---

Many men seem to proceed on the supposition that, though placed under the Gospel, they may accept or reject it, just as their inclinations dictate. But it is not left to every man's choice in a Christian land whether or not he will be subject to the Gospel. It is not a matter of option with a man who resides in a kingdom, whether he will be governed by the laws of the land. If he violate them it will avail him nothing to plead that he never intended to take them as his guide. No doubt a man may make something else than the Gospel the rule of his life: but the solemn fact remains that the Gospel, after all, continues to be the rule by which he will be tried. When he appears before the Judgment Seat the processes will have reference to the dispensation beneath which it pleased God to place him, and not that under which he has chosen to place himself. It will avail him as little to say, "I acted up to the light of nature; I never professed to be led by any other light", as it would for an Englishman to plead in the courts, "I acted up to the laws of Japan, which I professed to follow." The Gospel, then, will be the system by which we shall be judged, though it may not have been that under which we have lived. Here comes the question, Why is the Gospel rejected? If men are to be condemned for its rejection, it must follow that the rejection cannot be pleaded as unavoidable. Is there a man necessarily blameworthy for being an infidel? May he not have sat down with a calm and decided wish to investigate truth and to believe Christianity, and yet arise confirmed in his scepticism? The answer is this: that we dare not take the blame off men and throw it upon God. This may sound illiberal and uncharitable, but we cannot admit that God is the author of sin through placing any of His creatures under the invincible necessity of continuing in sin. In the text Christ charges men's unbelief in their immorality. The Scriptures conclude that where actions are evil faith cannot be genuine. The text states the converse of this, that practice influences faith. Men prefer darkness; therefore they hate light.

I. THIS WAS SO WITH THE JEWS. When Christ came, Judaea was over-run with profligacy. Christ rebuked it, and was consequently hated and crucified. Wherever the religion of our Lord is promulgated, it allows no truce to sin, but Christ came to save men from sin. Had He come to condemn men His contemporaries would have shrunk from Him equally. Their sensuality and pride had led them to expect a triumphing Messiah, who would give full scope for their licentiousness and arrogance; and when He preached His pure and spiritual kingdom, their habits of evil rose up in protest against Him and it. It was not that He was not armed with credentials; the exhibition of His greatest credential, the resurrection of Lazarus, sealed His doom.

II. IT IS THE SAME NOW. What produces infidelity is not weakness of evidence; it is the wish to prove the Bible a fable, and this goes more than half-way towards the result. If the Bible be true, evil deeds must be reproved, and hence some men have an interest in disproving its preten-tions. In this desire lies the secret of open, also of practical infidelity. Selfish, lustful men would view conversion as a positive calamity. They know that they cannot have religion without renouncing much that they loved, and doing what they dislike. In conclusion —

1. God has erected no barrier against the salvation of a single soul.

2. If any man is finally condemned, it will be by his own choice.

(H. Melvell, B. D.)

---

---

KJV: For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.

WEB: For everyone who does evil hates the light, and doesn't come to the light, lest his works would be exposed.