John Calvin Complete Commentary - Romans 9:19 - 9:19

Online Resource Library

Commentary Index | Return to PrayerRequest.com | Download

John Calvin Complete Commentary - Romans 9:19 - 9:19


(Show All Books | Show All Chapters)

This Chapter Verse Commentaries:

19.Thou wilt then say, etc. Here indeed the flesh especially storms, that is, when it hears that they who perish have been destined by the will of God to destruction. Hence the Apostle adopts again the words of an opponent; for he saw that the mouths of the ungodly could not be restrained from boldly clamouring against the righteousness of God: and he very fitly expresses their mind; for being not content with defending themselves, they make God guilty instead of themselves; and then, after having devolved on him the blame of their own condemnation, they become indignant against his great power. (302) They are indeed constrained to yield; but they storm, because they cannot resist; and ascribing dominion to him, they in a manner charge him with tyranny. In the same manner the Sophists in their schools foolishly dispute on what they call his absolute justice, as though forgetful of his own righteousness, he would try the power of his authority by throwing all things into confusion. Thus then speak the ungodly in this passage, — “ cause has he to be angry with us? Since he has formed us such as we are, since he leads us at his will where he pleases, what else does he in destroying us but punish his own work in us? For it is not in our power to contend with him; how much soever we may resist, he will yet have the upper hand. Then unjust will be his judgment, if he condemns us; and unrestrainable is the power which he now employs towards us.” What does Paul say to these things?



(302) The clause rendered by [Calvin ] “ Quid adhuc conqueritur — why does he yet complain?” is rendered by [Beza ] “ quid adhuc suecenset — why is he yet angry?” Our common version is the best, and is followed by [Doddridge ] [Macknight ] and [Stuart ] The γὰρ in the next clause, is omitted by [Calvin ] but [Griesbach ] says that it ought to be retained. — Ed.