Principles of Human Responsibility

by M. Rudge (Wales)

PAPER 1

Human responsibility is stamped upon the pages of our Bible from the beginning. It is timely for us to be reminded of this emphasis in a day when the ‘no blame’ culture has become characteristic of many aspects of national life. Much that is wrong is excused and it is often difficult to face people with their responsibility. It is also not unusual for the wrong person to receive the blame where two parties are involved and the main responsibility lies with others.
We know that in some cultures, the loss of face in confronting or acknowledging wrong has always been a feature of that society and can be taken to such extremes that it becomes ridiculous by normal standards. The practice has spread almost unnoticeably and marks a change from the time when the acceptance of responsibility and condemnation of irresponsibility, was normative. The words we appear to have difficulty in saying are, “I am sorry” or, “I was wrong.” Our pride tends to make us think that this is demeaning, whereas in reality it is something that is to be appreciated and more than likely, can be the first and necessary step towards righting what is wrong.

Evasion of responsibility and the tendency to blame others has been characteristic of man’s sinful nature from the beginning. Immediately after the fall, Adam blamed Eve for what had taken place and by implication, he blamed God - “The woman whom Thou gavest to be with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat”, Gen.3.12. Eve blamed the serpent. It is easy to blame the devil for something that is our responsibility. In the announcement of the penalty which was now passed upon Adam and through him upon the human race, God placed responsibility squarely upon each party involved. In Gen.3, the penalty was announced in the order in which events had taken place. The sentence upon the serpent came first, “Because thou hast done this ... “ The penalty upon Eve and upon womanhood, followed. Adam was charged with having hearkened to the voice of his wife. He became the head of a fallen race.

In the second half of Rom.5, a contrast is drawn between the headship of Adam and the headship of Christ. The consequences of Adam’s one act of disobedience not only passed to him but to the whole race. In contrast, the one act of obedience by Christ in His death has made it possible for the grace of God and the gift of righteousness to abound unto the “many”, who will eventually come under His headship, but it is available to all.

The responsibility for headship belonged to Adam. He was “first formed, then Eve” and he was held responsible for his transgression. Eve’s responsibility was not overlooked. “Adam was not deceived, but the woman being [thoroughly] deceived was in the transgression”, 1Tim.2.13,14. As a result, Adam’s headship was confirmed, “thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee”, Gen.3.16. This is the basis of Paul’s teaching in 1Tim.2.11-15, “Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.” The silence of the woman in the assembly gatherings is mentioned twice in vs 11 and 12, as the expression of her submission to the man’s authority and recognition of the truth of headship. These responsibilities are also taught in 1Cor.14.34,35, where the words, “as also saith the law” confirms the authority of the teaching of the Word of God in the book of Genesis. The truth of headship was not a new revelation to Paul or following the culture of the day. These principles remain in force.

Adam was the first man who attempted to evade responsibility for his actions. He is by no means the last. In Gen.4, when Cain was asked, “Where is thy brother?” he replied with another question in which he sought to evade responsibility for what had happened , “Am I my brother’s keeper?” The truth is that I am responsible for the welfare of my brethren. It is my business. Cain’s murder of his brother Abel, left him little ground to complain but he did. He reasoned that as “a fugitive and vagabond”, or “wanderer” in the earth, he would be vulnerable to attempts on his life. If he had lived in Noah’s day, the punishment would have been the death penalty. In response to his complaint, God was again merciful to him and said to him, “Therefore whosoever slayeth Cain, vengeance shall be taken on him sevenfold”, Gen.4.15. To a man like Lamech, God’s mercy to Cain was only licence to cast off restraint and responsibility. When he slew “a young man”, he said, “If Cain shall be avenged sevenfold, truly Lamech seventy and sevenfold”, Gen.4.23,24.

Evasion of responsibility is not just something that is attempted by wicked men. Even a godly woman like Sarah, sought to evade acknowledging that she had laughed in unbelief at God’s announcement that she would have a son when she was past child-bearing age. Abraham was questioned as to the reason why she had laughed. Was anything “too hard for the Lord?” “Then Sarah denied saying, I laughed not; for she was afraid. And He said, “Nay; but thou didst laugh”, Gen.18.15. Even godly men and women can be afraid to acknowledge that they are wrong and find it difficult to accept responsibility for what they have said or done. The importance of the truth of human responsibility is that it teaches us that we are responsible for our actions and will be held to account for them.

—to be continued (D.V.)