Romans 1:22

Professing themselves to be wise - This was the common boast of the philosophers of antiquity. The very word by which they chose to be called, “philosophers,” means literally “lovers of wisdom.” That it was their boast that they were wise, is well known; compare Rom 1:14; 1Co 1:19, 1Co 1:20, 1Co 1:22; 1Co 3:19; 2Co 11:19.

They became fools - Compare Jer 8:8-9. They became really foolish in their opinions and conduct. There is something particularly pungent and cutting in this remark, and as true as it is pungent. In what way they evinced their folly, Paul proceeds immediately to state. Sinners of all kinds are frequently spoken of as fools in the Scriptures. In the sense in which it is thus used, the word is applied to them as void of understanding or moral sense; as idolaters, and as wicked; Psa 14:1; Pro 26:4; Pro 1:17, Pro 1:22; Pro 14:8-9. The senses in which this word here is applied to the pagan are,

That their speculations and doctrines were senseless; and, That their conduct was corrupt.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Rom_1:22-23

Professing themselves to be wise they became fools.

The follies of the wise

Futility of thought has reached the character of folly. What, in fact, is polytheism, except a sort of permanent hallucination, a collective delirium, a possession on a great scale? And this mental disorder rose to a kind of perfection among the very peoples who, more than others, laid claim to the glory of wisdom. When he says, professing to be wise, Paul does not mean to stigmatise ancient philosophy absolutely; he only means that all that labour of the sages did not prevent, the most civilised nations--Egypt, Greece, and Rome--from being at the same time the most idolatrous of antiquity. The popular imagination, agreeably served by priests and poets, did not allow the efforts of the wise to dissipate this delirium. (Prof. Godet.)

Boasting of wisdom

In every department of knowledge, but especially in religion, boasting of wisdom is alike the proof and parent of folly.

I. It leads a man to go beyond the limits of his own powers, and to meddle with matters too high for him, or else to refuse to believe in anything which he cannot understand or grasp.

1. In either case this ends in folly. For the wisest and the most ignorant are on a par when they speculate upon subjects which transcend human thought, or over which God has been pleased to place an impenetrable veil.

2. He who believes in truth taught by nature and revelation is wiser than the so-called philosopher, who declines to receive anything but what his human intellect and finite powers can explain or fully grasp.

II. It leads a man to dispense with the help to be derived from the labours, remarks, or suggestions of others, as well as to advance the most absurd opinions, and to maintain them with the most inveterate obstinacy for the sake of notoriety.

III. It makes a man too willing to accept his own conclusions without sufficient and searching examinations.

IV. It ignores Gods law that the temple of Divine knowledge must be entered only by the gate of humility. (Biblical Museum.)

And changed the glory of the incorruptible God into an image.

Degradation of Gods glory

The glory of God is the splendour which His manifested perfections cast into the heart of His intelligent creatures; hence a bright image which is to man the ideal of all that is good. This image had been produced within them. What did they make of it? The sequel tells. While holding the Divine person, they wrapped it up, as it were in the likeness of its opposite; it would have been almost better to leave it in silence--it would not have been so great an affront. The preposition ἐν exactly describes this imprisonment of the Divine glory in a form ignoble and grotesque. The epithet incorruptible is, as it were, a protest beforehand against this degradation. (Prof. Godet.)

Idolatry a retrogression, not an advance in religious though

Idolatry according to Paul is not a progressive stage reached in the religious thought of mankind starting from primeval fetishism. Far from being a first step towards the goal of Monotheism. Polytheism is, on the contrary, the result of degeneracy, an apostasy from the original Monotheism, a darkening of the understanding and heart which has terminated in the grossest fetishism. The history of religions, thoroughly studied nowadays, fully justifies Pauls view. It shows that the present heathen peoples of India and Africa, far from rising of themselves to a higher religious state, have only sunk, age after age, and become more and more degraded. It proves that at the root of all pagan religions and mythologies there lies an original Monotheism, which is the historical starting point in religion for all mankind. (Prof. Godet.)

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

CRITICAL NOTES

Rom_1:22-23.—Here begins a dark picture of heathenism, but fully verified from the writings of what has been called the most brilliant age of the most intellectual nations of the world. St. Paul traces man’s downward progress. Evolution, but in the wrong direction. According to the Jewish rabbis, one sin made to follow as the punishment of another. τὴν δόξαν, spoken of God, refers to the divine majesty and glory.

Rom_1:25. Who is blessed for ever.—These doxologies common in Paul’s writings. Jewish rabbis use them. Mohammedans have honoured the custom. Tholuck mentions one Arabic manuscript in the Berlin Library where the expression “God be exalted” is often used.

Rom_1:28.—The apostle here states that the heathen voluntarily rejected the knowledge of the true God, which they must have gathered from the book of nature (Olshausen).

Rom_1:29.—Inveteracy of all evil and pernicious habits. Finding pleasure in causing and seeing suffering.

Rom_1:30. Backbiters, haters of God.—ὑβριστάς, ὑπερηφάνους, ἀλαζόνας. Insolent and injurious in acts, proud in thoughts, and boastful in words. Evil speakers in general. Planning more sins.

Rom_1:31.—ἁσυνθέτους. Covenant breakers, treacherous. Impious as neglecting the true wisdom, and continuing in sin, heathenism (Robinson).

Rom_1:32.—Sentence of God immutably written on the conscience. Approval of and delight in sin in ourselves and others, the highest pitch of wickedness.

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.—Rom_1:22-32

Polytheism and atheism.—In these concluding verses we have a dark but true record of the deplorable results of polytheism. The most degrading vices that can afflict and ruin humanity run rife in the polytheistic world. The rejection of the true God, the rejection of all true good, of every preservative influence—the rejection of God is not only the rejection of every preservative influence, but the stirring up against the rejecters of every destructive force. God gave them over to a reprobate mind to do those things which are not convenient. This is alike the teaching both of nature and of revelation. The rejection of good is the provocation of evil. The downward course is easy. Beware of first steps in sin, the provocation of evil, because by the rejection of the good evil is incited, as it were, to do us further harm and bring upon us destruction. Death is the final penalty of those who take pleasure in polytheistic and atheistic theories. Polytheism is scarcely the danger of civilised societies. The only idols we are likely to worship are idols of the mind. Our pantheons are the temples of mammon, the halls of philosophy falsely so called, the shrines of fashion, the haunts of refined but insidious and harmful pleasures. Our danger is practical atheism, and it is creeping into our places of religious worship. What is it but practical atheism which limits God to the church or chapel? What is it but practical atheism which allows men to do in secret that which they would not do before the sight of their fellow-men? Polytheism and atheism are nearly allied. They both conspire to rob God of His glory. The former substitutes images of corruptible men, birds, four-footed beasts, and creeping things for the glory of the incorruptible God; the latter substitutes, rather leaves, an awful void for the repose which those enjoy who recognise, worship, and serve the Creator: the former, as we here see, generates deplorable vices, and would soon make the world both a moral and a material ruin; the latter, likewise, would leave nations without any true safeguard. In speaking of atheistic tendencies we are not to consider the refined and moral advocates of atheism only, who may be influenced by the Christian forces about them; but we must follow them in their tortuous windings until we come to the dire and dark ocean where humanity would be finally immersed. In the endeavour to make our paraphrase on these gloomy verses of the epistle practical and suitable to our times, let us offer a few reflections on atheism in general. We here make no blind attack upon particular men, and do not forget that men are sometimes better than their creeds; for atheists, theists, and scientists all have their creeds, though they do not recite them in churches. Even the agnostic, who denies that we can know the absolute and infinite God, may have a creed, which may be professing himself to be wise.

I. Atheism suits the depraved wishes.—The head is not convinced; but the heart, the seat of affections, is set upon this declaration, that there is no God. It is well known that the wish is the father of the thought; and the fool has the strong wish that there may be after all no God. It would be a great relief if he could be firmly persuaded that there were no moral governor, and that man were an irreponsible creature. Responsibility is a heavy burden on the back of him who is sinful and foolish in conduct. Man finds himself trammelled not only by outward laws, but by an inward feeling that he ought to be subject to and obey those laws, and he cannot rid himself of this feeling, he cannot shake himself free from the trammels. The words “ought” and “ought not” are as fearful phantoms that torture his soul. He longs to be free, and yet cannot attain freedom. His wishes go out towards a goal which he can never reach. He keeps saying in his heart there is no God, and yet he gets no nearer to the establishment of this desired atheistic doctrine in his nature.

II. Atheism accords with false doctrine.—It is both the cause and the effect of false doctrine. Action and reaction work here as in other realms, only that reaction is a great productive power in this sphere. Atheism is the result of false doctrine; and when the creed, the “no God” creed, is received, it works powerfully to the production of still greater falseness and more debasing views of life and of morals. There can be no guarantee for morals if the idea of a moral governor be banished, if indeed it can be completely banished, from the world of thought. Theism is the foundation of right religion, and right religion cannot be divorced from a correct moral code. Ethical systems are but a rope of sand if they do not begin in the idea of a moral governor. Atheism is the cause and effect of false doctrine in the heart. These produce both the professed and the practical atheist. And this in turn fosters erroneous opinions; they grow to greater potency, and become tyrannical.

III. Atheism agrees with and fosters corrupt practice.—We are far from charging all atheists with being corrupt in practice as well as erroneous in doctrine. It may be that some atheists are as pure in life as some theists. Certainly it will not do to denounce a creed because of the immorality of its adherents. It is an old and a favourite method to damage the cause by vilifying the persons. Still, when atheism has been tried, if it can ever be tried, to a large extent like the Christian religion, then will be the time to speak of its practical results. The nearest approach to such a trial was in France, when God was dethroned and reason was worshipped. This monarch soon had the sceptre of authority wrested from its grasp. Reason soon became unreason. The vilest passions were let loose. Judgment was taken away from the line. Righteousness was no longer the guide of the reins. Misrule was the confusing, disturbing, and wasting order of the day. Practical atheism had been tried, and was found wanting. When atheists live pure lives, it follows either from the unconscious influence of Christianity, or from the force of an enlightened public opinion, or from remaining respect for virtue which atheism has not destroyed. Men are naturally depraved, and practise the evil while they approve of the good. It seems ridiculous to extol the goodness of human nature in the light of history, and of that history which is being enacted daily before our eyes, and which is being recorded in our daily papers. Let atheism prevail, and the floodgates of iniquity would be thrown open, and the pestilential waters would flow with destructive and ominous sweep over our planet. Our blessings brighten as they fly and disappear. We tell the force of an element or of a principle by withdrawing it from its proper connection. Tom Paine’s Age of Reason was printed in America, and before publishing the book he submitted the manuscript to Benjamin Franklin, who said, “Burn it; do not loose a tiger: if men are so wicked with religion, what would they be without it?” The withdrawal of religion would be the withdrawal of a great restraining force from society, and human nature would lose one important check to the outlet of its depravity. A belief in a God is a blessing which we do not fully appreciate. If it were withdrawn from the world, we should find out how great a preservative and conservative force it has been amongst mankind. Virtue, as its own reward, would not lead men to follow virtue for its own sake. The greatest happiness of the greatest number would mean the greatest happiness of the greatest number one; for selfishness would override a spirit of universal philanthropy. Utilitarianism would mean, How can I make others useful to the promotion of my individual interests? Materialism would swallow up moralism, and, like Pharaoh’s lean kine, would not be bettered by the process. Moral restraints would be not only loosened, but destroyed. Passions of the vilest kind would be let loose, like so many fierce and hungry wolves. Debasing lusts would speedily quench the fires of divinity still shining in human nature. The question of existence would become a question of physical power; the weakest physically considered would have to go to the wall. The time would soon come when only Samson and the Philistines were left, and he would make a last effort by which he and his oppressors would be involved in one common and hideous ruin. And our planet would soon be destitute of intelligent inhabitants. Before this sad event the race would be indeed properly described by the graphic words, “They are corrupt: they have done abominable works; there is none that doeth good.”

IV. Atheism is an endeavour to delude conscience.—Strange are the tricks which men play with their own nature. They endeavour to deceive their own selves, and too often succeed for a time in the art of self-deception. They strive to delude conscience by saying that there is no Creator, and therefore no moral governor. Then the voice of conscience is to be regarded as uttering a meaningless sound. In Paris they drink a mixture which they call “absinthe,” which brings the mind into a delightful state. Under its influence the soul appears to rise above the clouds, and is filled with pleasant visions. But by-and-by this pleasant effect passes away, convulsions and fearful headache follow, the hair falls from the head, and the deluded victim of over-indulgence is brought either to the madhouse or to an early grave. These short-lived visions of pleasure are bought at a fearful price. Thus the atheistic fool may for a time delude conscience. Pleasant visions of freedom from moral bondage may delight; but alas! too soon the pleasant effect will vanish. The atheistic absinthe will lose its power to charm and to delude, even if it does delude for the time being—a question which may very well be asked as we consider the constituents of conscience. Let us seek then:

1. To retain the idea of the true God in our knowledge;

2. To cling to the theistic truth as taught by right reason, by nature, and by Revelation 3. To worship and serve the Creator with heart and with head—in fact, with all our powers;

4. So to work, live, and pray that neither we nor our descendants may be reduced to the lowest depth of evil. “Without understanding, covenant-breakers; without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful.” Christianity develops the understanding, teaches men to feel themselves bound by their contracts, nurtures the natural affections, ameliorates and ultimately removes the implacable nature, and informs the poet to raise the song in praise of mercy. Shakespeare’s “quality of mercy” is one of the sublimest strains ever chanted by mortal tongue, and it received its inspiration from the lips of the Great Teacher.

Lie.—

I. An idol a lie.—

1. As professing to be what it is not;

2. As deceiving him who trusts in it.

II. Everything opposed to God a lie.

III. Everything a lie which—

1. Disappoints man’s hopes;

2. Fails to satisfy the cravings of his immortal soul.

IV. That life a lie which is not—

1. According to God’s will;

2. Directed to His glory;

3. The realisation of His enjoyment.—Rev. T. Robinson.

Man’s forgetfulness.—God has well remembered man—remembers him every day. God might easily forget man; he is so insignificant, worthless, unlovable. But He does not. God desires to be remembered by man. He has taken unspeakable pains to keep Himself before His creatures, so as to make forgetfulness on their part the greatest of all impossibilities. In everything that God has set before our eyes or ears He says, Remember Me. In every star, every flower, every mountain, every stream—in every joy, every comfort, every blessing of daily life—God says, Remember Me. It is not, however, merely a “deity,” a divine being, that is to be remembered. It is the one living and true God. Every departure from this is idolatry and dishonour. This true God wishes to be remembered.

1. Reverently. He is great and glorious, to be had in reverence of all creaturehood.

2. Confidingly. His character is such that He deserves to be trusted.

3. Joyfully. Not by constraint, or through terror or hope of profit, but with the full and happy heart.

4. Lovingly. We love Him because He first loved us.

5. Steadfastly. Not by fits and starts, at certain “devotional seasons,” but always. This God, whose name is Jehovah, is worthy to be remembered, He is so infinitely glorious, and good, and great, and lovable. The wonder is, how One so great should ever for a moment be forgotten. Yet man forgets God! He hears of Him, and then forgets Him. He sees His works, and then forgets Him. He acknowledges deliverances, and then forgets Him.

Israel is frequently charged with such things as these:

1. They forgot His words.

2. They forgat His works. Miracle on miracle of the most stupendous kind did He for Israel in Egypt and in the desert. They sang His praise, and then forgat His works.

3. They forgat Himself. Yes, Himself—their God, their Redeemer, their Rock, their Strength! They thrust Him out of their thoughts and memories. God lays great stress upon remembering Him and His works. Often did He use that word to Israel, “Remember.” “Remember the way that the Lord led thee.” “Remember the commandments of the Lord.” “Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy.” “Remember thy Creator.” In the New Testament the words of the Lord Himself must occur to every one, “This do in remembrance of Me”; and the response of the Church, “We will remember Thy love more than wine.” Forget not, O man, the God that made thee. He has given thee no cause to forget Him.—H. Bonar.

SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON Rom_1:23-32

Paul includes all transgressors.—Though the apostle begins his delineation of the ungodliness and unrighteousness against which wrath is revealed by specifying the grievous misconduct of the philosophers and legislators among the heathen, it must not be supposed that he means to limit his description to those who possessed extensive knowledge and high intellectual attainments. He plainly includes all who transgressed any known duty. His allusion to the wise and eminent seems intended to suggest this important consideration, that if the wrath of God be revealed against the transgressions even of these high and honoured characters, how much more must it fall on the great body of offenders who have no such shining qualities to counterbalance their sins? Nor must it be supposed,—because the first thing specified in this dark catalogue of transgressions is the concealment of what was known concerning God, and transferring the glory which belongs only to the incorruptible God to imaginary objects of worship, that is the only or even the chief offence against which wrath is revealed. This is the only fruitful source from which the gross practical wickedness of the heathen arose, and by which it was encouraged. But according to the principle before laid down, wrath is revealed, not only against this particular sin, but against every transgression whatever.—Ritchie.

Nature leaves without excuse.—“Not as God,” etc. The revelation in nature of God’s greatness and bounty ought to have produced in their hearts admiration and gratitude. It produced neither. But it left them without excuse. And for this end it was given—i.e., to make them conscious of the guilt of their ungodliness and ingratitude. Notice that their first fault was negative. All else was the result of not using the light which God gave. “But they became vain,” etc. Result of not giving honour and thanks to God. Their minds were at work, but to no purpose. Their reasonings were in vain. The facts of idolatry here asserted need, unfortunately, no confirmation. The writings and relics of antiquity prove the charge. Statues of men were worshipped by the Greeks; and the mummies of birds and reptiles from the temples of Egypt fill our museums. And, as far as I know, when Paul wrote this epistle, no serious voice had been raised in heathendom against this folly. Paul’s view of natural theology. With him creation plays a part in the moral training of the Gentiles similar to that of the law in the training of the Jews. A striking coincidence is found in the only two recorded discourses addressed by Paul to heathens, each of which he begins by appealing to the works of creation. With the Jews he begins by quoting the Old Testament. In each case he appeals to an earlier revelation given to prepare the way for the gospel, and thus seeks to call forth that consciousness of guilt without which the need of the gospel is not felt. God’s revelation of Himself in nature would probably bear its chief fruit in those Gentiles who heard the gospel. While listening to it they would condemn themselves, not for rejecting Christ, of whom they had never heard, but for disregarding a revelation which had been before their eyes from childhood. And just as the law retains its value even for those who have accepted the gospel, so the worth of the nature-revelation remains to those who behold the glory of God in the face of Jesus. That God reveals Himself in nature, raises natural science to a sacred study, and gives to it its noblest aim. We learn that, by the just judgment of God, godlessness, folly, and shame go together. Are not those men guilty of incredible folly who prefer to direct their highest thought and effort to the perishing objects around, rather than to those which will never pass away? Human nature is the same. The principles here asserted attest themselves before our eyes and in our hearts. The inevitable connection of godlessness, folly, and sin proclaims in words we cannot misunderstand that God is angry with those who forget Him. Heathens have observed this. Socrates, in Xenophon’s Memoir, says that the fact that certain sins produce their own punishment proves that the law which forbids them is from God. The true nature of sin. It is not a mere act, but is an adverse power against which man, unaided by God, is powerless. It has allies in our own hearts. The deep shame of the heathen is with Paul fully accounted for by the fact that God gave them up to sin. Of this all else is the necessary result.—Beet.

Conscience the best argument.—Our conscience is the best argument in the world to prove there is a God, for conscience is God’s deputy; and the inferior must suppose a superior, and God and our conscience are alike relative terms, it not being imaginable why some persons in some cases should be amazed and troubled in their minds for their having done a secret turpitude or cruelty, but that conscience is present with a message from God, and the men feel inward causes of fear when they are secure from without—that is, they are forced to fear God when they are safe from men. And it is impossible that any man should be an atheist if he have any conscience; and for this reason it is there have been so few atheists in the world, because it is so hard for men to lose their conscience wholly.—Ductor Dubitantium.

Corruption of the heathen.—Greater folly than this exchange of the living and glorious God for the mere image of birds, beasts, and reptiles the world has never seen. That the heathen really worshipped such objects is well known. Philo says that the whole land of Egypt was covered with temples and groves dedicated to dogs, wolves, lions, land and water animals, crocodiles, birds, etc. With regard to the vast majority of the people, the homage terminated on the animal or the idol; and the case was little better with the pantheistical refiners and defenders of this system, who professed to worship the great and universal divine principle in these particular manifestations. Why should the higher manifestation of God in the human soul do homage to the lower development of the universal principle in a reptile? We never find the sacred writers making any account of this common subterfuge and apology for idolatry. All who bowed down to a stock or stone they denounced as worshipping gods which their own hands had made, which had eyes but saw not, ears but heard not, and hands that could not save. This corruption of morals was confined to no one class or sex. Paul first refers to the degradation of females among the heathen, because they are always the last to be affected in the decay of morals; and therefore when they are abandoned the very fountains of purity are corrupted. It is unnecessary to say more than that virtue has lost its hold on the female sex, in any community, to produce the conviction that it has already reached the lowest point of degradation.—Hodge.

God not the author of sin.—God may make one sin the punishment of another, though it still is to be remembered that it is one thing for God to give a man over to sin, and quite another to cause him to sin: the former importing it in no more than God’s providential ordering of a man’s circumstances, so that he shall find no check or hindrance in the course of his sin; but the latter implying also a positive efficiency toward the commission or production of a sinful act; which God never does, nor can do; but the other He both may and in a judicial way very often does.… In all which God is not at all the author of sin, but only pursues the great work and righteous ends of His providence in disposing of things or objects, in themselves good or indifferent, toward the compassing of the same. Howbeit, through the poison of men’s vicious affections, they are turned into the opportunities and fuel of sin, and made the occasion of their final destruction.—Dr. South.

Holy voice of nature.—Cast your eyes over all the nations of the world. Amid so many inhuman and absurd superstitions, amid that prodigious diversity of manners and characters, you will find everywhere the same principles and distinctions of moral good and evil. The paganism of the ancient world produced indeed abominable gods, who on earth would have been shunned or punished as monsters, and who offered as a picture of supreme happiness only crimes to commit and passions to satiate. But vice armed with this sacred authority descended in vain from the eternal abode; she found in the heart of man a moral instinct to repel her. The continence of Xenocrates was admired by those who celebrated the debaucheries of Jupiter. The chaste Lucretia adored the unchaste Venus. The most intrepid Roman sacrificed to fear. He invoked the god who dethroned his father, and he died without a murmur by the hand of his own. The most contemptible divinities were served by the greatest men. The holy voice of nature, stronger than that of the gods, made itself heard and respected and obeyed on earth, and seemed to banish as it were to the confinement of heaven guilt and the guilty.—Rousseau.

[We are not to forget that Rousseau’s holy voice of nature is infidelity, and that it is folly to talk of vice descending from an eternal abode and finding a repelling force in the heart of man. We give the extract as a graphic confirmation of St. Paul’s description.]

Infidelity barren of good results.—The system of infidelity is a soil as barren of great and sublime virtues as it is prolific in crimes. By great and sublime virtues are meant those which are called into action on great and trying occasions, which demand the sacrifice of the dearest interests and prospects of human life, and sometimes of life itself—the virtues, in a word, which by their rarity and splendour draw admiration, and have rendered illustrious the character of patriots, martyrs, and confessors. It requires but little reflection to perceive that whatever veils a future world and contracts the limits of existence within the present life must tend in a proportionable degree to diminish the grandeur and narrow the sphere of human agency. As well might you expect exalted sentiments of justice from a professed gamester, as look for noble principles in the man whose hopes and fears are all suspended on the present moment, and who stakes the whole happiness of his being on the events of this vain and fleeting life. If he be ever impelled to the performance of great achievements in a good cause, it must be solely by the hope of fame: a motive which, besides that it makes virtue the servant of opinion, usually grows weaker at the approach of death; and which, however it may surmount the love of existence in the heat of battle or in the moment of public observation, can seldom be expected to operate with much force on the retired duties of a private station. In affirming that infidelity is unfavourable to the higher class of virtues, we are supported as well by facts as by reasoning. We should be sorry to load our adversaries with unmerited reproach; but to what history, to what record, will they appeal for the traits of moral greatness exhibited by their disciples? Where shall we look for the trophies of infidel magnanimity or atheistical virtue? Not that we mean to accuse them of inactivity: they have recently filled the world with the fame of their exploits—exploits of a different kind indeed, but of imperishable memory and disastrous lustre. The exclusion of a supreme Being and of a superintending Providence tends directly to the destruction of moral taste. It robs the universe of all finished and consummate excellence, even in idea. The admiration of perfect wisdom and goodness for which we are formed, and which kindles such unspeakable raptures in the soul, finding in the regions of scepticism nothing to which it corresponds, droops and languishes. In a world which presents a fair spectacle of order and beauty, of a vast family nourished and supported by an almighty Parent—in a world which leads the devout mind, step by step, to the contemplation of the first fair and the first good, the sceptic is encompassed with nothing but obscurity, meanness, and disorder. Modern infidelity not only tends to corrupt the moral taste, it also promotes the growth of those vices which are the most hostile to social happiness. Of all the vices incident to human nature, the most destructive to society are vanity, ferocity, and unbridled sensuality; and these are precisely the vices which infidelity is calculated to cherish.—Robert Hall.

Origin of idolatry.—Here then—in the alienation of the heart from God, the unsuitableness of His character to the depraved propensities of fallen creatures, and the consequent desire to have a God “who will approve their sin”—is the origin of idolatry. This view of the case accords well with the character of the “gods many and lords many of the heathen world,” and with the nature of the worship with which they were, and still are, honoured. Where, among all the objects of their worship, shall we find one whose attributes indicate the operation, in the mind that has imagined it, of anything like a principle either of holiness or of love? Where one whom its worshippers have invested with the qualities either of purity or of mercy? All their deities appear to be the product of a strange and an affecting combination of depraved passions and guilty fears. The principal gods of the Pantheon are raised above human kind chiefly by the superior enormity of their crimes, their greater power only enabling them to be the greater adepts both in folly and in wickedness. They are the patrons and the examples of all that is vile and of all that is cruel—of intemperance, and lust, and knavery, and jealousy, and revenge. Thus men love to sin; and they make their gods sinners, that they may practise evil under their sanction and patronage. The worship of their gods is such as might be anticipated from their characters. Well are their superstitions denominated “abominable idolatries.” They consist, not merely of the most senseless fooleries and extravagances, but of the most disgusting impurities, the most licentious acts of intemperance, and the most iron-hearted cruelties. It may be remarked that the very same tendency of human nature to depart from Jehovah and follow after idols evinced itself when a fresh experiment was tried in the case of the Jews. They alone of all nations were put in possession of the knowledge of the true God; and they showed a constant inclination, for many ages of their history, to change—to go astray from Jehovah, and to serve “strange gods, the gods of the heathen that were round about them,” Is it not most wonderful that the only people who were in the right discovered so strong a, propensity to change the right for the, wrong, while those who were in the wrong adhered pertinaciously to their errors and were obstinately averse to; embrace what was right? How spirited the expostulation of Jehovah by the I prophet Jeremiah!—“Pass over the isles of Chittim, and see; and send unto Kedar, and consider diligently, and see if there be such a thing. Hath a nation changed their gods, which are yet no gods? but My people hath: changed their glory for that which doth not profit. Be astonished O ye, heavens, at this, and be horribly afraid; be ye very desolate, saith the Lord.”—Wardlaw.

ILLUSTRATIONS TO CHAPTER 1

Rom_1:22. The fate of a boaster.—Simon Tournay affords a memorable and affecting proof of the truth of that scripture. “Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools.” In 1201, after he had excelled all Oxford in learning, and had become so eminent at Paris as to be made chief doctor of the Sorbonne, he was so puffed up with foolish pride as to hold Aristotle superior to Moses and Christ, and yet but equal to himself. In his latter days, however, he grew such an idiot as not to know one letter in a book, or to remember one thing he had ever done.

Rom_1:24. The Goddess of Reason.—In the Paris papers of August 1st, 1817, we find among the obituaries the following announcement: “Died, within these few days, in the hospital of pauper lunatics of Salpêtrière, where she had lived unpitied and unknown for many years, the famous Theroigne de Mericourt (the Goddess of Reason), the most remarkable of the heroines of the Revolution.” This female (nearly in a state of nudity) was seated on a throne by Fouché and Carnot in the Champ de Mars, and hailed alternately as the Goddess of Reason and Liberty. There was something remarkable in the history of the latter days of this poor creature, and her life is not without its moral. She who was taught publicly to blaspheme her Creator and dishonour her sex was for the last twenty years of her miserable life subject to the greatest of human calamities—the deprivation of her reason. She repented severely of her horrible crimes, and her few lucid intervals were filled up by the most heartrending lamentations. She died at the age of fifty-seven.

The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.

The result of deliberate folly:

v. 22. Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

v. 23. and changed the glory of the uncorruptible God in to an image made like to corruptible man, and to birds, and four-footed beasts, and creeping things.

v. 24. Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness through the lusts of their own hearts to dishonor their own bodies between themselves;

v. 25. who changed the truth of God into a lie, and worshiped and served the creature more than the Creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.

Here the result of ignoring God and of deliberately setting aside the guidance of the natural knowledge of God is shown. When men claimed, asserted, boasted their own wisdom, 1Co 1:22, they became fools, they were stultified in intellect. The true wisdom, which comes down from above, is ever humble, but where the divine truth is missing, human philosophy with its boastful attitude makes its appearance. And so the final result of the vanity of their mind, of the darkness and foolishness of their intellect, was that men have exchanged the glory of the immortal God for the semblance of the picture of mortal man. The semblance which was chosen in the place of God was the picture of some man or of some animals, either birds or four-footed beasts or reptiles. Such an idol was to be a representation of the Godhead, Isa 44:12-19; Psa 115:4-8; Psa 135:15-18. History gives many examples; for the idols of the Greeks and Romans, also of the ancient Germans were statues in the form of men; the eagle of Jupiter and the ibis and hawk of the Egyptians were sacred birds; the white ox of the Egyptians, the golden calf of the Israelites, goats and monkeys in other nations, were four-footed idols; and among the reptiles were the crocodile and various serpents, all of which were given divine honor. Such were and are the manifestations of the false religions of men when they turn from the true God. In the foolishness of their unnatural idolatry they pervert the original order of God. "Man, made in the image of God, now makes God in his own image; and the master of the animal kingdom has so far forgotten his dignity as to worship the pictures of animals which should be subject to him."

The result of this idolatry is a loss of all true morality as well, a fact which God permitted as a well-deserved punishment. Therefore, because of their godlessness and idolatry, God has delivered the idolaters into uncleanness. It is a divine punishment and destiny; God punishes sin with sin. In the lusts of their hearts, in the condition in which they were in consequence of their godless, irreligious conduct, which they delighted in, God has given them over to uncleanness. The sinful lusts and desires of the heart were the people’s own doing, and the dishonoring practices which followed were God’s punishment. When a person refuses to heed the warnings of God in nature and conscience, then these warnings are finally withdrawn, the unrighteous person is abandoned to the gratification of his desires and lusts, to every form of uncleanness and immorality, just as a physician may finally leave an untractable patient to his own devices. And so the uncleanness of the idolaters results in gross transgressions of the Sixth Commandment, that their bodies are dishonored in themselves. Through all immoral vices the bodies of men are shamefully treated; uncleanness takes away all the honor which the body of man possesses as a creature of God, 1Co 6:18.

The apostle now emphasizes once more that the motive which prompted God to this punishment lay in the transgressors themselves. It is carried out in the case of all those that changed the truth of God, the true worship of God, the true God Himself, into a lie, into idolatry and idolatrous practices. Men have exchanged the true living God for idols, to whom they falsely attach the name gods. And the creature they have thus honored and served in place of the Creator, in preference to the true God, to whom alone all blessing and honor is due, as Paul emphasizes by the conclusion with the Hebrew Amen. This same emphatic belief and confession must live in the Christians of all times: there is only one true God, He who has revealed Himself in His Word for the salvation of mankind.

Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom 1:22. φάσκοντες, professing.—ἐμωράνθησαν) The LXX., Jer 10:14, etc., ἐμωράνθη πᾶς ἄνθρωπος ἀπὸ γνώσεως—ψευδῆ ἐχώνευσαν—μάταιά ἐστιν, ἔργα ἐμπεπαιγμένα, (every man is a fool in his knowledge.—Their molten images are falsehoods, they are vain and deceitful works). Throughout this epistle Paul alludes to the last chapters of Isaiah, and to the first of Jeremiah, from which it appears, that this holy man of God was at that time fresh from the reading of them.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom_1:22-23. In a false conceit of wisdom (comp 1Co_1:17 ff.) this took place (viz. what has just been announced in ἘΜΑΤΑΙΏΘΗΣΑΝ.… ΚΑΡΔΊΑ), and what a horrible actual result it had!

The construction is independent, no longer hanging on the διότι in Rom_1:21 (Glöckler, Ewald); the further course of the matter if described. While they said that they were wise (comp 1Co_3:21) they became foolish. Comp Jer_10:24 f. This becoming foolish must be understood as something self-incurredproduced through the conceit of independenceas is required by the description of Gods retribution on them in Rom_1:24; therefore the dirigente Deo, which Grotius understands along with it in accordance with 1Co_1:21, is here foreign to the connection. The explanation of Köllner, Baumgarten-Crusius, and others, including Usteri: they have shown themselves as fools, is erroneous, because the aorist passive in Rom_1:21 does not admit of a similar rendering.

For examples of φάσκειν, dictitare, in the sense of unfounded assertion (Act_24:9; Act_25:19; Rev_2:2), see Raphel, Xenoph. and Kypke. Comp Dem. Phil. i. 46, iii. 9; Herodian, iii. 12, 9. Their pretended wisdom was a μάταιος δοξοσοφία, Plat. Soph. p. 231 B. We may add that this definition is not aimed at the Gentile philosophers, who came much later and in fact did not do what is declared in Rom_1:23 (comp Calvin), but generally at the conceit of wisdom (1Co_1:21), which is necessarily connected with an estrangement from divine truth, and from which therefore idolatry also, with its manifold self-invented shapes, must have proceeded. For heathenism is not the primeval religion, from which man might gradually have risen to the knowledge of the true God, but is, on the contrary, the result of a falling away from the known original revelation of the true God in His works. Instead of the practical recognition and preservation of the truth thus given comes the self-wisdom rendering them foolish, and idolatry in its train.

καὶ ἤλλαξ. Κ.Τ.Λ[475]] and they exchanged the majesty of the imperishable God for a likeness of an image of a perishable man, etc., i.e. instead of making, as they ought to have done, the glory of the eternal God manifested to them in the revelation of natureכְּבוֹד יְהֹוָה, i.e. His glorious perfection (Rom_1:20)the object of their adoration, they chose for that purpose what was shaped like an image of a perishable man, etc.; comp Psa_106:20; Jer_2:11. The ἐν (comp Sir_7:18) is instrumental, as is elsewhere the simple dative (Herod vii. 152; Soph. Niob. fr. 400, Dind.): thereby, that they made and adored such an ὁμοίωμα, and on the other hand rejected the glory of God, which they ought to have worshipped. Comp LXX. Ps. l.c[479]; ἠλλάξαντο τὴν δόξαν αὐτῶν ἐν ὁμοιώματι μόσχου. On the genitive εἰκόνος comp also 1Ma_3:48; Rev_9:7; and on ὁμοίωμα itself in the sense of likeness, Rom_5:14, Rom_6:5, Rom_8:3; Php_2:7; Sir_38:28; 2Ki_16:10; Isa_40:18; 1Sa_6:5; Plat. Phaedr. p. 250 A; Parm. p. 132 D. It is not mere similarity, but conformity with the object of comparison concerned as agreeing therewith in appearance; see also Holsten, z. Ev. des Paul. u. Petr. p. 440; Pfleiderer in Hilgenfelds Zeitschr. p. 523 f.

καὶ πετειν. κ. τετραπ. κ. ἑρπ.] No doubt as Paul, in using ἀνθρώπου, thought of the forms of the Hellenic gods, so. in πετειν. κ.τ.λ[481] he had in his mind the Egyptian worship of animals (Ibis, Apis, serpents). Philo, Leg. a[482]. Caj. p. 566, 570. For passages from profane authors respecting the folly (at which the φθαρτοῦ here also points) of image-worship, see especially Dougtaeus, Anal. 69, p. 102, Grotius and Wetstein. We may add that, like the previous φθαρτοῦ ἀνθρώπου, the genitives ΠΕΤΕΙΝῶΝ Κ.Τ.Λ[483] are dependent on εἰκόνος, not on ὁμοιώματι (van Hengel), which is less natural and not required by the singular εἰκόνος, that in fact refers to each particular instance in which a man, birds, etc. were copied for purposes of divine adoration by means of statues and other representations.

[475] .τ.λ. καὶ τὰ λοιπά.

[479] .c. loco citato or laudato.

[481] .τ.λ. καὶ τὰ λοιπά.

[482] d refers to the note of the commentator or editor named on the particular passage.

[483] .τ.λ. καὶ τὰ λοιπά.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

22. φάσκοντες εἶν. σοφ.] Not, ‘because they professed themselves wise,’ but while they professed themselves wise—professing themselves to be wise. The words relate perhaps not so much to the schools of philosophy, as to the assumption of wisdom by the Greeks in general, see 1Co 1:22, of which assumption their philosophers were indeed eminent, but not the only examples.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Rom_1:22

Professing themselves to be wise Φάσκοντες εἶναι σοφοί, (for σοφούς, by attraction). Saying in the sense of pretending to be. The more they boasted of their wisdom, the more conspicuous became their folly. What greater folly can there be, than to worship beasts rather than God? To this the apostle refers in the next verse.

Charles Hodge — Commentary on Romans (1835), First Corinthians (1857), and Ephesians (1856) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Or thought themselves.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

Professing themselves--"boasting," or "pretending to be"

wise, they became fools--"It is the invariable property of error in morals and religion, that men take credit to themselves for it and extol it as wisdom. So the heathen" (Co1 1:21) [THOLUCK].

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 22. Professing themselves to be wise] This is most strikingly true of all the ancient philosophers, whether Greeks or Romans, as their works, which remain, sufficiently testify. The word φασκοντες signifies not merely the professing but the assumption of the philosophic character. In this sense the word φασκειν is used by the best Greek writers. See Kypke. A dispassionate examination of the doctrine and lives of the most famed philosophers of antiquity, of every nation, will show that they were darkened in their mind and irregular in their conduct. It was from the Christian religion alone that true philosophy and genuine philosophers sprang.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

22. While they were thinking, etc. It is commonly inferred from this passage, that Paul alludes here to those philosophers, who assumed to themselves in a peculiar manner the reputation of wisdom; and it is thought that the design of his discourse is to show, that when the superiority of the great is brought down to nothing, the common people would have no reason to suppose that they had any thing worthy of being commended: but they seem to me to have been guided by too slender a reason; for it was not peculiar to the philosophers to suppose themselves wise in the knowledge of God, but it was equally common to all nations, and to all ranks of men. There were indeed none who sought not to form some ideas of the majesty of God, and to make him such a God as they could conceive him to be according to their own reason. This presumption I hold is not learned in the schools, but is innate, and comes with us, so to speak, from the womb. It is indeed evident, that it is an evil which has prevailed in all ages — that men have allowed themselves every liberty in coining superstitions. The arrogance then which is condemned here is this — that men sought to be of themselves wise, and to draw God down to a level with their own low condition, when they ought humbly to have given him his own glory. For Paul holds this principle, that none, except through their own fault, are unacquainted with the worship due to God; as though he said, “As they have proudly exalted themselves, they have become infatuated through the righteous judgment of God.” There is an obvious reason, which contravenes the interpretation which I reject; for the error of forming an image of God did not originate with the philosophers; but they, by their consent, approved of it as received from others.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(22) They became fools.—They were made fools. It is not merely that they expose their real folly, but that folly is itself judicially inflicted by God as a punishment for the first step of declension from Him.

(22, 23) Relying upon their own wisdom, they wandered further and further from true wisdom, falling into the contradiction of supposing that the eternal and immutable Essence of God could be represented by the perishable figures of man, or bird, or quadruped, or insect.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

22. Professing themselves to be wise, &c.] A severe but just description of speculation, primitive or modern, which ignores Revelation where Revelation has spoken. St Paul does not mean that in such speculations no intellectual power was exerted; surpassing power often was, and is, displayed in them. But the premisses of the reasoners, and their moral attitude, in view of the real state of the case, were fatally wrong. In the very act of “professing to be” competently “wise” they proved themselves “fools,” and further proved it by palpable acts, as follows.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Professing themselves to be wise,.... The learned men among the Gentiles first called themselves "Sophi", wise men: and afterwards, to cover their wretched pride and vanity, "Philosophers", lovers of wisdom; but notwithstanding all their arrogance, their large pretensions to wisdom, and boast of it

they became fools; they appeared to be so; they showed themselves to be such in those very things they prided themselves with the knowledge of: as, for instance, Socrates, after he had asserted the unity of God, and is said to die a martyr for the truth; yet one of the last actions of his life was sacrificing a cock to Aesculapius, at least he desired his friend Crito to do it.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

22 Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools,

Ver. 22. Professing themselves to be wise] Aristotle, nature’s chief secretary, writeth many things most absurdly concerning God; as, that he is a living creature, that he worketh not freely, but by a kind of servile necessity; and that therefore he deserveth no praise or thanks from men for his many benefits, since he doth but what he must needs do. These are Aristotle’s absurd assertions. And yet at Stuckard in Germany was found a doctor of divinity that preached to the people, that the Church might be sufficiently well taught and governed by Aristotle’s ethics, though we had no Bible. And the Collen divines set forth a book, concerning Aristotle’s salvation, and called him Christ’s forerunner in naturals, as John Baptist had been in supernaturals. But what saith St Paul, 1Co 2:14; "The natural man receiveth not," &c. Gr. ψυχικος, the souly man, that doth excolere animam, improve of the mind, such as Aristotle, Cicero, &c., who the wiser they were, the vainer they were, and the further from God and his kingdom; their learning hung in their light, and served but to light them into utter darkness. {a}

{a} Quanto doctiores tanto nequiores, ut Syri venales apud Ciceronem. Athenaeus brings Plato bewailing his fond love to a filthy harlot.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Some think, that all along this context the apostle hath reference to the Gnostics, a sort of heretics in the first age, (of which see Dr. Hammond in locum), and that the meaning of the words is this, That they, assuming the title of Gnostics, of knowing men, and of men wiser than others, have proved more sottish than any. Others think the words refer to the heathen philosophers, who though they were learned and wise in secular and natural things, yet they became fools in spiritual and heavenly matters; though they well understood the creature, yet they erred concerning the Creator. And as fools delight in toys, neglecting things of great value; so they set up puppets and idols of their own devising, in the room of the true God; which the apostle gives us in the next verse, as a demonstration of their folly. Socrates, who was accounted one of the wisest amongst them, desired his friends, when he was about to die, to offer for him a cock to Aesculapius, which he had vowed.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

22. Wise—In discarding the primitive belief in God the first proud pretenders claimed credit for great worldly wisdom.

Fools—As the idolatrous and depraving results showed. When the Psalmist said, The fool saith in his heart there is no God, we have the same profession of superiority over the poor pietists who worship the Creator, and the same fact of the being a fool.

And precisely as this proud destitution of the religious sentiment grows, either atheism or idol-worship is asserted. In our own day it is affirmed by some would-be philosophers that even a religion may exist in the mind of an atheist; and others claim that the being an atheist is no depreciation of a man’s moral worth. Doubtless a man can exist with a purpose of obeying the law of right who does not positively believe in the existence of God. Yet, as before said, the non-acknowledgment of God is not merely an intellectual defect, but a moral delinquency in itself. It renders prayer and communion with the Holy One impossible; it destroys all view of a divine moral government, all trust in the rule of an omnipotent reason, all firm hope of an immortality and retribution beyond the grave. The spiritual and religious sentiments and emotions are lost, and the moral sentiments and purposes fed and sustained by these become withered and dead. Theories of sensualism, animalism, and base development succeed, and though a few philosophers may act the part of sages, statesmen, or philanthropists, yet the masses will plunge into lawlessness and bestiality. Thus professing to be wise, even the philosophic few will be found to be false philanthropists and fools.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Vers. 22, 23. Professing themselves to be wise, they Became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into the similitude (literally, in similitude; cf. Psa_106:20, whence idea and words are taken) of an image of corruptible man, and of birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things. The expression, gnontev ton , refers to what has been said of to gnwsto , having been "manifest in them." It implies actual knowledge, not mere capacity of knowledge. Mankind is regarded as having lost a truer perception of God once possessed, idolatry being a sign of culpable degradation of the human race not, as some would have us now believe, a stage in man"s emergence from brutality. Scripture ever represents the human race as having fallen and become degraded; not as having risen gradually to any intelligent conceptions of God at all. And it may well be asked whether modern anthropological science has really discovered anything to discredit the scriptural view of the original condition and capacity of man. The view here presented is that obfuscation of the understanding (sunesiv) ensued from refusal to glorify and give thanks to known Deity. Gratias assere debemns ob beneficia; glorificare ob ipsas virtutes divinas" (Bengel). Hence came mataiothv , a word, with its correlatives, constantly used with reference to idolatry; cf. Act_14:15 1Co_3:20 Eph_4:17 1Pe_1:18; also in the Old Testament, 1Ki_16:26 (en toiv mataioiv eporeuautwn , LXX), 2Ki_17:15 (yhsan opisw twn martaiwn , LXX); Jer_2:5 Jon_2:8 (fulassamenoi mataia kai qeudh). Two forms of idolatry both involving unworthy conceptions of the Divine Being are alluded to, suggested, we may suppose, by the anthropomorphism of the Greeks and the creature-worship of Egypt, which were the two notable and representative developments of heathen religion. The expression, faskontev einai sofoi , with the previous en toiv dialogismaoiv , have led some to suppose in this whole passage a special reference to the schools of philosophy. But this is not so. The degradation spoken of was long anterior to them, nor is this charge, as formulated, applicable to them. The idea is, generally, that boasted human intellect has not preserved men from folly; not even "the wisdom of the Egyptians," or the intellectual culture of the Greeks. (cf. 1Co_1:19, etc.; 1Co_3:19, etc.)

Vers. 22-25. Downward evolution.

No charge more acutely stings a man than that of being considered senseless; he would rather be deemed a knave than a fool. The apostle shows that man, whom God created upright that he might behold God and heavenly things, has continually gazed at the earth, and become prone like the beasts. Thus bending, he has wrapped his soul in shadow, and his religion, instead of a blessing, has proved a curse.

I THE WORSHIP OF IMAGES ORIGINATES IN A NATURAL CRAVING FOR A SENSIBLE EMBODIMENT OF DEITY. Abstract ideas have little charm or power for men, and the worship of force or humanity can never attract the multitudes. The yearning for a visible God was answered in the Shechinah, and in the many appearances of the angel of Jehovah, and has received fullest recognition in the manifestation of God in Christ. The spirituality of Divine worship was to be preserved in Israel by the commandment not to rear graven images, and the ascension of Christ to heaven, withdrawing the Saviour from mortal eyes, is likewise intended to protect Christianity from the dangers liable to a system whose votaries should "walk by sight" rather than by faith. The Scriptures and universal history demonstrate the rapidity with which, as in the Roman Catholic Church to-day, men"s homage and devotion are transferred from the Being represented, to the statue or figure which at first stood innocently enough as his symbol. There is a danger of modern literature seeking too much "to know Christ after the flesh," instead of relying upon the assistance furnished by the teaching of the Spirit, the invisible Christ dwelling in the heart.

II THE TENDENCY OF IMAGE-WORSHIP IS TO DEGRADE RELIGION. The argument of Xenophanes, ridiculing the Homeric theology that if sheep and oxen were to picture a god, they would imagine him like one of themselves, only showed that natural religion, in framing a notion of Deity, rightly attributes to him the highest attributes of personality and intelligence conceivable. And the Apostle Paul accused the Athenians of unreasonableness in fancying that the great Father could be supposed to be less powerful and intelligent than his children. But without supernatural aid man sinks lower and lower in his conceptions; the direction of evolution in religion is downward, not upward, except where there is a manifest interposition of the Supreme Being. Note how strenuously the prophets had to combat the desire of Israel to ally themselves in worship with the abominable idolatries of the nations around. Man, selected as God"s representative, becomes man in his lowest moods and merely animal existence; the transition is easy to the wise-looking owl and soaring eagle, then to the cow and the dog, and finally to the serpent and the fish. The unity of God is lost in the multiplicity of idols, and his power and righteousness swamped in bestial stupidity and depravity. Religious rites became scenes of licentiousness. "The light that was in men has turned to darkness, and how great is that darkness!

III THE WORSHIPPER GRADUALLY ASSIMILATES HIMSELF TO THE OBJECT WORSHIPPED. Man does not rise higher in thought and life than the Deity before whom he bows and to whom he submits himself; but he may, and too generally does, adopt the worst features of the character and conduct of his gods. What we constantly meditate upon transforms us into its own lineaments. Where the lower animals are deified, there the passions of the brutes are rampant, and a merely animal existence is lived. The lie substituted for the truth shunts man"s behaviour on to another line, and a descending plane lands him in moral ruin. "They that make the gods are like unto them; so is every one that trusteth in them." The revelation God gives of himself in his Word operates reversely on a similar principle, so that "we beholding as in a glass the true glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image;" and, the image of God in man being restored, the likeness to God to which we are made to attain grows unto perfection, till "we shall be like him, when we shall see him as he is. S.R.A.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The next sin which the apostle charges upon the Gentiles, is the sin of idolatry. Such as professed themselves to be the most wise and knowing men among them, as their celebrated philosophers, poets, and orators, they debased and dishonoured the all-glorious God, by framing vile images of men and beasts, of birds and creeping things, to represent him by. These idolaters changed the glory of the living, ever-living God, into the likeness of lifeless things; whereas the Lord is so infinitely glorious, that nothing can set forth his glory sufficiently; the most excellent creature cannot represent his super-excellent perfections; and accordingly, it is as an angel, as by a worm or a fly. All attempted representations of God by any creature whatsoever, are idolatrous provocations.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

22. “Saying that they were wise they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into the likeness of corruptible man, birds, quadrupeds and creeping things.” The Greeks worshipped gods in human form, and the Egyptians in the form of many animals; the former reached idolatry and the latter brutality.

William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Professing themselves to be wise, they became fools ,

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

22. Became fools. The Greeks and Roman heathen boasted of their wisdom and held the rest of the world in contempt, but at the same time their idolatry showed their utter folly.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

They claimed to be wise, but they became foolish

"While they were claiming that they were wise, they became foolish"

They ... they

the people in Romans 1:18

exchanged the glory of the imperishable God

"traded the truth that God is glorious and will never die" or "stopped believing that God is glorious and will never die"

for the likenesses of an image of

"and instead chose to worship idols that looked like"

perishable man

"some human being that will die"

of birds, of four-footed beasts, and of creeping things

"or that looked like birds, four-footed beasts, or creeping things"

translationWords

wise

fool

glory

like

image

perish

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

22. φάσκοντες The asyndeton shows that this is an explanation of the preceding sentence. φ. of false allegations, Act 24:9; Act 25:19 and here only.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

22. φάσκοντες εἶναι σοφοὶ ἐμωράνδησαν· 12:24. καὶ γὰρ τῶν πλάνης ὁδῶν μακρότερον ἐπλανήθησαν θεοὺς ὑπολαμβάνοντες τὰ καὶ ἐν ζῴοις τῶν ἐχθρῶν ἄτιμα, νηπίων δίκην ἀφρόνων ψευσθέντες.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Vv. 22, 23. “Professing to be wise, they became fools, and changed the glory of the incorruptible God into the likeness of the image of corruptible man, and of birds, and fourfooted beasts, and creeping things.” Futility of thought has reached the character of folly. What, in fact, is Polytheism, except a sort of permanent hallucination, a collective delirium, or as is so well said by M. Nicolas, a possession on a great scale? And this mental disorder rose to a kind of perfection among the very peoples who, more than others, laid claim to the glory of wisdom. When he says: professing to be wise, Paul does not mean to stigmatize ancient philosophy absolutely; he only means that all that labor of the sages did not prevent the most civilized nations, Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, from being at the same time the most idolatrous of antiquity. The popular imagination, agreeably served by priests and poets, did not allow the efforts of the wise to dissipate this delirium.

When good is omitted, there always comes in its place an evil committed. As, in respect of the understanding, the refusal of adoration (they did not glorify) became a vain laboring of the mind (they became vain), and, finally, complete estrangement from truth, folly (they became fools); so in respect of the heart, ingratitude was first transformed into darkness; and, finally—such is the last term described Rom 1:23 -into monstrous and debasing fetishism. The ungrateful heart did not stop short at not thanking God, it degraded and dishonored Him, by changing Him into His opposite.

The glory of God is the splendor which His manifested perfections cast into the heart of His intelligent creatures; hence, a bright image which is to man the ideal of all that is good. This image had been produced within them. What did they make of it? The sequel tells. While holding the divine person, they wrapped it up, as it were, in the likeness of its opposite; it would have been almost better to leave it in silence, it would not have been so great an affront. The preposition ἐν (which corresponds here to the Hebrew א) exactly describes this imprisonment of the divine glory in a form ignoble and grotesque. This meaning seems to us preferable to that of commentators who, like Meyer, translate ἐν, by, which is less natural with a verb such as change. It is simpler to say “change into,” than “change by.” The epithet incorruptible is, as it were, a protest beforehand against this degradation; we need not then translate, with Oltramare, immortal. Paul means to say that the glory of God is not reached by this treatment which it has had to undergo. In the phrase: the likeness of the image, we should certainly apply the first term to the material likeness, and the second to the image present to the artist’s mind when he conceives the type of God which he is going to represent. The worship of man especially characterizes Greek and Roman Polytheism; that of the different classes of animals, Egyptian and Barbarian paganism. We need only refer to the worship of the bull Apis, the ibis, the cat, the crocodile, etc., among the Egyptians.

Thus idolatry, according to Paul, is not a progressive stage reached in the religious thought of mankind, starting from primeval fetichism. Far from being a first step toward the goal of Monotheism, Polytheism is on the contrary the result of degeneracy, an apostasy from the original Monotheism, a darkening of the understanding and heart, which has terminated in the grossest fetichism. The history of religions, thoroughly studied as it is nowadays, fully justifies Paul’s view. It shows that the present heathen peoples of India and Africa, far from rising of themselves to a higher religious state, have only sunk, age after age, and become more and more degraded. It proves that at the root of all pagan religions and mythologies, there lies an original Monotheism, which is the historical starting-point in religion for all mankind.

This statement of the apostle has been regarded as a reflection of that contained in the Book of Wisdom (comp. for example, the passages, Wis 13:1-8; Wis 14:11-20). But what a difference between the tame and superficial explanation of idolatry, which the Alexandrian author gives to his readers, and the profound psychological analysis contained in the preceding verses of St. Paul! The comparison brings out exactly the difference between the penetration of the author enlightened from above, and that of the ordinary Jew seeking to reconstruct the great historic fact of idolatry by his own powers.

The apostle has developed the two terms of Rom 1:18 : truth, and repressing the truth. After thus presenting, on the one hand, the divine revelation, and, on the other, the sin of man in quenching it, it remains to him only to expound the third idea of his text: the terrible manifestation of God’s wrath on that sin, in which the whole of human impiety was concentrated.

Frédéric Louis Godet — Commentaries on Luke, John, Romans, and 1 Corinthians — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1870s–1890s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.