15.For he saith to Moses, etc.^296 With regard to the elect, God cannot be charged with any
unrighteousness; for according to his good pleasure he favors them with mercy: and yet even in
this case the flesh finds reasons for murmuring, for it cannot concede to God the right of showing
favor to one and not to another, except the cause be made evident. As then it seems unreasonable
that some should without merit be preferred to others, the petulancy of men quarrels with God, as
though he deferred to persons more than what is right. Let us now see how Paul defends the
righteousness of God.
In the first place, he does by no means conceal or hide what he saw would be disliked, but
proceeds to maintain it with inflexible firmness. And in the second place, he labours not to seek
out reasons to soften its asperity, but considers it enough to check vile barkings by the testimonies
of Scripture.
It may indeed appear a frigid defence that God is not unjust, because he is merciful to whom
he pleases; but as God regards his own authority alone as abundantly sufficient, so that he needs
the defence of none, Paul thought it enough to appoint him the vindicator of his own right. Now
Paul brings forward here the answer which Moses received from the Lord, when he prayed for the
salvation of the whole people, “I will show mercy,” was God’s answer, “on whom I will show
mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion.” By this oracle the Lord
declared that he is a debtor to none of mankind, and that whatever he gives is a gratuitous benefit,
and then that his kindness is free, so that he can confer it on whom he pleases; and lastly, that no
cause higher than his own will can be thought of, why he does good and shows favor to some men
but not to all. The words indeed mean as much as though he had said, “From him to whom I have
once purposed to show mercy, I will never take it away; and with perpetual kindness will I follow
him to whom I have determined to be kind.” And thus he assigns the highest reason for imparting
grace, even his own voluntary purpose, and also intimates that he has designed his mercy peculiarly
for some; for it is a way of speaking which excludes all outward causes, as when we claim to
ourselves the free power of acting, we say, “I will do what I mean to do.” The relative pronoun
also expressly intimates, that mercy is not to all indiscriminately. His freedom is taken away from
God, when his election is bound to external causes.
The only true cause of salvation is expressed in the two words used by Moses. The first is ,
chenen, which means to favor or to show kindness freely and bountifully; the other is , rechem,
which is to be treated with mercy. Thus is confirmed what Paul intended, that the mercy of God,
being gratuitous, is under no restraint, but turns wherever it pleases.^297
(^296) The quotation is from Exodus 33:19, and literally from the Septuagint. The verb is to be taken here in the sense of
showing favour rather than mercy, according to the meaning of the Hebrew word; for the idea of mercy is what the other verb,
, conveys. Schleusner renders it here and in some other passages in this sense. The rendering then would be — “I will favour
whom I favour,” that is, whom I choose to favour; “and I will pity whom I pity,” which means whom I choose to pity. The latter
verb in both clauses is in Hebrew in the future tense, but rendered properly in Greek in the present, as it commonly expresses a
present act. — Ed.
(^297) These two words clearly show that election regards man as fallen; for favour is what is shown to the undeserving, and mercy
to the wretched and miserable, so that the choice that is made is out of the corrupted mass of mankind, contemplated in that
state, and not as in a state of innocency. Augustine says, “Deus alios facit vasa irae secundum meritus; alios vasa miserieordiae
secundum gratiam — God makes some vessels of wrath according to their merit; others vessels of mercy according to his grace.”
In another place he says, “Deus ex eadem massa damnata originaliter, tanquam figulus, fecit aliud vas ad honorem, aliud in
contumeliam — God, as a potter, made of the same originally condemned mass, one vessel to honor, another to dishonor.” “Two
sorts of vessels God forms out of the great lump of fallen mankind.” — Henry