The Pulpit Commentary — Romans — Section 37

the succoselon of dBy and night, the ebb and flow of the tides-all these thinzs require 11. controlling force, and that force must not only ha.ve a.lmighty power, but rnust ha.ve intelligence and reason nnd will, Buch a being mnst be a Person. Such a. Pernon is more thnn human-is Divine. Tho ea.me light of nature is granted to us all. But how much more ligllt has been granted to us/ We have the light of God's written Word. What mysteries that Word opens up to us, concerning which the voice of nature is silent I WhBt a light it gives ue about the mercy of God, and the Saviour's redeemincr love I What a light it gives us about immortality and heaven, a.ft.er which the best of the ancient heathen were groping and searching in darkneBB ! How thankful we should be, amid the darkness which sorrow brings, and as we look forward to the darkness of the grave, for the light which God in his Word has mercifully granted to us I But that great privilege, that unspeakable blessing, 'brings with it a solemn responsibility. We who have the Bible in our hands are without excuse if we live in godlessness or unbelief, if we reject the offer of salvation. II. LIGHT nEJEOTED, "They are without excuse, because that, when they knew God, they glorified him not as God, neither were t■ankful" (vers. 20, 21). And then, further on, the apostle says, "They did not like to retain God in their knowledge" (ver. 28). How often have nati()'ll,s acted thus-rejecting the light which was their best possession, their safety and their shield I The Jewish nation rejected the heavenly light, notwithstanding God's repeated warnings as to the consequences of doing so. !<'ranee rejected the light when it expelled the Huguenots, the God-fearing portion of its population. Spain did the same when, by its Inquisition and its autos-da,-fi, it exterminated all who dared to prefer the pure light of the Divine Word to the darkness and superstitions of Rome. Such nations were plainly without excuse, for they had the light, and deliberately rejected and quenched it when they could. & also u·e find rulers rejecting the light. That was the case with King Saul. He rejected the com- mandment of the Lord, and God rejected him from being king over Israel Belshazzar, King of Babylon, had plenty of light given him in the career of Nebuchadnezzar his father about the power and justice of God. But, as Daniel reminded him, he had disregarded the solemn lesson; though he knew all this, he had not bumbled himself, but had lifted himself up against the Lord of heaven (Dan. v. 21, 22). And so on that night of revelry the fingers of a man's hand came forth and wrote upon the wall, " Thou a.rt weighed in the balBnces, and art found wanting." He was without excuse. He had rejected the light which God had given him. Do we not see a similar infatuation in the case of the unhappy Mary Queen of Scots? Though she had faithful men of God in her ea.pita.I and often heard the truth from the lips of John Knox, she chose rather to be guided by her own ea.prices and by the influence of her frivolous courtiers. She, too, rejected the light which God had placed within her reach. We an not to think that it makes no difference whether we accept the Divine light or not. There is a danger that we may becomo too liberal as to the attitude men take up regarding God's Holy Word. It is well to be broad-broad as the mercy and the love of God. But, on the other hand, we ma.y be broader and more indulgent towards error than God's Word permits of. God des.ls with men as intelligent and rational and moral beings, with a free will, capable of free choice. He puts before them life and death. He tells them that "the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." He tells them that there is no other wa.y of salvation except through Jesus Christ alone. Upon them rests the responsibility and the guilt if they reject his salvation. It is worse than a matter of indifference; it is a sin in the sight of God. it is n sin against their own soul's destiny, for men to reject or neglect the mes.sage which the great Creator has mercifully sent them. It may be done in the name of science. It may be done in the name of advanced thought. But it is moral guilt nevertheless. " They are without excuse." III. WnATH REV:U.LED. "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven ~"'1Wl8i all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who hold the truth in unrighteousnes.s" (ver. 18). And how could it be otherwise, If light bas been granted to beings of intelligence and reason and conscience, and they have deliberately chosen to reject it, is it not fair nnd just that thoy should take the consequences? It is in the very 1rnture of things that "wlmtsoovor II man soweth, that shall he also reap." A man c1mnot violnte a nntural law with imptwity. The most liberal-minded sci~ntilic lW\11  30 THE EPISTLE OF PAUL TO THE ROMANS. [011. 1, 1-32