The Pulpit Commentary — Romans — Section 282

I. Me>sEs. Next to the Christ., perhaps none has played so c011eplcuoue a part in t.l1e history c>f the world's 81\lVl\tion as Mose..q,, Prepared from his birth for the greBt work l'f his life: trace his history with this in view. Called forth at last to step into the arena: and, when the antagonism was past, set forth by God as the great legislator for his me(', And here, for his iuaugurat.ion into the great work, the vision of God's goodness (Exod. xx.xiii. 19). But, while God would thus equip him and mo.ke him st.rong. had he a claim upon God's call and fashioning aud favour? No; it was· all of God's free choice. Another might have been chosen-another oolled, equipped, and bles..-1. God had his reasons, doubtless, but these are in the background hero. The question is one of freedom. Can Goo select whom ho will for his saving purposes, or is he tied by &.ny supposed claims on the part of individuals or of peoples? There is only one answ~hat God is perfectly free in this matter: "I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy," etc. Surely, if God showed this freedom in the oose of Moses, he might show it equally in the case of the" remnant," and of the Gentiles. lL PIIARAoB. God's great purposes were to be wrought ont the more effectually by antithesis; even as all his purposes are wrought out by the antithesis of good and evil. Moses was the great deliverer; Pharaoh was the great resister. And as Moses set forth judgment and mercy from God, Pharaoh set himself against God, and hardened his heart yet more and more. And at last his own conspicuous overthrow must publish abroad to all nations and all time that with a mighty hand God had set hie people free. And could Pharaoh rightly complain that God made him play this conspicuous part, &ea-a.inst his own will, in the salvation-purposes of God for the. world? No, in truth. As an iRdividnal, he had perfect liberty of choice, and God undoubtedly willed his salrntion; his sinful resistance of God was not ordained by God. But God, fore- seeing the sin., determined to make even the wrath of man to praise him ; and though Pharaoh's co-operation with Moses would have achieved the object well, yet hie resistaDce of :Moses, as God's messenger, was so overrnled as to redound to the effectua- tion of God's will God certainly had the liberty to make his self-hardening tributary to the fulfilling of his own desigDs. .And if he had the right to reprobate Pharaoh from a voluntary co-operation, arid yet control his resistance to the same end, might he not equally reprobate unbelieving Israel from a voluntary co-operation now, und- for thls truth"'now comes into the foreground in their case-make even their reprobation to subserve his designs? Let us remember that God will use us, whether we will or not, for the work of his kingdom.. But let ne seek to be used as willing instruments, and, as we have no claim to be used in this way or that, seeing that God's purposes are sovereign, let us pray, "What wilt thou have me to do? "-T. F. L. V ers. 19-29.-The rebuke of preswmption. The objectors might eay-If God over- rules all the conduct of men by BUch sovereign power, why does he reprobate any P Is not the very idea of the reprobation inconsistent with itself? He sets himself against some that he may glorify hie Name; but if this tends to the working of hie will, and they cannot resist, why does he set himself against them? The apostle, in reply, will indeed vindicate to them the reasons which enter into the working of the all-righteous God; but, first, he will question their competency to object to the working of such a One as God. They ask in a spirit of self-complacent Pharisaism ; he will ask them how they dare presume to sit in judgment on their Maker, He ehowe, then, the unreasonableness and the unscripturalness of such presumptuous questioning of the ways of God. L .A:J; i:;:sBEASO~ABLE PRF.SUXl'TIOl!I'. If it be regarded on the ground of mere right, has not God a right to do what he will with hie own? It is certain that bis will is wise, right.toll.I!, and merciful ; but the question now is one of prerogative. And God, the Absolute One uf the universe, is surely not to come to the tribUDal of creaturely jodgme11t? It is eve11 as though the clay were to judge the action of the man that fa.ehioIJ!S it, and l!&Y, "Why clidat thou make me thus?" 'l'he potter has a right over the clay ; he may do u he will He may make the vessels, some for meaner use, eomo for nobler; a11,i the clay cannot question his deeds. So cannot man question God, Ht de-.,.ls with mankind for historical purpoBCB as the potter with the clay. Go<l tnkee clay, Legins to fasbiun it for pur1,ose11 of honour, casts it aside, takes other clay and llll. rt. 1-33.] THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO TIIE ROMANS. 281