In his Abolition of Man, C. S. Lewis defended the objectivity of values, such as beauty and goodness, in contrast to the modern notion that such qualities are merely individualistic. Lewis wrote, “Until quite modern times all teachers and even all men believed the universe to be such that certain emotional reactions on our part could be either congruous or incongruous to it—believed, in fact, that objects did not merely receive, but could merit, our approval or disapproval, our reverence, or our contempt” (p. 25).
Lewis argued that natural law (or objective morality) is essential to the wellbeing of humanity. He was increasingly concerned that modern society is without “chests” (i.e. the higher emotions that are absolutely essential to harmonize the cerebral and the sensual), which would lead eventually to the abolition of man. Humanity “without chests” is the worship of one’s own mind and passions (a moral relativism that destroys the chest and removes morality). Romans 2 focuses upon God’s written law (the conscience, or Tao, as Lewis called it) upon the human heart, and how this proves that the gospel (“good news”) of God’s grace is relevant for all humanity.
But the angel said to them, “Do not be afraid; for behold, I bring you good news of great joy which will be for all the people
- Luke 2:10
This article explains how Romans 2 serves as a warning to those who may be neglecting or overlooking the demonstration of God’s righteousness. Everyone needs the good news, including both moral (Rom 2:1-16) and religious (Rom 2:17-29) people.
Once you read this article, you'll understand how Romans 2 addresses a very modern phenomenon among those who classify themselves as either moral or religious: claiming to believe the Bible, yet not living by the principles of Scripture. God is concerned that the hearts of His people are properly related to Him (vv. 28-29).
Who are the people whose sin you tend to judge? What are the excuses used to validate your judgment? What are the aspects of God’s will that you know, yet do not currently practice? Have we been hypocritical in teaching others spiritual matters or principles that we are not practicing? If others were to see into our heart and mind, would it be inconsistent with our external behavior?
From Midnight Call magazine
