There is great force and beauty in the title addressed by faith to God at a time when nothing but faith could have counted upon His interest in, and care for, men who had made but too manifest their. stubbornness and self-will. And we do well to remember that He is “the God of the spirits of all flesh” (see Num. 16:2222And they fell upon their faces, and said, O God, the God of the spirits of all flesh, shall one man sin, and wilt thou be wroth with all the congregation? (Numbers 16:22)), and is never indifferent to that which His power has formed.
He is true to this character, and nowhere is His care for the creatures of His hand more conspicuous than in the wonderful provision which He has made for all the difficulties which man has wrought for himself in seeking to understand his own and God's relation to this scene, and to the evil which is undeniably in it. Man has sought ever to understand these things from his own point of view, and, but too ready to make himself the measure of everything which he strives to understand, has been led into many a devious path of speculation and skepticism and infidelity, even from the first day in which it was possible for mind to work and pursue its own way, regardless of God. But God has, in gracious and perfect wisdom, provided beforehand the solution of all and the key to all difficulties of the sincere, by giving His own mind or that which is the blessed outcome of it. The simple soul bows to His wisdom, receiving submissively what He communicates, and is blessed and helped and delivered, while the proud are left to the darkness and uncertainty of their own thoughts; for nothing is so foolish as pride, and the pride of mind is the most deceitful and deadly, as it is the most blinding, of all forms of folly.
While we might, on the one hand, trace these thoughts and efforts of man's mind—efforts to find light by the examination of his own being, or of the material creation generally, efforts to postulate God from his own conceptions of what should be, efforts to scan the past or pierce the future by such light as he could gather, efforts which have unceasingly troubled the sea of human life, and in the end left man to feel that, in spite of himself, he is surrounded by the unknown, and trembles at every turn on the brink of depths that he cannot fathom: while the history of these workings of the human mind, which have perplexed souls innumerable, is within reach, yet it can but show us man's side of the picture, and that is not the bright side, however unpalatable it may be to have to own it. God's side is far otherwise. He has not been indifferent to all, or to anything, that has disturbed man and indeed man's helpless wanderings in his foolish endeavor to “find out God” are enough in themselves to call out the compassion and the sorrow of the renewed heart, which itself, even when acting in its energy without hindrance, is but a reflex of God; but He abides in the calmness and beauty of His own light, which makes all manifest, and He blesses and guides with it those who truly turn to Him, and own Him, as for themselves, the source of wisdom. It is from this point of view that I would look for a little at the responsibility of man, as knowing about it but the teaching of God's word by the Spirit, and fully owning that this alone contains true wisdom.
Before taking up our subject, however, we must notice one little word which God has given—and it is like the words of God—to illumine, as if by; a single ray, the entire field which we are to traverse, instructing us divinely as to the true character of the scene in which man is found. By comparing Gen. 1:3-5, 14-193And God said, Let there be light: and there was light. 4And God saw the light, that it was good: and God divided the light from the darkness. 5And God called the light Day, and the darkness he called Night. And the evening and the morning were the first day. (Genesis 1:3‑5)
14And God said, Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven to divide the day from the night; and let them be for signs, and for seasons, and for days, and years: 15And let them be for lights in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth: and it was so. 16And God made two great lights; the greater light to rule the day, and the lesser light to rule the night: he made the stars also. 17And God set them in the firmament of the heaven to give light upon the earth, 18And to rule over the day and over the night, and to divide the light from the darkness: and God saw that it was good. 19And the evening and the morning were the fourth day. (Genesis 1:14‑19) (which is the account, not of the creation of light, but of the establishment of its place and functions in relation to this world, as then ordered) with Rev. 21:1, 5, 23; 22:51And I saw a new heaven and a new earth: for the first heaven and the first earth were passed away; and there was no more sea. (Revelation 21:1)
5And he that sat upon the throne said, Behold, I make all things new. And he said unto me, Write: for these words are true and faithful. (Revelation 21:5)
23And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof. (Revelation 21:23)
5And there shall be no night there; and they need no candle, neither light of the sun; for the Lord God giveth them light: and they shall reign for ever and ever. (Revelation 22:5), we see at a glance that it was quite within God's power to have ordained that there should be uninterrupted day in this world, instead of night and day, and the question arises, why did He allow, the presence of darkness while putting a division between it and the light? Simply to show that the scene was to be established in moral responsibility before Him—He did not banish the darkness entirely by His power. Evil was, and He permitted it to have a certain relation to this scene and to His creatures, so as to test man, and thus fairly establish the principle, of human responsibility. This principle continues until evil is finally removed; and when applied to Christians, the claim upon them is that they should act like God, and not mingle light and darkness (2 Cor. 7; Eph. 5); that they should recognize the darkness—the evil—and be apart from it in holiness, that is, in the power of good, which is superior to it and is possessed by them, for thus is God separate. Because He is omniscient and holy, evil must always have a certain relation to Him, but He may totally exclude it from the scene of His power. By-and-by, when His dealings in grace on account of evil have been frilly made manifest, He will eternally banish it, but not the knowledge of it, from the scene which is then established in grace, not responsibility, on the everlasting and immutable foundation of the work of Christ; for we know that in the “new heavens and the new earth” righteousness will dwell, and we, while conscious of the existence of evil, will be maintained eternally in holiness.
Thus we learn that what was done in “creation” was entirely with a view to a certain condition of the world, and man upon it, and therefore that anything in its economy had, and has, a relative character. We may say, conversely to Rev. 21:2323And the city had no need of the sun, neither of the moon, to shine in it: for the glory of God did lighten it, and the Lamb is the light thereof. (Revelation 21:23), that then there was “need of the sun and of the moon to shine,” and it was with respect to this state of need of such things that God ordained them, He having been pleased, in His sovereign power, to allow such a state to have existence. All that we know as men, and are surrounded by, is thus relative, and the only way in which we can know anything absolutely, or even in its relation to another and a different condition, even if that be not a final one, is by its being revealed to us. We must see and own this, however, as that is the first Step towards receiving the truth of God's revelation, and, if we refuse to do so, there is no hope that we ever will understand.
These considerations are of importance, because we constantly find men reasoning from the phenomena, experiences, and analogies furnished by the present system, and their life in it, as if these were final and conclusive. At the very least the leaving room for the possibility of another and a different condition would considerably modify both the conclusions and the processed by which they have been reached.
One other consideration of a general character demands notice before we pass on, and that is, the relation which responsibility bears to death. Many bold statements are current, the object of which is to teach (I cannot say to prove) that the death of men is merely an orderly and necessary step in the course of nature to which their bodies are subject. The fact that in other departments of nature, say, for instance, the vegetable kingdom, or even in the case of the animals, death appears as a necessary link in the chain of phenomena, is, it is argued, enough to show that this order of events was necessarily the arrangement for man also. But this is a grievous non sequitur.
The supposed geological proofs of the existence upon the earth of races of animals which had become extinct before man's appearance there, as showing that death existed among them prior to Gen. 3, do not trouble me. I am ready to admit that these animals may have lived and died, and it may have been intended that even those placed on earth when man was formed should be subject to the laws which obtain with regard to organic forms—such as plants, &c.—as we know them. But this proves nothing, as no moral question is raised by such death, neither plants nor animals being responsible beings. With man, however, it is far otherwise, as we shall see, and his death is the direct fruit of sin, as his failure in his responsibility. This condition of things, and the creation of the responsibility which is the groundwork of it all, began with Adam, and therefore the theory of previous races of “pre-Adamite man” is a mere idle fancy, unless it is held that they became extinct before Adam was formed, or that Adam was an independent creation. This would of course preserve his moral responsibility intact; but either is a thought very foreign to the theory to which I now refer, and consequently, as man's moral relationship to God cannot be denied (except by those who are willfully blind and debased), we must not hesitate to sacrifice the vision of men's minds to the truth.
2.-THE PRINCIPLE OF RESPONSIBILITY.
The basis of responsibility is moral relationship to God, and that man has been placed in such relationship (in contrast to the lower creation, which is “lower” indeed relatively to him just because it has not such relationship) will be denied by no one whose judgment we need to consider. Those who do deny it can reach a consistent position only by denying the existence of God, and we do not require to stop for such, because every test which can be applied to them but makes manifest the truth of scripture, that it is “the fool,” and the fool only, who “hath said in his heart, there is no God."
Every relationship (and I use the word in its broadest sense) of necessity carries with it responsibility. There exists, by virtue of the existence of the relationship, the moral obligation to fulfill its duties, whatever the extent of these, and whatever the character of the person who claims them may be. And the validity of the claim is in no way affected by loss of power in the responsible one to fulfill the duties; for were it otherwise there could not be a righteous basis for the execution of judgment, no matter what might be the extent of failure, or what the gravity of its results, because in reality loss of power is failure. To simplify this. I shall make use of an illustration which has already been used by another. We shall suppose that there is a man who owes another a thousand pounds—a common enough case—but unfortunately the debtor is a spendthrift, and has not a penny wherewith to meet the claim. He is, in fact, without power to pay but no one could for a moment say that he is not as much bound to pay as if he possessed the whole amount. The claim subsists, and therefore the responsibility also.
But as obligation flows from relationship, and it is plain that for the obligation to subsist the relationship which constitutes it must exist, so the possession of power at some one period is necessary for the creation of responsibility. The possession of the thousand pounds (to continue the illustration), or its equivalent, at one point, is plainly necessary to constitute the debt; this corresponds to the possession of the power to which I allude; and, moreover, the idea of one being set in a relationship, the duties of which he at the same time is incapable of performing, is manifestly self-destructive.
The fact is, relationship cannot exist where there is incapacity in the alleged responsible person to perform its duties. I do not mean acquired incapacity, but where be is in his nature such as to negative the claim, and therefore the possession of power is involved in the term relationship.
Thus a beast or a stone cannot be responsible for moral conduct, and neither is in the relationship to which responsibility attaches.
A beautiful illustration of these solemn principles is given us in the Lord's wonderful answer to Pilate's boast in John 19:10, 1110Then saith Pilate unto him, Speakest thou not unto me? knowest thou not that I have power to crucify thee, and have power to release thee? 11Jesus answered, Thou couldest have no power at all against me, except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin. (John 19:10‑11); and this answer is all the more complete and wonderful, because it sheds light on the subject after it has been complicated by the difficulties with which sin has surrounded it, and is not existing in its simple elements as in Adam's day.
We may be sure that, had any sinful man—had any one of us—been in His place, men would have had the record of a very different word. We should either have denied the divine origin of the power in which Pilate boasted, in order to press upon him, according to our thoughts, the consequences of its use, or have admitted it, in order to put him aside contemptuously in affected superiority; and thus would have said, either,” God never gave you the power to act thus;” or, “Thou couldest have no power at all against me except it were given thee from above, and therefore I have to do with God and have nothing to do with thee.” But His word was, “Thou couldest have no power at all against me except it were given thee from above: therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin.” In this perfectly wise answer responsibility is owned, though in the same breath with God's sovereignty, and yet each is perfectly in its place. It is as though He had said, God has allowed this—allowed them to have power, but they have used that power to have their own way, and it is manifest that it is their own way, and not God's, and so God marks the various steps in guilt.
There was far more active evil against the Lord in Judas than in Pilate, and so this led him, when God allowed them to act unrestrained, to deliver Him to Pilate. Pilate was, in one sense, only doing his duty in acting as a judge, condemning or releasing; but he was of course bound to act before God, and in subjection to Him in this. He very manifestly did the contrary, and hence his sin, which no doubt the Lord's word made his conscience aware of in some degree. Thus the possession of power as given of God, while it created responsibility, yet raised no question as to guilt; this was decided by the working of the will, which directed the use of the power, and thus the roots of the matter are brought to light.
All this is important enough as entering into the nature of even the most ordinary relations of human life, but its solemnity cannot be overrated as our relations with God rise before us; for it is these which first and most of all concern us, and moreover, all others have their true place only as these are rightly owned.
We have thus before us in this subject that which brings into view the reality of the soul's relation to God, and that which has to do with the setting of each man individually before God in his individuality, with God's claims, and with man's actions and thoughts. It is not calculated deeply to move or touch the heart—grace does this; but that is not less useful, because of its most solemn and searching appeals to conscience. And it has the weightiest of all reasons to urge for its consideration, because it is on the individual ground that the final issues will be manifested at the βῆμα of judgment. “For we must all be manifested before the judgment-seat of Christ, that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad,” “so then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.” (2 Cor. 5:1010For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad. (2 Corinthians 5:10); Rom. 14:1212So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God. (Romans 14:12).)
Now nothing is more important, and nothing contributes more moral vigor and reality to the soul, than the hearty acknowledgment of the force of this intense individuality. God seeks to lead men to it, in order that they may realize that each one has to do with Him, and so may have a clear and definite issue before their minds; but we can trace to feebleness in the apprehension of it, or to indifference to its truth, much of the perplexity in which souls are found. Men raise questions as to how God can deal with the heathen, or with people in particular circumstances, and do this really, though perhaps unconsciously, with the thought of finding a decent excuse for shirking what relates to themselves; but they are blind to the fact that even supposing they found a satisfactory solution to all such inquiries, yet this could not in any way settle for them the far more solemn matter of their own soul's relation to God. What possible shelter, then, can these questions, when unsettled, afford! Such thoughts are, I doubt not, ready tools in the hand of him who is far more subtle than man—the enemy of souls; but his tools are as various as the souls with whom he seeks to have to do, and so he can turn the feebleness in apprehending the importance of individuality before God to account in another way. This he does—for those who would escape from under its keen edge in the former way—by weakening the claim of God's word on the individual conscience by means of the interposition of some authority which is not God's (such as that of the church) between the soul and the word.
But all such miserable subterfuges of the enemy, and all such petty efforts of men, are blown to the winds when the soul faces the stern reality of dealing with God alone. Reader, you and I must meet God, and have to do with Him, individually about our deeds—aye, and about our sins—either here or hereafter. He cannot be put off forever. We may succeed in staving off the consideration of this truth for a time by demanding explanations about everybody's lot and portion but our own, and seek to escape, like the cattle-fish, in the darkness and obscurity produced by ourselves; but all this has an end; and were the whole body of these questions forever settled, to-morrow you would be no nearer a satisfactory conclusion for yourself, for there would yet remain the one to arrange between your soul and God. Forget not this.
Rome or “the church” may falsely claim that you cannot receive the word of God, or know it as His, or know what it says, being His word, unless you receive it through her hands, and with her explanations; but all this is proved to be a false claim by the very fact of your individual responsibility to God. For how could God hold men individually responsible to Him, giving His word to be the regulator and measure of that responsibility, unless that word were addressed to each one, and capable of being received and understood by each one? Mark well, I do not say that the word does not contain anything besides that which is addressed to man in his responsibility. It does contain very many things that are on another basis altogether, and these are surely of the reach of mere human intelligence. But even this admission is far from giving room for ecclesiastical claims even over these things, for we are distinctly told in 1 Cor. 2 that they are revealed to faith by the Spirit of God, who alone is competent to communicate either the things themselves or the understanding of them.
In considering the history and principle of responsibility, it is of the last importance that we rightly distinguish between the responsibility of man as natural man, the descendant merely of Adam, with what is addressed to that, and the application of the principle to any as occupying a new and special relationship to God, say as His children or His people. For, while it is true that the responsibility of man lies at the root of all the relations of God to man, yet we shall find it also the case that the principle enters both into all the special dealings of God by which He has marked the course, of man's history, and into all the relationships which He has ordered and established from time to time, and into which His people have been brought.
The mere rationalist is incapable, from his standpoint, of making or of seeing the force of these distinctions. He has but one standard, or measure, to which all things, mental, moral, or material must be brought, and that is man as known by him naturally. But whatever he does, or fails to do, we must not forget that the present condition of man, in which alone of course all human knowledge about him is gathered, is itself but a consequence of what is of incomparable gravity, namely, the introduction of sin into all his relations, because into his nature. And therefore it follows that any view of man which refuses due weight to this consideration of necessity introduces the element of confusion into any attempt to define his relations with God, and certainly does so into the attempt to understand or give a proper place to the principle of responsibility. We cannot wonder, though we may grieve, as we see the consequences of his position, that the rationalist is thus unable too to see the insufficiency and narrowness of it, or the nattiness of the views it involves, albeit it is what commends itself to his “reason.” He is necessarily one-sided, and to be one-sided is as necessarily to be unable to see the clear light of the truth.
When, however, the balance is evenly held, and due weight is allowed to these varieties of position, the value of which we learn from God in His word, then the principle of responsibility is seen in its coherence and force. It runs as a golden thread throughout the whole course of man's history as a moral being; it binds together into one connected and consistent whole all the varied methods of God's dealing, and the different measures of His revelation; it manifests thus the divine unity of purpose, thought, and design which pervades the entire Bible, giving the clue to the severity of His judgments; and to the results of His grace; in a word, it sets before us God and man in their proper relations the one to the other, and nothing can be more important than this.
To us as Christians its value is great, not only because it presents us with that which checks and corrects the proud independence of man's mind, but also because there is to be found in it a solution of much of the difficulty which occurs to many minds in the presentation of the gospel to all, and a fund of powerful and practical truth for the people of God, serving rightly to direct the keen edge of many a word to the consciences of those who are fain to press, and so to misuse, grace as a means whereby that edge may be turned away from them. But the soul which has been brought consciously into the light, and has been made by grace thoroughly honest with itself, knows the inestimable benefit of that which in any degree makes us increasingly real and true.