4. The History of Responsibility continued from page 272
In Noah we reach an important landmark in the history of responsibility, for we are shown, in what the word of God gives of his history, divine principles concerning two most important relationships then mentioned for the first time. These are government, or the relation of what we may call “magisterial authority” to God and men generally; and the relation of what may be called “paternal authority” to the smaller sphere of “the house,” in view of God's government on earth.
It is plain from Genesis ix. 1-3, that God now placed man in a new relationship, committing for the first time into his hand the sword of executive government.
This has never yet been recalled from man, nor have the principles of its exercise been altered by the word of God. On the contrary, in times subsequent to Gen. 9, with the increase of evil in the world, its powers have been widened and increased, and they are fully recognized in the New Testament as having divinely given claims over the obedience and loyalty of Christians. And there is in this no question of there being what are called “Christian magistrates.” Paul, in Acts 23:5, on the contrary, standing sea Christian before a ruler who was violently opposed to Christ, refers to the word in the Old Testament scripture as binding upon him with reference to any such magistrate. And in Rom. 13:1-8 Christians have the clearest light shining for them upon both their relation to the “higher powers,” as those who “bear the sword,” and the relation of these governors to God; while 1 Tim. 2:1-4 and 1 Peter 2:11-17 amplify the exhortations to quiet and submissive conduct on our part under them in all that concerns the administration of earthly affairs—the true Christian character of pilgrims and strangers here being maintained through all that is done. Men have forgotten all this who have tried to use the truths of Christianity to displace divinely enunciated principles of the government of the world; turning the teaching of scripture which was intended for the guidance of the church, into maxims for the use of the world. This has arisen from confounding together the church and the world, and from thoroughly mistaking the place and the object of Christianity. It was not intended to interfere with the world, as such, at all, but was designed to take out of it a people for the Lord's name. A worldly Christianity has thus neither the truth as to God's government of the world, nor that of the true grace of God in the midst of an evil world.
Thus, too, with the revelation given to and in Noah concerning the mutual relations existing between a household and its head. We have no previous indication of the mind of the Lord on this subject, but He revealed a most weighty principle in Gen. 7:1, saying to Noah, “Come thou and all thy house into the ark: for thee have I seen righteous before me in this generation.” This unfolds no less the responsibility of the head, as such, towards God, than the result of his faithfulness towards the household, with their privilege in being, by virtue of their connection with a head who is obedient to God, eligible for introduction into a place or position of external, but very real, blessing. This is a principle of very solemn application in God's ways of government among men, as Ex. 12:5, 6; 34:7, testify, and it is one of those which run unaltered through all God's subsequent dealings with men. It still stands good, though it has—as many other truths have—been almost obliterated by the dogmas of many Christians.
In Abraham the observance of it is indeed made by the Lord the special groundwork upon which peculiar blessing is conveyed to him, in Gen. 18:17-19: while the same principle is borne witness to in New Testament scripture, both as regards blessing resulting to the head through his faithfulness to his “house” (1 Tim. 3:4, 5), and as regards blessing flowing to them on account of his devotedness to the Lord's will (2 Tim. 1:16); as well as regards the extent of God's purpose of blessing in Christianity, namely the invariable including of all who are thus connected with those who believe. (Acts 16:31; 2:30, &c.)
Abram, again, furnishes us with the first illustration of the introduction of a new and special basis for the responsibility of particular persons, as distinguished from the rest of mankind. The principle of this I have briefly alluded to on page 217, and in Gen. 12, &c., we see that Abram was called into, and so placed before God on, the ground and relationship which God's sovereign grace and promise defined for him.
The scriptures show us that although this dealing of God with him was that of grace towards him, yet it constituted him responsible as in a path which it marked out, for God says to him in Gen. 17:1, “I am the Almighty God,” that is, God in the character revealed to him in grace—all-powerful on his behalf “walk before me, and be thou perfect.” And this is also a principle which abides in the case of all those brought into relationship with God in grace, as we shall see. In fact this is but reiterating in another form the universal principle of responsibility with which we set out (see page 215), namely, that the being placed in any relationship (however planed there, whether by grace, or in God's sovereign government) is that which creates the responsibility to fulfill its duties, whatever these are.
Of course, men object to grace, and are not slow to charge God with unfairness in taking up sinners for blessing in that absolute way. But the root of such objections and such dislike of grace is self-righteousness, and a refusal to own the true condition of man. There is nothing more wholesome than the hearty acknowledgment that all deserve nothing but punishment, that all are thoroughly bad, and corrupt, and lost. And in no other way are we clear of false thoughts about God and His grace. He has made it abundantly plain in Josh. 24:1-3 that such was the condition of all when His grace was first made publicly known in Abram; and in view of blessing which has thus come into the earth among men, while alt are evil, nothing but the sovereignty of God's election can account for any being saved and blessed. Apart from this there seem to be but two other principles upon which He could act towards men, namely, that He must either save all, or save none. But the former of these would deny His holiness, all being sinners; and the latter, while being perfectly just and righteous, would, at least in appearance, deny His love. He reconciles both in the cross, and, choosing some for salvation by it, accounts and makes them just.
The condition of man is made even more plain by such dealing, for if He has to come in and choose some for blessing out of those who are wholly bad, it necessarily shows to what state all have come, and those who reach punishment reach no more than their due, which in fact all deserve. The when God chooses has nothing to do with the sovereignty of His doing it, for it would be as sovereign (as one has said) for Him to choose now as before the world.
As far as we know it by its exercise, this election of God has its first public witness or display in Abraham; we hear nothing of it before his day, but then the world was wholly corrupted by idolatry. The principle of election then comes out in God's acting for the first time, and Rom. 9, which treats of this great and solemn subject, goes no farther back for the commencement of its line of proof of God's sovereign mercy in His dealings with men. It shows also, through succeeding generations, that God could own no other basis for blessing.
In Ex. 33 God announces this principle as that which He would act upon with Israel, but the apparent difficulty, as He had just proposed to put them on the ground defined by a new measure of responsibility as the basis of blessing, is explained, when we see that this was after Moses had to pitch the tabernacle outside the camp, all the congregation having gone after idolatry while he was up on the mount receiving the law from God.
Pharaoh's case is clear, for he was a wicked man and utterly regardless of God, though in his position of power he, above all others, should have owned Him. God, willing to show His power and wrath for the good of His people (Ex. 6:6, 7), that they might trust Him as their deliverer, endured with much long-suffering the evil of the king of Egypt, and at last dealt with him in judgment, in hardening, plaguing, and finally destroying him. That was the present application of what God did, but it has further application to us Gentiles in view of the larger mercy which has come out to us. (Rom. 9:18-24.)
Nothing can surpass the power and grandeur of the words of Rom. 9 in the laying low of all human pride, and showing man's abject dependence for blessing on God's sovereign mercy. The illustration of the potter (ver. 21) is used to make plain how all depends upon sovereign power; for it is out of the same lump that furnishes vessels to dishonor that He chooses to produce vessels unto honor.
People, and even enlightened Christians, shrink from applying the word, “fitted to destruction” to God's action; but the fear is groundless, for no “doctrine of reprobation” (as it is called) is conveyed in them, because they do not mean that God made the men bad as to their natures. It means that, just as in the case of some who were bad, He by His mercy prepared them for blessing, so, in the case of others who were bad, He put them in circumstances where all their badness could be displayed, if He had a purpose to display His power and wrath against evil in their overthrow. Thus they were fitted to destruction. It did not make them bad, nor did it interfere in the least with their responsibility on the ground we have already discussed; it made their badness manifest: and, without the mercy that chooses for salvation, all would be fitted to destruction by simply having time to live given them.
The principle underlying all this is manifest. Man being evil, his doings never can be a basis upon which God can justify him, and therefore it must be by God's way that he is made righteous. This, of course, is a matter of faith on man's part, what God shows of His way being contrary to man altogether, and necessarily so on account of man's condition, while on God's part it is sovereign goodness. And the grace that places him thus in a position of blessing and privilege before God supplies him with power to fulfill the duties resulting from it, and thus those who are blessed become in a new way responsible.
(To be continued)