RESPONSIBILITY OF HAVING LIGHT.
“Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth.” John 9:41. We have great sympathy for the blind. We have respect also for the condition of those who can honestly say of the teachings of the Bible, that they cannot see them. We recognize the fact that a person may be in the condition that he cannot see. It may be his own fault that he cannot see. It may be that he has had opportunity enough to see, and is himself only to blame that he has not the light. But the responsibility, in such case, is with him. We have to deal with the facts as we find them; and when a person says that he cannot see, we must take him at his word; and if we think he is dangerously wrong, try to help him into the light. How often we hear people say, “I cannot understand why such and such conditions should exist in God’s dealings with men.” How often they say, “How can the heathen be condemned for not believing the gospel, having never heard of Christ? and why, if a man has not had favorable conditions in this life, should he not have another chance in a future life, a second probation?” A relative of ours, a thoughtful man from the East, rejecting all divine revelation, on the ground that according to such revelation God is an unfair and unjust God, said to us one day, “What would you think of a man, or [referring to God] of a being, who would lay a trap for a man, and then condemn and punish him for falling into it?” This he said in reference to the fall of Adam, as set forth in the Scripture. So he scouted the Bible on account of its representations of how man fell, and sin came into the world. So men will presume to reason in regard to the great themes of the word of God, as if by their reason they could balance up the right or wrong of the course that God sees fit to take with His creatures, and pass judgment upon the course of the Almighty, who reads all hearts, knows all motives, and sees the end from the beginning. Do not they ever consider that there are great and decisive conditions to be taken into the account which have a bearing upon all events and the persons concerned in them? In regard to the heathen, God has given them one life in this world, and the apostle, in Rom. 2:10–16, states God’s principle of dealing with them. Even in their circumstances they need not reject Christ, unless they choose to. Light enough is given them to show them the way to life, if they are determined to seek and follow it. But how happens it that the heathen are in the condition they are in? Did God desire that they should ever be in such a condition? Did He not place in their possession ample means to prevent it, and keep them from it?—By all means. Then again we ask, How happens it that they have sunk into so low a condition?—It is because they chose to know not God. They rejected the means offered them, and departed from God. But for this God was not to blame. Read Paul’s comment upon their course in Rom. 1:21–32. This is not God’s fault. The gospel has been sent in appropriate times into all parts of the earth. Why does it not shine there now as it shone in its best in the past?—It is because it has been rejected. Again we say, This is not God’s fault. His dealings with the children of men, in all parts of the world and in all ages, are fully vindicated. Nothing has been found in the past, there is nothing in the present, and there will nothing be found in the future to mar the harmony of the final song of jubilee, “Just and true are thy ways, thou King of saints,” or “King of the ages.” And in regard to future probation, have not people had one life, and that, in the majority of cases, right in the blaze of light and liberty of gospel lands? What would be the object of letting them live that life again under the same or more favorable circumstances? Having rejected and trampled underfoot the great light and privileges they have been enjoying, would they do any better if they had a second chance? Now if in the lands of light and liberty every one, without exception, who had an opportunity, embraced the gospel, there might be some ground for the plea that, if they have never heard, they should have the opportunity under more favorable circumstances than they had enjoyed; but what chance is there for any such plea for those who have been brought up in Christian lands? Who will constitute the great majority of those who have passed the period of their probation in such lands,—those who have accepted the gospel, or those who have rejected it? The plea for a continued probation after this life, rests on a purely selfish motive, and a desire to continue in sin here. God will not thus make himself the minister of sin. In view of this fact, where is the possibility of the idea of a future probation for those who have neglected the opportunities of this life? So in regard to the fall of Adam. Our friend persuaded himself that God was unfair to lay a trap for man, and then condemn and punish him for falling into it. If he had been left in ignorance, and unwarned of danger, there would have been a difference. As Christ said, “If ye were blind, ye should have no sin.” But Adam was not blind, ignorant, or unwarned. The prohibited tree was pointed out, and the results of disobedience were made plain to him: “In the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.” This trial was not a trap laid for Adam to walk into blindly, and then die; it was a necessary test laid upon Adam to develop his character, as God has to try every free moral agent. God will not compel, or force, obedience upon any one. Obedience must be voluntary, and prompted by love, or it is no obedience. The injunction laid upon Adam tested him fully on these great principles. In short, it tested upon every principle involved in every one of the precepts contained in the moral law. Adam had every condition and influence favorable to obedience, except the temptation of the devil. It was no blind problem he had to wrestle with; no snare nor deception practiced upon him. Instead of making this transaction a basis of a charge against God, as an unjust and impartial and deceitful being, he should be reverenced for it, on account of its simple and easy terms, its comprehensive meaning and far-reaching consequences.