# What do you think of this thought:man has no responsibilty???



## Mayflower (Jun 26, 2008)

What do you think concerning the next thought that received from someone, concerning the view of predestination of God and responsibility of man ?:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
First, I do not think any man is accountable for anything that he cannot 
help, do, or believe. I will approach this answer in TWO different ways.
(a) The Bible nowhere teaches the "responsibility" of man for anything. 
Surprised? It just isn't in the Holy Book, nor should we be surprised it is 
not there. In the use of words, "responsibility" refers to one who has an 
obligation, legally or morally, to do something, or to see that it is done. 
If he who has this "responsibility," assigns the task to another, the one to 
whom the task is assigned is "accountable" for getting it done. Man IS 
"accountable" to God for anything that God has commanded (and let him know - 
not, kept it secret from him) him. To violate that known and expressed 
command is a sin, and the wages of that sin is death. He KNOWINGLY violated 
the command, and "must give an ACCOUNT to Him for the deeds done in the 
body, whether good or evil." It is NOT required of a reprobate to believe 
that Christ died for HIM. Christ didn't. God will not, in my judgment, 
condemn a man for believing a lie; and if the reprobates believed that 
Christ died for him, that would be a lie. Man is ACCOUNTABLE to God for 
violations of God commands impressed by God upon his mind and conscience. 
Sin can be rather variable: The widow of Seraph was commanded to feed the 
prophet. I was not. If she had not fed him, even the fact that she did not 
have anything to feed him with, would have been to her a sin. In that I was 
not so commanded, to me it would not have been a sin. (God Himself provided 
her the wherewithal to feed the prophet, and herself and son.). The Bible 
clearly teaches "accountability," although it certainly is not highly 
emphasized! The word "account" is used by a very few times. Neither 
"responsibility" or "accountablity" are found in the English Version of the 
Bible.
(b) The reprobate is condemned ONLY for sins that he knowingly commits. 
His reprobation, nor his inability, condemns him to perish. He has 
sufficient light of nature to condemn others that he sees doing something 
"wrong." Yet, he does it himself. He can judge others rather roundly, 
frequently, and often angrily; yet he does the same things. Just as surely 
as the elect are not blessed for doing good works, and rewarded heaven, 
neither are the reprobates condemned to hell because of their ignorance or 
helplessness.
The English word that Spurgeon, Fuller, Pendleton, Lloyd-Jones, Murray, 
etc. use to present their error is "antinomy." It means that two 
contradictory and mutually exclusive things can both be true, although they 
are antipods to one's understanding. According to them, both God's 
Sovereignty and Human Responsibility are TRUE, and we must believe them 
BOTH. My answer is: They are NOT both true; nor are we required to be 
idiots! God is SOVEREIGN. Man is ACCOUNTABLE; but man is NOT RESPONSIBLE! 
God IS the one RESPONSIBLE - He created us all, and has a right to do with 
His own as He pleases.
(c ) In natural things: A businessman is RESPONSIBLE to the government 
to collect and pay the legal taxes and fees for doing business. However, he 
is a very busy man. So he hires a book-keeper to handle the financial 
affairs, collect the taxes and fees, and pay them to the government. The 
book-keeper is ACCOUNTABLE to the businessman for whom she works. If the 
taxes are not collected and paid, the government agents comes after the 
businessman because he is RESPONSIBLE. The businessman, not knowing the 
taxes where not collected and paid, FIRES the book-keeper for a lack of 
ACCOUNTABILITY to him. The one that will be fined by the government is the 
one that is in the position of responsibility. The government is not 
concerned about who it was that was "accountable."


----------



## christianyouth (Jun 26, 2008)

I honestly don't know the contention. I sometimes use both of the terms interchangeably, as I suspect most do. What is the difference between saying, "Man is responsible for his sin" and "Man is accountable for his sin"?


----------



## Hippo (Jun 26, 2008)

christianyouth said:


> I honestly don't know the contention. I sometimes use both of the terms interchangeably, as I suspect most do. What is the difference between saying, "Man is responsible for his sin" and "Man is accountable for his sin"?



I would say that responsible is moral (i.e fault) while accountable is judicial (i.e. consequenses).


----------



## Sven (Jun 26, 2008)

Responsibility and accountability are virtually synonymous terms in the context of this theological question. The basic idea behind responsibility is the word response, God tells us to do something and we must respond to it in the exact manner in which He tells us; moreover, we are held accountable if we do not do what He tells us. I agree with Hippo in his distinction between the two terms, but I still think that to use one over the other is to deny their relation.
As to the notion that a reprobate is not required to believe that Christ died for him, nothing could be further from the truth. There are several passages in Scripture that make it very plain that all men are called upon to believe in Christ, and to reject the offer of salvation is to reject Christ and His work. "While we were yet sinners, Christ died for us." (Rom. 5:8) "Christ died for the ungodly" (Rom. 5:6) Those who are sinners and ungodly who hear the gospel are required to believe that Christ died for them. When the Scriptures say "Ho, everyone that thirsteth, come ye to the waters..." (Isa. 55:1)and "Whosoever will, let him take of the water of life freely" (Rev. 22:17), these are sincere offers and those who hear them are required to do what they say. Acts 17:30 says, "And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent." God calls all men to repent that includes the reprobate along with the elect. The reprobate are required to repent even though it is not given them to repent. It is the same when they are called to believe that Christ died for them, even though He did not die for them. I do admit though that those who have never heard the gospel at all will not be held responsible or accountable for not believing that Christ died for them.


----------



## Jimmy the Greek (Jun 27, 2008)

This ought to be good.


----------

