Romains 1:24,25

Wherefore God also gave them up to uncleanness.

The consequences of the Divine abandonment

You have merely to loose the connection, and the trucks by their own weight rush down the incline, and dash themselves to a thousand pieces. A physician has merely to retire when his orders have been repeatedly disregarded, to deliver his refractory patient over in his disease to protracted suffering and possibly to a premature grave. In like manner, if God judicially delivers over men who wilfully reject Him to their lusts, they will sink into the lowest depths of degradation, and come to everlasting destruction. (C. Neil, M. A.)

The Divine penalty attached to sin

Here Paul expresses the feeling of indignation raised in his heart by the thought and view of the treatment of God by the creation to whom He had revealed Himself so magnificently. There is something here of that “exasperation of heart” (Actes 17:16), felt at Athens. This feeling is expressed forcibly by the conjunctions, διὸ, “on account of which,” i.e., of the sin just described, referring to the justice of the punishment in general. Καί, “also,” brings out more especially the relation of congruity between the nature of the punishment and that of the offence. They sinned, “wherefore” God punished them; they sinned by degrading God, wherefore also God degraded them. The word “gave over” does not signify that God impelled them to evil, to punish the evil committed. The holiness of God is opposed to such a sense, and to give over is not to impel. On the other hand it is impossible to stop short at the idea of a simple permission. God was not purely passive in the terrible development of Gentile corruption. Wherein did His action consist? He positively withdrew His hand; He ceased to hold the boat as it was dragged by the current of the river. This is the meaning of the apostle in Actes 14:16. It is not a simple abstention, but the positive withdrawal of a force. Such is the meaning of Genèse 6:3. As Meyer says, “The law of history, in virtue of which the forsaking of God is followed by a parallel growth of immorality, is not a purely natural order of things; the power of God is active in the execution of this law.” If it is asked how such a mode of action harmonises with the moral perfection of God, the answer undoubtedly is that when man has reached a certain degree of corruption he can only be cured by the excess of his own corruption; it is the only means left of producing what all preceding appeals and punishments failed to effect, the salutary action of repentance. So it is that at a given moment the father of the prodigal lets him go, even giving him his share of goods. The monstrous character of the excesses about to be described confirms this view. The two prepositions ἐν, “through,” and εἰς, “to,” differ from one another as the current which bears the bark along, once it has been detached from the shore, differs from the abyss into which it is about to be plunged. Lusts exist in the heart; God abandons it to their power, and the legions that fall which must end in the most degrading impurities. “You have dishonoured Me; I give you up that you may dishonour your own selves.” (Prof. Godet.)