Responsibility
As you grew into adulthood, were you taught to take responsibility for your actions, achievements and failures? I suspect your parents were somewhat like mine who demanded that we be responsible for our conduct. My parents would have paid no attention to our attempting to shift the blame for our faults and misbehaviors on our brothers and sisters or on our classmates or on our teachers. They required us to fulfill our obligations with no excuses. Was that cruel on the part of our parents? As we grew older and had families and jobs or professions of our own, have my brothers and sisters regretted the teaching and example our parents provided for us? I have never actually raised that question with the eleven Claiborne children who survived to adulthood. But I believe I know what they would all say. I know what my answer to the question is. I am grateful to God that my parents reared me to accept full responsibility for my life. I believe God used my parents to help me become a fruit-bearing person.
My father was a building contractor, but he also owned a farm. We older boys plowed the fields, planted corn, cultivated and picked strawberries and did other kinds of work on the farm. I remember one time when my father told the three older boys that a four-acre field of corn needed to have the weeds, Johnson grass, briars and such removed. We took gooseneck hoes and began our work early in the morning. But the creek that ran alongside the field presented a great temptation for us to go swimming. So we spent most of the day having fun in the creek. About three in the afternoon, it dawned on us that the weeds, briars and bushes had better be missing from that field when our father came home from work. Never have three boys worked faster and harder to prevent a disaster. We knew the consequences of not fulfilling our responsibilities. Our parents made us better human beings by making sure we were fully responsible for our own conduct.
One of the major
problems in American society is the unwillingness of millions of our
citizens--both black and white--to take responsibility for their lack of
education, their poor job opportunities and other aspects of their lives. They are too prone to blame
society--especially members of other racial groups--for their situation. Many black leaders in
Some of
If I had known when I read that book in 1999 what I know today, I would have outlined and counted every time Dr. Steele used the word “responsibility.” I shall take time to read three brief excerpts form Shelby Steele’s book. Dr. Steele believes that many black students “choose to believe in their inferiority.” He then states very plainly: “They hold their race to evade individual responsibility” (p. 28). Dr. Steele very succinctly and very correctly states: “Personal responsibility is the brick and mortar of power” (p. 33). One final observation by Dr. Steele should challenge all people, regardless of color or of race or of any other consideration. “And when we do think of ourselves as victims, we are released from responsibility for some difficulty, spared some guilt and accountability” (p. 67). Everyone--especially those who promote affirmative action--would profit greatly by reading g Shelby Steele’s books.
Did you know that there are prominent scholars in the academic world and in theology who totally dispute all responsibility of all human beings? They do not believe anyone has any responsibility for his actions. They may not teach their beliefs so bluntly, but that is really what they believe. Since I am a preacher and deeply concerned about a Christian’s responsibility to serve God, I shall first discuss what the Calvinists teach about responsibility, then what two different academic disciplines teach on the topic. Obviously, if you think I have missed the mark, you are invited to let me hear from you.
I am aware that
some Calvinists--especially those who call themselves “moderate
Calvinists”--will probably object to what I am saying, but there is no doubt
about its truthfulness. John Calvin
taught--and many of his committed followers still teach--that God saves men
wholly by his grace. One preacher in
I sincerely challenge anyone to harmonize the doctrine of grace alone through faith alone with the instructions Jesus and his apostles gave to those who heard them. For example, our Lord told his disciples in the great Sermon on the Mount: “Not everyone who says unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter the kingdom of heaven; but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven” (Mt. 7:21). Is Jesus actually teaching the necessity of doing the will of the Father in order to inherit the kingdom of heaven? You know that is what he said. So if doing the will of the Father in heaven is essential, then salvation is not by grace alone. Besides, there is strong emphasis in this verse on responsibility for doing the will of God.
When Jesus spoke to some Galileans about some tragedies with which they were familiar, he asked if they thought those tragedies were visited on the victims because they were more ungodly than others. He then said, “I tell you, No; but, except you repent, you shall all likewise perish” (Lk. 13:1-5). We know God did not repent for the people to whom he spoke. If they did not repent, they would be lost. Do you get the impression that the people in Christ’s day had the responsibility to repent? If they did not repent--and many of them did not--they had no hope of eternal life.
Could the people who were already Christ’s disciples be lost if they did not obey his will? Our Calvinist friends say no, but Jesus had an entirely different view. Matthew 25 was specifically addressed to Christ’s disciples. Jesus talked with them about feeding the hungry, giving meat to the ones in need, providing water for the thirsty, being hospitable to strangers, clothing the naked, visiting the sick and those in prison. You know he was not speaking of those who had not obeyed him. They were already lost. Nothing they could do or fail to do would make them any more lost. But he said concerning his own disciples who neglected to help the hungry, the poor and the needy: “Inasmuch as you did it not unto the least of these my brethren, you did it not unto me. And these shall go away into everlasting punishment.” According to Jesus Christ, everlasting punishment was a place prepared for the devil and his angels (Mt. 25:41, 46). Does any of that suggest that Christians must be responsible? No, it does not merely suggest it; it absolutely requires it.
While the King
James Version of the Bible does not use either the word “responsible” or “responsibility,”
can there be any doubt about what Jesus had in mind when he told his disciples:
“Seek first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things
(food, clothing, and drink) shall be added unto you” (Mt. 6:33)? Was Jesus merely suggesting that his
disciples seek the kingdom first? And
what did he mean when he said to them: “Therefore all things whatsoever you
would that men should do unto you, do you even so to them: for this is the law
and the prophets” (Mt.
Calvinism is not the only approach to responsibility that runs contrary to scripture and to good common sense. A psychological theory called “behaviorism” denies all responsibility for one’s actions. Behaviorism says, in effect, that human beings are nothing more than higher animals. They do not make conscious choices, but react to stimuli just as animals do. All intelligent people recognize the many different influences that have a bearing on our behavior. If you grew up in a Christian home--as I did--you were more likely to become a Christian than those who grew into adulthood among atheists, agnostics, secular humanists, and other unbelievers. If you attended schools where the teachers honored high moral values, you were more likely to become a decent person than if the teachers were rogues and rascals. The communities in which we grew to adulthood, the homes from which we came, and the churches we attended were bound to have had some influence on how we have lived. But had we no choices in what we became? Did I become a gospel preacher purely because of my background? If that were true, why did not my seven other brothers become gospel preachers?
I remember, as a sophomore in college, my first encounter with behaviorism, although I do not recall that the theory presented in my class on child psychology was called “behaviorism.” J.B. Watson articulated the theory based on the experiments of Ivan Petrovich Pavlov, a Russian physiologist. You probably remember from your college days studying the research of Pavlov. Pavlov offered meat to a dog at the same time he rang a bell. He so conditioned the dog to respond to the bell that when he did not offer meat at the time he rang the bell, the dog still salivated. He developed what has become known in psychology as classical conditioning. I believe most people would agree that we can be (and often are) conditioned to make certain responses to a particular stimuli. But could we not make other choices? Are we nothing more than dogs or cats or hogs?
The work of Pavlov became the basis for the radical views of B.F. Skinner, a psychology professor at Harvard. Skinner’s best known literary work is entitled WaldenTwo, a book I read while I was doing graduate work at the University of Georgia. Skinner did most his experimental work on animals and then applied the results of his research to human beings. Skinner did not believe human beings can consciously choose the path they will follow in life. They are conditioned by their parental background, by their genes, by the practices and mores of the communities where they have matured, and such like. A few questions arise in my mind as I have studied behaviorism for many years. Did Skinner arrive at his psychological and philosophical views by his conditioning? If he did, are his views any better or truer than anyone else’s views? If he believed that our choices and beliefs are conditioned by our background, why did he spend his life at Harvard trying to convince students of the truthfulness of behaviorism? If some students accepted Skinner’s views and others did not, neither group of students could be praised or blamed. They really had no other choice, if Skinner’s views were true.
If you think theories such as behaviorism have no implications for society but are just theoretical or hypothetical, please think again. If behaviorism were true, the best man or woman who ever lived deserves no commendation. Men and women could not have behaved differently from the way they did behave. If they were compassionate, generous, and gracious, they behaved as they were conditioned to behave. If they were crude, violent, and mean, they do not deserve any blame. How could we put people in prison or execute them for doing what they could not avoid? If you have studied our legal system, you know the influence that behaviorism has exerted on our judges, on prosecutors and on defense attorneys. “But judge,” some defense attorneys argue, “his father abused him. He grew up poor. He cannot be held accountable for raping, robbing, and killing that old lady. He could not avoid breaking the law.” Tragically, thousands and thousands of Americans have avoided prosecution because judges, juries, and attorneys have accepted such utter foolishness.
The theory of materialism, such as that Karl Marx, Friedrich Engels and Vladimir Lenin advocated, maintains that men and women are conditioned by the economic system that prevailed in their country. They really do not make choices; they cannot behave in ways that are contrary to their upbringing. Obviously, there are serious moral and spiritual problems with the socialistic and communistic approaches to life. They cannot provide for the welfare of the citizens who embrace those systems. In addition, criminals cannot be held accountable for their conduct. The people in the former Soviet Union and in other ex-communist countries are paying heavily for the stupidity of believing the writings of Karl Marx. Good common sense should have prevented their embracing those bankrupt systems.
My friends, not one of the philosophical systems I have discussed with you today--Calvinism, behaviorism or materialism--makes any sense in view of the teaching of scripture and of the experience of mankind. We know we are free moral agents capable of examining evidence and then making choices based on that evidence. Joshua, by divine inspiration, informs us that we can make either good or bad choices. When Joshua, with God’s guidance and strength, had led the Israelites over the Jordan River into the land of Canaan, he reminded them of God’s goodness in giving them a land they had not earned, cities they had not built, vineyards and olive yards they had not planted. He then challenged them: “Now therefore fear the Lord, and serve him in sincerity and in truth: and put away the gods which your fathers served on the other side of the flood, and in Egypt: and serve the Lord. And if it seem evil unto you to serve the Lord, choose this day whom you will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land you dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord” (Josh. 24:13-15). Did Joshua and the Israelites have a choice about whether they served the living God or idols? If they did not, Joshua was speaking foolishly. But you know they had a choice. You also know that many of them made the wrong choice. Will God hold them accountable for their choices?
The Lord Jesus who made man and knows what is in man (John 2:24-25) surely knew if his creatures were free to make choices. Are there any more inspiring and precious words than these from the very lips of God’s only Son: “Come unto me, all who labor and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, and learn of me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and you shall find rest unto your souls. For my yoke is easy, and my burden is light” (Mt. 11:28-30)? If men cannot choose to come to the Lord or to reject his gracious invitation, these words are meaningless and deceptive.
I close our lesson today with these beautiful words from the book of Revelation. “And the Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him who hears say, Come. And let him who is athirst come. And whosoever will, let him take of the water of life freely” (Rev. 22:17). Will you this very day confess your faith in Jesus Christ as God’s Son, repent of your alien sins, and be baptized into Christ for the remission of your sins? My friends, you have that responsibility, if you are not a Christian.
Winford Claiborne
The International Gospel Hour
Back to Home Page
Back to Transcripts Titles