unto honor, Rom 9:21, finds its corresponding term in vessels of mercy, Rom 9:23. It is equally obvious that to the liberty used by the potter over the lump of clay which is at his disposal, to make of it vessels of different destinations, Rom 9:21, there corresponds the power of God displayed either in the form of wrath or in that of grace in Rom 9:22-23. It is therefore the transition from the figure to the application which is indicated by the , and the particle ought therefore to be translated by now. But in the form: Now if, there is at the same time contained a gradation. For Paul means thereby that God has not even dealt with Israel as the potter with his vessel. We seek the principal proposition on which depends the sentence: Now, if willing…, and we do not find it; but it is easy to understand it from what precedes: Wilt thou still find fault, O Jew? wilt thou do what the vessel would not dare to do against the potter? Wilt thou still accuse God of being unjustly angry? We shall see afterward the point in the following passage where this understood principal proposition finds its logical place.

Fuente: Godet Commentary (Luke, John, Romans and 1 Corinthians)

What if [With these words Paul introduces his real answer to the question asked in verse 19. The full idea runs thus: “I have answered your impudent question by an assertion of the absolute right of God, which you can not deny (Pro 26:5; Psa 18:26). But what will you say if, etc.” If the absolute abstract right of God puts man to silence, how much more must he be silent before the actual, applied mercy and grace of God which forbears to use the right because of his longsuffering pity toward the impenitent, and his forgiving leniency toward the repentant. Paul asserts the absolute right of God, but denies that he applies it. Herein he differs from Calvinism, which insists that he applies it] God, willing to show his wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering vessels of wrath fitted unto destruction [And now, O man, how silent must you be if it appears that God, although willing to show his displeasure against wickedness, and ready to show his power to crush its designs, nevertheless endured with much longsuffering evil men whose conduct had already fitted them for, or made them worthy of, destruction. Paul has already told us that the longsuffering of God is exercised to induce repentance, though its abuse may incidentally increase both wrath and punishment (Rom 2:4-11). It is not affirmed that God “fitted” these evil ones for destruction. “And,” says Barnes, “there is an evident design in not affirming it, and a distinction made between them and the vessels of mercy which ought to be regarded. In relation to the latter it is expressly affirmed that God fitted or prepared them for glory. (See Rom 9:23) ‘Which HE had afore prepared unto glory.’ The same distinction is remarkably striking in the account of the last judgment in Mat 25:34-41 . To the righteous, Christ will say, ‘Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for YOU,’ etc. To the wicked, ‘Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared FOR THE DEVIL AND HIS ANGELS;’ not said to have been originally prepared for them. It is clear, therefore, that God intends to keep the great truth in view, that he prepares his people by direct agency for heaven; but that he exerts no such agency in preparing the wicked for destruction.” No potter, either divine or human, ever made vessels just to destroy them. But any potter, finding a vessel suited to a dishonorable use, may so use it, and may afterwards destroy it. How the Jews “fitted” themselves for destruction is told elsewhere by the apostle– 1Th 2:15-16]:

Fuente: McGarvey and Pendleton Commentaries (New Testament)

22. But if God, wishing to show forth his indignation and make his power known, endured with much long-suffering the vessels of wrath which had been perfected for destruction. Fitted, E. V., which I translate having been made perfect, is the identical word constantly translated perfect, setting forth Christian perfection. Hence it involves the conclusion that there is a perfecting for destruction as well as salvation. No soul goes to heaven till perfected for glory. Even so no one goes to hell till perfected for damnation. The potter never gives up the vessel while there is hope. God is the Omnipotent. Hence He works on every vessel so long as there is hope. When the human will so contravenes the divine will as to disqualify Omnipotent grace to make you a vessel to honor, then you are perfected for destruction. God is Omniscient. He sees you will never let Him save you. Consequently He lets you drop into hell. There is no other place for you. He has made heaven for you, but you will not let Him love you, consequently you are a vessel unto dishonor perfected for damnation, i. e., ripe for hell.

Fuente: William Godbey’s Commentary on the New Testament

9:22 {22} [What] if God, willing to shew [his] wrath, and to make his power known, endured with much longsuffering the {y} vessels of wrath fitted to {23} destruction:

(22) The second answer is this, that God, moreover and besides that he justly decrees whatever he decrees, uses that moderation in executing his decrees, as is declared his singular mercifulness even in the reprobate, in that he endures them a long time, and permits them to enjoy many and singular benefits, until at length he justly condemns them: and that to good end and purpose, that is, to show himself to be an enemy and avenger of wickedness, that it may appear what power he has by these severe judgments, and finally by comparison of contraries to set forth indeed, how great his mercy is towards the elect.

(y) By vessels, the Hebrews understand all types of instruments.

(23) Therefore again, we may say with Paul, that some men are made by God the creator for destruction.

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes

People prepare themselves for destruction by pursuing sin (ch. 1; cf. Mat 7:13; 1Th 2:15-16; 2Th 2:3; Php 3:19). However, the verb translated "prepared" in this verse is probably a passive rather than a middle, though the form of the passive and middle tenses is identical in Greek. The passive is much more common in the New Testament. Paul probably meant that God prepares some people for destruction. Pharaoh was such a vessel of wrath. Paul had in mind those in Israel who had opposed the gospel in his day. God was patient and merciful with them (cf. Rom 2:3-4; Act 2:38; Act 3:19-20; 2Pe 3:9).

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)

Disfruta de miles de canciones cristianas en exclusiva sólo en Bibles