O ne of the most common excuses that unbelievers put forth in rejecting the Gospel is – “What about the heathen living in some dark part of the jungle who has never heard the good news? How can it be fair that he is condemned for not believing someone whom he has never heard of ?” Another objection is that the heathen has not been given the law. The argument goes – how can one be guilty of a law of which he is not informed. The Jews lived under the Law. The Gentiles, on the other hand, lived apart from the Law. Paul’s answer is that although the Gentiles do not have the Law, they “do by nature the things contained in the law”. This is what some theologians call the “law of nature” or the “moral law”. Just as creation – natural revelation – is sufficient to condemn sinners for failing to worship the Creator God, so the sinner is justifiably condemned for failing to obey the moral law. The heathen may not have been given the Law of God, but they have a “law unto themselves” which is enough to condemn them. This is the moral argument for the existence of God. If such a moral code did not exist, there would be no need for such objections. Society in general recognizes that there are behaviours which are acceptable and those which are not. When an unbeliever accuses another unbeliever of wrongdoing, he is appealing to some standard of right and wrong that is expected of every person in that society. The accused on the other hand tries to justify his deed by some excuse that grants him exemption from that standard. There would be no need for excuses if there is no universal moral code. The point is that both the accuser and the accused agree they have a “law unto themselves.” God is a God of order not just in creation but also in our morality. The person who rejects the Law of God is enslaved to sin.
LESSON
For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves.
THOUGHT
Powered by FlippingBook