The principle of accountability to God is clearly set forth in the Scriptures in a wide variety of ways. There can be no misunderstanding when it comes to determining why certain individuals bear a greater measure of responsibility to God than others. Jesus very broadly stated the divine principle when explaining the few and many stripes administered to the disobedient servants; “For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall much be required: and to whom men have committed much, of him they will ask the more” (Luke 12:48). This can only be intelligible to us if we comprehend what is meant by “much” that is given to certain ones. The answer is found in the statement which just preceded the quotation above. Jesus declared that the degree of responsibility or guilt was dependent on their knowledge of the Lord’s will. “And that servant, which knew his Lord’s will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes” (12:47). Here, then, is a divine principle which finds ample illustration in God’s dealings with mankind.
However, before looking at specific cases in the historical record, let us observe other places in the New Testament where the principle of responsibility is lucidly set forth. In the parable of the talents recorded in Matthew 25, the basis of the servant’s responsibility lay in their knowledge of the Lord’s will. It was because the wicked and slothful servant “knew” the character of the Lord and what he expected from him that made his act of indolence sinful: “And the Lord answered and said unto him, Thou wicked and slothful servant, thou knewest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather where I have not strawed” . . . (V-26). See also Luke 19:22, 23.
Though the testimony of Jesus is sufficient, it is to be expected that the other inspired New Testament writers would agree with his teaching. James, the half brother of the Lord, declared, “Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin” 4:17). Those who follow the example of the “wicked and slothful servant,” and refuse to respond to the revealed will of God will be held responsible for their sin, even though it be a sin of omission. One cannot treat with impunity the will of God, when understood.
No Law—No Transgression
John defines sin as the violation of God’s law. “Whosoever committeth sin transgresseth also the law: for sin is the transgression of the law” (1 John 3:4). Sin, being the transgression of the law, it follows that whenever that law is known or recognized, those who break it are held accountable for their act. Conversely, those who in ignorance commit sins, although their acts are truly sinful, are not held responsible. This principle of moral accountability is dearly set forth by the apostle Paul: “For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law” (Rom. 5:13). This is in harmony with Paul’s earlier comment in the same epistle, “Because the law worketh wrath: for where no law is, there is no transgression” (4:15).
This Scriptural principle is both reasonable and logical. God will not hold a man guiltless who has knowingly disobeyed Him. When the revelation of His will is understood, man has no recourse other than to obey it. Disobedience under these circumstances can only bring down the disfavor of the Lord upon him. Compliance with God’s revealed will, of course brings one Into covenant relationship with Him, and places him in a position where he can reap the benefits of Christ’s atoning sacrifice.
Sin And Its Consequences
Let us look at the historical record and see if the principle of enlightenment bringing responsibility is substantiated.
“By One Man Sin …”
The first act of disobedience is found right at the beginning of man’s history. Certain commands were given to Adam (and from the record we must conclude to Eve also) concerning his conduct in the garden. Among these was one which concerned the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. “And the LORD God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in that day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die” (Gen. 2:16, 17). t is apparent from what followed that both the man and the woman clearly understood this edict from the Creator. In replying to the serpent’s question, Eve said, “We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall we touch it, lest ye die” 3:2, 3). Though both Adam and Eve knew the will of God, they disobeyed with disastrous consequences. Although they devised a covering for their nakedness and then attempted to hide themselves among the trees of the garden, they were soon to learn that Yahweh is a God afar off as well as close at hand. The apostle, in commenting on this event, declared “By one man sin (the transgression of the law) entered into the world, and death by sin” (Rom. 5:12); and again 1 Tim. 2:14, “And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.”
This principle is further illustrated in the checkered history of Israel. Here was a nation whom God had selected as His firstborn (national) son. This people had been called out of the nations, constituted a divine kingdom with God given laws and statutes, and consciously established to work out an exalted destiny. The LORD had revealed His will to them in varied ways, not the least of which was the covenant from Sinai, mediated by Moses. Israel was given precise commandments, laws and statutes, not only governing their national conduct, but also their individual deportment. Because of this unique position the nation was to be a model of moral conduct. By their national and individual character, the surrounding nations should readily discern the presence of God in their midst. Though the nation was warned many times over of the terrible calamities which would come upon them should they turn away from the commandments delivered by Moses, they chose to disobey God. The succession of rebellious acts and continued disobedience of His laws finally caused their national dispersion among the Gentile nations. Their tragic history of persecution, affliction and even genocide is well known to the world.
The reason for this severe and lengthy persecution is transparent. They knew the LORD’S will, having been given both the oral and written expression of His law. Because they possessed an intimate relationship to the Creator, they enjoyed tremendous privileges. But greater privileges bring with them greater responsibilities. The divine favor and grace brought upon them then became the ground of God’s judgments. The precise reason for their expulsion from the land and subsequent affliction is clearly stated in both the law and the prophets, well known to Bible students. As Amos records the word spoken against Israel, “You only have I known of all the families of the earth: therefore I will punish you for all your iniquities” (3:2).
The judgments of God against Nineveh in Jonah’s day were averted because the inhabitants of that city, numbering some 120,000 could not “discern between their right hand and their left hand”, and repented from their evil ways (Jonah 4:11).
Resurrectional Responsibility .. .
Having illustrated the divine principle with which God determines His judgments, we shall now discern that the same basis holds true for individual accountability to resurrectional judgment.
The Condemnation Which is Come into the World
Jesus spake a great deal about personal moral responsibility and the basis upon which that responsibility would be based. One of the most significant statements Jesus ever made relative to this judgement is found in John 3:19: “And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.” The New Testament reveals Jesus as the “light of the world,” “the true light,” the light which “is come into the world” (as a light to ‘lighten the Gentiles’) and as ‘the Light of Life” (Luke 2:32, Jo. 1:9, 8:12, 9:5; 12:46. etc.). This term “light” is a metaphor and is often used for knowledge or understanding. The Lord Jesus Christ is “light” inasmuch as he reflects the intellectual and moral enlightenment of the Father. In the words of Paul in speaking of Jesus; “who of God is made unto us wisdom, righteousness, and sanctification, and redemption” (1 Cor. 1:30), “in whom are hid all the treasurers of wisdom and knowledge (Col. 2:3). The children of God are encouraged to “Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom . . .” (Col. 3:16).
Now Paul states, God “hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son” (Heb. 1:2). It is understandable therefore, how his doctrine would bring men to enlightenment concerning the Father’s purpose. His form of instruction, often employing parables, would leave a lasting impression upon those who heard him. The foremost purpose of the coming of Christ was to secure man’s salvation. This, of course, was contingent on man’s understanding of the plan of salvation as revealed by him. But the rejection of the offer of life, when thoroughly understood, would bring man into condemnation. “For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved” (Jo. 3:17). However, the rejection of Christ would mean man’s eventual condemnation. As we are told in the next verse, “He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed on the name of the only begotten Son of God” (V18). The condemnation of the rejectors will take place at the same time the believers will be saved. “Condemned already” simply means that although the formal sentence has not yet been pronounced, the issue has already been determined by the action of the rejector.
The Divine Principle of Resurrectional Responsibility
Now, what is the principle which determines one’s amenability to the judgement seat of Christ? The answer lies in the following verse, 19: “And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.” For Jesus to state “this is the condemnation” is equivalent to his saying “this is the basis . . .” “This” refers to the light, epitomized in the Lord Jesus Christ. Sinners chose to be in darkness rather than light because their deeds were evil. As stated before, “light” is a metaphor for knowledge or understanding. In Psalm 119 the Psalmist declares, “Thy word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path” . . . The entrance of thy words giveth light, it giveth understanding unto the simple (V105, 130). This same word being the means by which enlightenment comes, naturally passes on to the Word made flesh. Light then, being a metaphor for knowledge or understanding, it logically follows that “darkness” stands for ignorance. Jesus had said to the Pharisees, “For judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not might see; and that they which see might be made blind” (Jo. 9:39). When the Pharisees heard this they were filled with indignation, and asked him, “Are we blind also?” Note the Lord’s candid and judicial reply, “If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth” (V41).
The sinful deeds of mankind are generally done under the shadow of darkness so as to escape detection. So it is in respect to unrepentant sinners, as Jesus continued to say, “For everyone that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved” (3:20). The sinners in being exposed to the light of Christ’s teachings no longer had a cloak under which they could hide. The penetrating teachings of the Lord brought discernment to them, and thus, made them liable to judgment.
Certain Convictions of Rejectors
The word, reproved, carries with it the idea of conviction or rebuke. The Greek word, “ELEGCHO” is translated “convince” in Jo. 8:46; “Which of you convinceth (convict, prove me guilty) of sin?”. Also in James 2:9; “But if you show favoritism, you sin, and are convicted by the law as lawbreakers” (NIV). Those who came within the scope of the Lord’s teaching and understood, but continued in their evil deeds would be convicted. When would this condemnation or conviction take place? The answer is supplied in the following verse (21); “but he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.” Both the condemnation and the righteous deeds of the obedient are to be experienced at the same time, when the Lord returns. As Jesus declared in Luke 14:14, The righteous “shalt be recompensed at the resurrection of the just.”
Further on in the gospel of John we find a practical illustration of this principle. In chapter 12, Jesus cried, “He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day” (V48). What prompted this warning of future judgment (by the word) ? Why did the Lord suddenly issue this solemn edict concerning those who rejected him and his words ? John supplies the answer in the narrative itself. In verses 42 and 43, he records; “Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue: For they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God.”
Here were a group of people who, although understanding and believing in Jesus, chose to reject the Lord’s counsel, and refuse to confess him. This rejection was due to an unwillingness on their part to take on certain responsibilities associated with discipleship. The pull of the world was too strong for them to relinquish, for as John stated, “they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God.” These were clearly enlightened rejectors of the gospel. This refusal on their part to positively respond to the enlightenment the teaching of Jesus placed upon them is the plight of all who knowingly reject the call of the gospel; namely, of being judged (Grk, KRINO, signifying condemned as in Acts 13:27, 2 Thes. 2:12 “damned”).
A Prophet Like Unto Moses
This condemnation would be by the word spoken by Jesus. This simply means that they would be condemned on the basis of the knowledge conveyed to them through the word administered by Jesus. The seriousness of this rejection lies in the fact that the words spoken by the Lord were those of the Father. “For I have not spoken of myself; but the Father which sent me, he gave me a commandment what I should say, and what I should speak” V49). Jesus is the prophet like unto Moses whom God promised to raise up from among his brethren. The words recorded in Deut. 18, must surely have been in the mind of Jesus when he made this statement. For of this coming prophet, God had said, “. . . and I will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him” (V18). Jesus was ever conscious of his role as spokesman for God, and this is clearly revealed in his reply to those Jews who marvelled at the wisdom set forth in his teaching: “My doctrine (teaching) is not mine, but his that sent me.” (Jo. 7:16). God also revealed to Moses, “And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.” (Deut. 18:19). This is the authority behind the Lord’s warning concerning the eventual judgment reserved for those who rejected his words.
The Last Day
When is this judgment to take place; in this life or at some future time? If it is future (in contrast to this life) under what circumstances will the condemnation of those who knowingly reject the Truth take place? The answer is found in the very context of the Lord’s announcement concerning the judgment: “. . . the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day” “(Jo. 12:48). The “last day” is the key here. This phrase is to be found frequently in John’s gospel, and, with one exception where it is defined in the context as the “last day of the feast” (7:37), it refers to the day of resurrection and judgment. Jesus made reference to this last day in his assurance of losing no one whom the Father had given him: “And this is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day. And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life, and I will raise him up at the last day.” Jo. 6:39, 40. The same phrase occurs also in verses 44 and 54.
On the occasion of the death of Lazarus when Jesus comforted Martha, “thy brother shall rise again,” she immediately replied, “I know that he shall rise again in . . . the last day.” (Jo. 11:23, 24).
These illustrations will serve to identify beyond any question the “last day” to which Jesus referred in John 12:48.
That this is truly the time Jesus had in mind when pronouncing this judgment is further evidenced in the remarks of Peter to the Jews as recorded in the 3rd chapter of Acts. The apostle urged the people to “repent and be converted . . .” (V19, 20). Peter then warned them of coming judgment and the consequences which would result by their rejection of the gospel message. He next quoted to them the words from Deuteronomy with certain clarifications: “And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear that prophet, shall be destroyed from among the people.” (Acts 3:22, 23). This destruction of those who refused to hear the prophet like unto Moses would take place when God would send Christ back to the earth (V20, 21).
Although a great deal more evidence could be brought forth from God’s Word citing the principle of resurrectional re-responsibility, the foregoing will suffice for the present.
The Origin of the Organic World – Part One