Romans 9:18

“Therefore hath he mercy on whom he will have mercy, and whom he will he hardeneth.”

John Calvin (1509-1564)

To whom he wills then he showeth mercy, &c. Here follows the conclusion of both parts; which can by no means be understood as being the language of any other but of the Apostle; for he immediately addresses an opponent, and adduces what might have been objected by an opposite party. There is therefore no doubt but that Paul, as we have already reminded you, speaks these things in his own person, namely, that God, according to his own will, favours with mercy them whom he pleases, and unsheathes the severity of his judgment against whomsoever it seemeth him good. That our mind may be satisfied with the difference which exists between the elect and the reprobate, and may not inquire for any cause higher than the divine will, his purpose was to convince us of this–that it seems good to God to illuminate some that they may be saved, and to blind others that they may perish: for we ought particularly to notice these words, to whom he wills, and, whom he wills: beyond this he allows us not to proceed.

But the word hardens, when applied to God in Scripture, means not only permission, (as some washy moderators would have it,) but also the operation of the wrath of God: for all those external things, which lead to the blinding of the reprobate, are the instruments of his wrath; and Satan himself, who works inwardly with great power, is so far his minister, that he acts not, but by his command. Then that frivolous evasion, which the schoolmen have recourse to respecting foreknowledge, falls to the ground: for Paul teaches us, that the ruin of the wicked is not only foreseen by the Lord, but also ordained by his counsel and his will; and Solomon teaches us the same thing,–that not only the destruction of the wicked is foreknown, but that the wicked themselves have been created for this very end–that they may perish. (Prov. xvi. 4.)

(From: “Commentary” )

Arthur W. Pink (1886-1952)

V. 18. “Therefore hath He mercy on whom He will have mercy, and whom He will He hardeneth”. The “therefore” announces the general conclusion which the apostle draws from all he had said in the three preceding verses in denying that God was unrighteous in loving Jacob and hating Esau, and specifically it applies the principle exemplified in God’s dealings with Pharaoh. It traces everything back to the sovereign will of the Creator. He loves one and hates another, He exercises mercy toward some and hardens others, without reference to anything save His own sovereign will.

That which is most repellant to the carnal mind in the above verse is the reference to hardening–“Whom He will He hardeneth”–and it is just here that so many commentators and expositors have adulterated the truth. The most common view is that the apostle is speaking of nothing more than judicial hardening, i.e., a forsaking by God because these subjects of His displeasure had first rejected His truth and forsaken Him. Those who contend for this interpretation appeal to such scriptures as Rom. 1:19-26– “God gave them up”, that is (see context) those who “knew God” yet glorified Him not as God (v. 21). Appeal is also made to 2 Thess. 2:10-12. But it is to be noted that the word “harden” does not occur in either of these passages. But further. We submit that Rom. 9:18 has no reference whatever to judicial “hardening”. The apostle is not there speaking of those who had already turned their backs on God’s truth, but instead, he is dealing with God’s sovereignty, God’s sovereignty as seen not only in showing mercy to whom He wills, but also in hardening whom He pleases. The exact words are “Whom He will”–not “all who have rejected His truth”–“He hardeneth”, and this, coming immediately after the mention of Pharaoh, clearly fixes their meaning. The case of Pharaoh is plain enough, though man by his glosses has done his best to hide the truth.

V. 18. “Therefore hath He mercy on whom He will have mercy, and whom He will He hardeneth”. This affirmation of God’s sovereign “hardening” of sinners’ hearts–in contradistinction from judicial hardening–is not alone. Mark the language of John 12:37-40, “But though He had done so many miracles before them, yet they believed not on Him: that the saying of Isaiah the prophet might be fulfilled, which he spake, Lord, who hath believed our report? and to whom hath the arm of the Lord been revealed? Therefore they could not believe (why?), because that Isaiah said again, He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their hearts (why? Because they refused to believe on Christ? This is the popular belief, but mark the answer of Scripture) that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their heart, and be converted, and I should heal them.” Now, reader, it is just a question as to whether or not you will believe what God has revealed in His Word. It is not a matter of prolonged searching or profound study, but a childlike spirit which is needed, in order to understand this doctrine.

(From: “The Sovereignty of God”)

Francis Turretin (1623-1687)

Reprobation no less than election is made from good pleasure; therefore not from foreseen unbelief, as appears from Rom. 9:18 (“whom he will he hardeneth”). If the will is the cause of the hardening, it is also the cause of the reprobation because the cause of a cause if also the cause of the thing caused. Now hardening is the cause of damnation; therefore that which is the cause of the former is also the cause of the latter. Moreover, Paul proves this: (a) by the example of the twins, one of whom was elected, the other reprobated, before they had done anything good or bad (Rom. 9:11); therefore the cause arises from the sole good pleasure of God (either calling or rejecting) and not from works; (b) by the similitude of the potter; for if the potter has this power over the clay that he can from the same mass form a vessel unto honor or dishonor, why cannot God have so great a power over his creatures as to be able to reprobate one and elect another? The reason for the difference is added; for the power of the potter over the clay although great, is yet finite and limited, while the power of God over men is infinite. Finally, man is the creature of God, but the mass is not the creature of the potter. Hence a stronger argument arises–if the potter has so great a power over the clay (which is not his work), why should God not have a greater power over man, his creature!

(From: “Institutes of Elenctic Theology”)