How is the man without the Bible to be judged by God? Is God just in this judgment? These are the questions with which we ended the last chapter.
If any of you have ever thought with honesty and not just sat under the evangelical umbrella, or if you have tried to talk to people on the outside, you immediately know that these questions deserve consideration. Is God really just in judging the man without the Bible?
We read in Romans 1:32—2:3, “. . . who, knowing the judgment of God, that they who commit such things are worthy of death [in other words, having moral motions regardless of their philosophic system], not only do the same, but consent with them that do them. Therefore, thou art inexcusable, O man [the man without the Bible], whosoever thou art that judgest; for wherein thou judgest another, thou condemnest thyself; for thou that judgest doest the same things. But we are sure that the judgment of God is according to truth against them who commit such things. And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them who do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?” Think about what is being said here.
Here are the people without the Bible scattered all over the world. Their ancestors (including the last two generations in our own culture), knowing the truth, have turned away from it, and this generation is unaware of it. Yet they have had the powerful testimony of the fact that their own system does not sufficiently explain what is—the mannishness of man and the existence and form of the universe. Further, all men have moral motions, even the modern man who by theory does not believe in morality. Although the standard of moral judgments may be much lower than those set forth in the Bible, moral judgments are still constantly being made.
Let us suppose for a moment that as each baby is born, a tape recorder is placed about its neck. Let us further suppose that this tape recorder works only when moral judgments are being made. Aesthetic judgments, etc., are not recorded, but every moral judgment is. Throughout one’s whole life, every real moral motion is recorded upon the tape recorder. Finally, when each person dies and stands before God in judgment, God pushes a button and each person hears with his own ears his own moral judgments as they rolled out over the years: “You were wrong in doing this. You are wrong in doing that.” Thousands of moral judgments pour forth, and God simply turns and says, “On the basis of your own words, have you kept these moral standards?” And each man is silent. No person in all the world has kept the moral standards with which he has tried to bind others. Consequently, God says, “I will judge you upon your own moral statements (those judgments upon which you have bound and condemned others), even if they are lower than moral statements should be. Are you guilty or not guilty?” No one will be able to raise his voice. The whole world will stand totally condemned before God in utter justice, because they will be judged not upon what they have not known, but upon what they have judged others and have not kept themselves. So all men must say, “Indeed I am justly condemned.”
It is most significant that in Romans 2:15, 16, Paul concludes with this concept in the final two verses where he is addressing the man without the Bible, before he begins to speak to the man with the Bible: “who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the meanwhile accusing or else excusing one another in the day when God shall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ according to my gospel.”
The Bible emphasizes this in various places. Luke 12:2, 3 reads, “For there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; neither hidden, that shall not be known. Therefore, whatever ye have spoken in darkness shall be heard in the light; and that which ye have spoken in the ear in closets shall be proclaimed upon the housetops.” I think that people may actually hear their own moral judgments, their own harsh words, being poured out against other men. And they will have to say, “You are just and I am condemned.”
Revelation 20:12 speaks of the last great judgment: “And I saw the dead, small and great, stand before God, and the books were opened; and another book was opened, which is the book of life. And the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works.” I have known evangelicals who have been somewhat embarrassed by this and say that this passage really means that people will be judged on whether they have accepted Christ as Savior or not. That is not what God says. He says, “I’m going to judge you by your works, and your works will fail.” They will fail on the basis of their moral judgments against others. There is no injustice in God’s dealings with lost men, because they are judged on the standard by which they have bound others.
You will recall that up through Romans 4 Paul talks about how to become a Christian. From the fifth chapter on he talks to Christians. In Romans 5 there is a titanic statement about the historicity of the space-time fall of Adam. Paul is giving to Christians the explanation of the origin of evil. But I think it’s highly significant that Paul did not mention this to the man without the Bible. When he talks to the man without the Bible he says to him, “I want to ask you a question: do you keep your own moral standards?” I have yet to find the man who, in an atmosphere of empathy, will not say, “No, sometimes I break them by mistake, but at times I deliberately break them.” And this is what God’s Word says will be the basis of the judgment of those who do not have the Bible. The judgment rests upon the individual’s true moral choice.
I am convinced from my experience that without the biblical position concerning God’s judgment of all men you can not have really good answers for modern man when he asks his questions. Some of those questions, as I’ve been emphasizing, are: Who is man? What is man? Who am I? Does history have any significance? Do I have any significance? And if a Christian is to give answers that are tough-fibered enough to break into the thinking of honest people in this century, he must have an answer concerning significance that will bear full weight. Moral judgment is made on the basis of the standards a man holds and yet deliberately breaks. Such moral judgment has an effect, not only in this life, but in the life to come. The limitedness of this life never can give significance enough. But here when moral judgment is based on a man’s choice which affects his present and future life far down into the reaches of foreverness, suddenly significance breaks like a great bursting bomb. This is the significance of finite man on the highest possible level. Here is the very opposite of Proust’s concept of the dust of death on life now.
The only way that one can get rid of the lostness of men is to give up either one of two things. First is the emphasis upon God’s true holiness. This, of course, removes this lost-ness of men. But the results are disastrous. What is lost is not just God, but man. If Nietzsche says God is dead, Sartre must say man is dead. For if you give up the true holiness of God, you give up any moral absolute in the universe, and you are back in a big circle where everything is adrift.
Second, one can give up the significance of history and the significance of man in that history. If neither has significance, then the concept of God’s judgment of man can be ignored. But if you do that, man has no meaning. So if you give up the holiness of God, there are no absolutes and morality becomes a zero; if you give up the significance of man, man becomes a zero. If you want a significant man, with absolutes, morality, and meaning, then you must have what the Bible insists upon—that God will judge men justly, and they will not be able to raise their voices because of the base upon which He judges them.
This brings me to two conclusions. First of all, in Romans 2:1, Paul moves from abstract statements to personal application: “Therefore, thou art inexcusable, O man.” Romans 2:3 repeats the personal emphasis: “And thinkest thou this, O man?” Paul is not just teaching abstract doctrine. It is my opinion, in fact, that every doctrine is meant to be practiced. Even the doctrine concerning the Trinity is meant to be practiced by the way our lives exhibit an understanding of the centrality of personality. And surely Paul’s present message is to be practiced. All men are going to be judged, and all men are going to be found with a totally failing grade: “Therefore, O man”—you, individually.
Beginning at 2:17 Paul deals with the Jew, the man with the Bible. God says through Paul, “Just as I have explained that the man without the Bible is to be judged on the basis of the moral standards with which he binds others, I will explain to you, the man with the Bible, that I will judge you upon the higher standards of the Scripture.” And as Paul continues on to 3:9, he concludes: the man with the Bible is no better than the man without the Bible, for both Jews and Gentiles have sinned.
You must understand that God’s passing grade is 100 percent. If He is less than perfect or accepts less than perfection, the absolutes are gone! That’s what an absolute means; it’s a 100 percent affair. And so God says to the man without the Bible, “Have you kept 100 percent of the moral judgments with which you bound others?” And to the man with the Bible, “Have you kept 100 percent of the standards of Scripture?” The answer is no. In Galatians 3:21 Paul writes, “Is the law, then, against the promises of God? God forbid; for if there had been a law given which could have given life (or could make alive), verily righteousness should have been by the law.” That is, if God could have given a law so that Jesus did not have to go to the cross, surely He would have done it! He didn’t send Jesus to the cross as a piece of theater, as one arbitrary possibility in the midst of other arbitrary possibilities. Rather, since there is no law that man in his rebellion does not break, God had to provide a non humanist solution for the problem of man if there was to be a solution.
But in the book of Romans, as early as Romans 1:16, 17, we are confronted with God’s unexpected solution: “For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ; for it is the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.” Paul says there is a solution for me personally and for you personally—a solution for the universal need of all men. God has provided a solution which fills the practical need and can be discussed on Mars Hill without shame. In that solution two great needs are fulfilled: the need for an absolute and the need for the significance of man.
What specifically is this solution? “For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God” (3:23). The Greek is stronger: “For all have sinned [aorist tense] in the past, and all are coming short of the glory of God.” In the past, we have sinned; in the present, we are sinning. But he continues, “being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus.” Many of you have been raised with these words from the Scripture until they have just become words. Some of you may say, “Oh, I’ve heard it ten million times, and it grinds through my mind like a phonograph.”
Smash the record and listen to the words! “Whom God hath set forth [that is, Christ] to be propitiatory through faith in his blood [that is, Christ’s finished work in space, time, and history, on the basis of the infinite value of His work because of His person as the eternal Son of God], to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God.” God has provided a solution whereby His holiness and man’s significance can stand, and yet not all men will be lost.
Then look at the great 3:26. People pass by it much too easily, not understanding the wonder of what Paul is saying: “For the showing at this time his righteousness, that he himself might be just [that is, that He might keep His holiness—and thus there is an absolute], and yet [the word yet is not in the Greek, but the force of it is] the justifier of him who believeth in Jesus.”
What is being said here? God has provided a way that no philosophy would have thought of. It is a way that would take us by surprise if we were not just thinking by evangelical habit. There should be everlasting surprise in it. I stand here. I am significant. God must be holy. Is all lost now that I have sinned? The answer is no! God has provided a propitiation, a substitute. The whole of God’s answer rests upon the substitutionary death of Jesus Christ. Because of who He is, His death has infinite value; it can cover every spot; it can remove true moral guilt (and not just the guilt-feelings that exist) in the presence of God as the perfect Judge of the universe.
Thus three great things fall into place: God’s holiness, man’s significance, and the possibility of man’s redemption. I don’t know about you, but I believe it is time to stand up and sing the doxology. Here is an intellectual answer that nothing else has ever presented!
In 2:1-3, Paul brings the message down to the individual: “Therefore, thou art inexcusable, O man!” Paul’s message is not just something for somebody else. It’s for every one of us. God is holy. There is a moral absolute. I am significant. I have deliberately sinned. I am under that wrath of God. Note it well: unless by God’s grace I have taken advantage of this unexpected and totally surprising answer to the dilemma, I am under the wrath of God.
Our second conclusion involves our attitude as Christians now that we know that the man without the Bible (not only the bushman but the educated modern man) is under the judgment of God. It’s perfectly true that God in His mercy often brings men into contact with the gospel in very unexpected ways. L’Abri is a proof of this every day of the year. The amaz ing people that God brings in amazing ways from the ends of the earth to hear the content of the gospel in L’Abri! But we are not to wait like a piece of stone for God to bring men to us. Paul tells us very clearly what our attitude is to be. In 1:14, 15, he says, “I am debtor both to the Greeks and to the barbarians;both to the wise and to the unwise.” I am a debtor, says Paul, to all classes of men. “So, as much as in me is, I am ready to preach the gospel to you that are at Rome also.” And although that meant prison and finally death, he was willing to go. He went on in the same way as Jeremiah went on.
Later in 10:13-15, Paul writes, “For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. How, then, shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher? And how shall they preach, except they be sent? As it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!” Paul’s response is firm and strong. I am a debtor to be a teller of the content of the good news. The Christian is called to be the carrier of the content of the good news.
Milton understood properly: Satan was a horrible rebel, but what he did had a large meaning in history. And when men turn and revolt, it has meaning in history. When men who knew the truth turned and revolted against God, it meant that those who followed them in history did not have the content of the gospel. But there is a gospel. And God turns to those of mankind who know the content and He says: Take the gospel. And he continues to honor the way He made man as significant, for He now says, I have put the good news into your hands that you might have compassion upon your own kind!
Who are these, regardless of the color of their skin and the language they speak, scattered over the face of the world? Who are these that do not have the content of the gospel? Who are they? They are my kind; they are my people; they are not something else; they are that which I am. I can really understand them because I am who they are. It is the Christian who knows the real unity of the human race, for we have a common origin; we are of one flesh and blood.
I stand here now, a Christian who has the content of the gospel, and I say: Isn’t it wonderful that we have an answer to modern man, who says man is a zero. I can say, You are not a zero. I can say: Proust is wrong; the dust of death is not on everything. There is real meaning that stretches out forever and ever into the future. Isn’t that wonderful! And then if I’m listening and thinking at all, not only to the Word of God, but to the dictates of compassion in my heart, I realize that significance means something more. Significance should make me as the seraphim who cover their faces with their wings. I should put my hands over my face, because now I am significant. It’s up to me in compassion to take the good news to my kind. This is who I now am.
It is Paul again who sounds the warning in 1 Corinthians 9:16: “For though I preach the gospel, I have nothing to glory of; for necessity is laid upon me; yea, woe is unto me, if I preach not the gospel!” Upon what basis should I preach and teach? Just some sociological group pressure from my church? The fact that the missionary candidate is a big wheel on some Christian college campuses and in some churches? Never! Ten thousand times no! The pressure upon me is this: I am significant, and my kind needs the message that I know.
Woe to us, woe to our evangelicalism with our lack of compassion. There is a decline in missionary interest across evangelical circles. What is lost? One of two things or both: a real sense of the lostness of the lost or compassion in our hearts. Many of us are intellectually embarrassed to speak of the lostness of the lost. We have been infiltrated by the naturalistic concepts of our own relativistic day. Across evangelicalism there is a great veil; regardless of what men affirm in their statements of faith, they no longer are facing the reality of the lostness of their own kind.
And as we have lost the sense of the lostness of the lost, we have also lost compassion. We are hard. What do you think when you see the newspaper pictures of those starving and displaced people? Do you have any compassion? What I find in much evangelicalism is not only weakness in sensing the lostness of the lost, but a tremendous weakness of compassion for the needs of my kind in the present life. What do you think of the overwhelming misery that almost every edition of the newspaper, almost every TV and radio news program brings us? Do you have any interest in helping them (or others in our own country) who need help in this life? And then as a Christian, does your world-view stand strong and consistent so that as you look at those starving people, you say: “Yes, they need help in this life. These are my kind; and there’s an eternity out there, and these people also need the content of the gospel.” Compassion for the needs of men, that’s our need. In the midst of our affluence, we ought to have compassion for people in this life and in eternity as we understand the lost-ness of the lost. To separate these two things as though they can be divided is not to understand the gospel.
All the church is to be made up of tellers. Not everyone is to be a missionary, not everyone is a minister, but there is no Christian who doesn’t have laid upon him the admonition of Paul to be a debtor. Everyone is bound to be a teller in his own place, in his own calling, according to the individual vocation which God has given him.
What about missionary giving? Often we are proud to say we give more to missions than any other country in the world.
But it seems to me that most Christians give their money out of sociological pressure in their group, and that group pressure is often generated by habit. It does not seem to me that most evangelicals give their money out of compassion and a sense of the lostness of the lost of their own kind.
People say to me at times, “But can you preach the gospel you have described in the midst of your intellectual presentation? Will modern man listen? Won’t he say it’s ugly?” I have never found a man who has thought orthodox Christianity as such is ugly once he understands the titanic answers it gives. I have never known a man who found that that was ugly! What men find ugly is what they see in Christians who hold to the orthodox doctrine that men are lost, but show no signs of compassion. This is what is ugly. This is what causes men in our generation to be turned off by evangelicalism.
At the conclusion of our study of Jeremiah and his message we said that if there is to be a constructive revolution in the orthodox, evangelical church, then like Jeremiah we must speak of judgment concerning individual men great and small and judgment of the church, the state, and the culture which have known the truth of God and have turned away from Him and His propositional revelation. God exists, He is a holy God, and we must know that there will be judgment. And like Jeremiah we must keep on—keep on so speaking regardless of the cost to ourselves. Now having completed our study in Romans we must add this: if there is to be a constructive revolution in the orthodox, evangelical church, we must comprehend and speak of the lostness of the lost, including the man without the Bible. And like Paul we must not be cold in our orthodoxy, but deeply compassionate for our own kind even when it is costly.
If we are Christians and do not have upon us the calling to respond to the lostness of the lost and a compassion for those of our kind for this life and eternity, our orthodoxy is ugly. And it is ugly in the presence of anybody who’s an honest person. And more than that, orthodoxy without compassion is ugly to God.