The Pulpit Commentary — Exodus — Volume 2 — Section 207

J)eut xxxii. 6, 16-28). They would be "surely" punished. 3. The general asser- tion that transgressions will not be pardoned does not imply that there is no room left for intercession and repentance; that, e.g., an alteration in the spiritual conditioo,; might not procure, if not remission, at least a sensible alleviatioo of the penalty; that prayer, proceeding from a contrite heart, might not obtain the removal of affi.iction, or the restoration of the penitent to Divine favour. Great severity, nevertheless, attaches to this announcement. The history is the best commentary upon it. It is literally true that, after the ratification of the covenant at Sinai, no serious transgression of Israel was allowed to go unpunished. In no case did even repent.ance avail wholly to avert chastisement. At most, the penalty was lightened, or shortened in duration. '!'bus, on the occasion of the sin of the golden calf, the earnest intercession of Moses availed to save the people from destruction, and obtained from God the promise that he would still go with them; but it did not save the idolaters from being smitten with the sword of Levi ( eh. xxxii. 28), or prevent the. Lord from still "plaguing" the people " because they made the ea.If, which Aaron made" ( eh. xxxii. 35). Cf. later inst.ances, e.g., Nadab and Abibu (Lev. x. 1-8); the murmuring at Taberab (Num. xi. 1-3): the lusting at Kibrotb-battaavab (Num. xi. 4--35); the rebellion at Kadesh, punished by the rejection of that whole generation (Num. xiii., xiv.); the revolt of Korab (Num. xvi., xvii.); the sin at Meribab, when even Moses forfeited bis right to enter the land of promise (Num. xx. 1-13); the later murmuring, when the people were punished by fiery serpents (Num. xxi. 7-9); the idolatry and fornication of Baal-peor (Num. xxv.). This severity is the more remarkable when we remember bow leniently God dealt with the people before the ratification of the covenant with Sinai. "All mur- murings before they came to Sinai were passed over, or merely rebuked; all murmur- ings and rebellions after Sinai bring down punishment and death" (Kitto). We trace the same principle of dealing through the whole history of the Old Testament. David, e.g., is personally forgiven for his sin of adultery; but the temporal penalty is not remitted (2 Sam. xii.). He is punished on a later occasion for numbering the people, and bas the choice given him of three evils; and this, notwithstanding his sincere repentance (2 Sam. xxiv.). So Manasseh is said to have ":filled Jerusalem with innocent blood, which the Lord would not pardon" (2 Kings xxiv. 5). The con- gruity of this strict dealing with a dispensation of law is sufficiently obvious; and, in the light of the examples quoted, the language of the text will not be felt to be too strong. II. How FAR TRUE UNDER THE GosPEL. The Gospel, as befits its nature, places in the forefront, not the declaration that God will not pardon sin, but the announcement of the terms on which he will pardon. It is a declaration of mercy to those who are viewed as already under wrath-the law having accomplished its design of convincing men of sin. The terms, however, on which the Gospel proposes to grant forgiveness are of such a nature as fully to establish the truth underlying this text ; viz., that God, as a God of holiness, will not clear the guilty (cf. Ex. xxxiv. 7). 1. This truth is the presupposition of the Gospel. Else whence its demand for atonement? Why is sin not simply condoned-not simply waived aside as something admitting of unconditional oardon? In view of the fact that the Gospel absolutely refuses pardon save on the ground of " the shedding of blood," it certainly cannot be accused of making light of guilt, or pf ignoring its relations to justice. God remains the just God, even while he is the Saviour (Rom. iii. 26). Stated othenvise, it is on the ground of the principle in the text, that a Gospel is needed. " '!'he wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men" (Rom. i. 18). No clearing of_ the guilty here. The principle in question is the genera.I principle of God's moral administration ( Hom. ii. 6-12). 2. '!'his truth still applies in its rigour to those who "disobey " the Gospel. For these there is no pardon. There remains for them only judgment and fiery indignation (Heb. x. 27). So solemn is the truth that "there is none other name under heaven given among men whereby we must be saved" (Acts iv. 12). 3. Even helievers, notwithstanding that they receive spiritual pardon, must not expect to escape temporal chastisements, appropriate to their offences. So far as sin's penalties are hound up with natural law it is certain that they will not escape them. They may be spiritually pardoned, yet, as respects the temporal penalty, may, like Esau, find. nn place for repentance, thougk they seek it carefully with tears (Heb. xii. 17). LiuJ 218 THE BOOK OF EXODUS. ( en. xxm. 20-23.