Romans 9:14-18, The Q&A of Verse 14

The Question (v. 14 a, b)

There are seven occurrences of the phrase “What shall we say then?” all of which appear in the book of Romans. Three of these occurrences (3:5; 6:1; 7:7) are nearly identical to 9:14 in that each is followed by a second question (such as “Is God unrighteous?” here in 9:14) and then the response “May it never be”! In all of these cases Paul uses this formula at a point where he recognizes that a false conclusion could be drawn from what he is saying (Cranfield, 2:481–82). Here Paul is sensing that his statements in 9:6–13, where he has been defending the word of God throughout history as accomplishing the purposes He and He alone set forth, could lead to the false conclusion that God has always been unjust in showing His favor at His own discretion and not on the merits of people. Particularly in 9:13, “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated,” God chooses to favor one from a pair of twins before they were even born. This leads to the question “Is God unrighteous”?

The Answer (v. 14 c)

Paul’s answer to the question “Is God unrighteous?” is made abundantly clear by the text in more than one regard. First, the tense of the verb in the phrase “What shall we say then?” would seem to indicate that Paul is asking a question which implies doubt about the response. It is a question of oughtness or necessity. In other words “How can we say this?” This indicates Paul’s repulsion at the thought that someone might infer an erroneous conclusion from his previous argument. Second, a more literal translation of the question would be “(There is) no injustice with God (is there)?” The phrasing itself shows that the expected response is a negative one. Finally you have Paul’s short yet definitive response “May it never be!” This phrase is used nine times throughout the book of Romans and indicates the ridiculousness of the question at hand (such as, “Shall we go on sinning?” in 6:1 or “Is the law sin?” in 7:7)[1].

Paul’s answer to the question is clear: it should never be concluded that God is unrighteous and it is ridiculous to think otherwise. Though his attitude to the question is clear, the fact that Paul will take the time to address this conclusion demonstrates that he regards it as a serious point that must be considered (Cranfield, 2:482). He will now spend the next few verses explaining why he comes to such an answer, and just as v. 13 raised the question in the first place; it also forms the basis for which Paul will outline his explanation. Verse 13 presents two different ways in which God may appear unrighteous: in granting mercy to some and in condemning others. Paul will address the first point in v. 15–16, establishing God’s sovereignty and absolute freedom to show mercy to who He pleases, and then in v. 17–18 he deals with the second case demonstrating God’s sovereignty and freedom in rejecting some people (Lloyd-Jones, 154)[2].

---

[1] This verb is classified as an optative and seems to appeal to volition: ‘You should never conclude such a thing!’ or ‘God forbid that you should think this!’ (Wallace, 482).

[2] Lloyd-Jones actually argues that verse 18 is a concluding summary of the passage and not merely an inference from verse 17, though he does pose the idea that verses 15 and 17 are two statements made by Paul in arguing for the single point of the righteousness of God raised in verse 14.