And the man said, The woman whom thou gavest to be

with me, she gave me of the tree, and I did eat. And the LORD God

said unto the woman, What is this that thou hast done? And the

woman said, The serpent beguiled me, and I did eat (Gen. 3:12-

13).

The blame game began very early in man's history. It is still as

popular as ever.

When God returned in judgment, Adam and Eve had to give an

accounting for what they had done. We use the word "accounting"

as a way to describe a person's summary of what he has achieved

or not achieved. In a narrow sense, this is what account books

are supposed to do for us. They enable us to put down on paper or

on a computer screen a specific objective indicator of what we

have accomplished. It also indicates objective failure.

Adam's response to God's question is a familiar one. He

immediately blamed his wife. In effect, he was blaming God for

having provided such a wife for him. His wife had been given to

him in order to serve as his helper. But, somehow, she did not

help him. She lured him into sin. It was mostly her fault.

God does not answer Adam at this point. He turns to Eve. He asks

her why she had done this thing. She imitates Adam. She

identifies the serpent as the source of the bad advice.

God does not bother to ask the serpent anything. The serpent was

not directly accountable to God. The serpent was part of the

creation. The serpent was accountable to Adam. This is why he

initially approached Eve. He did not want a direct confrontation

with Adam. He preferred to tempt Adam's subordinate. Once he

successfully lured her into sin, she tempted Adam. The serpent

had attacked the weakest link in the chain. God declares judgment

against the serpent.

Then God moves back up the chain of command. He condemns the

woman. Then he condemns Adam. The rebellion started at the

bottom, and God brings judgment at the bottom. It was a bottom-up

rebellion, and God imposed a bottom-up judgment.

This rebellion changed the nature of man's relationship with God.

The story of mankind up to this point was the story of grace.

Through their sin, Adam and Eve moved from grace to wrath. From

this point until the final judgment, the story of the kingdom of

God is the story of the transition from wrath to grace.

This transition was made manifest to Adam and Eve by God's trial,

for this is what Genesis 3 records. God cross-examines them, and

then He declares judgment against them. He imposes negative

sanctions on them. This was preliminary to the wrath of God at

the final judgment. This was a down payment on the wrath to come.

The response of both Adam and Eve to God's questions is

indicative of a man's response in general to any accusation

against him, whenever the accusation is true: he attempts to

delegate responsibility downward. He wants to deflect the wrath

of God or him to someone under his jurisdiction.

He was initially in a position of authority over this person. The

person made a mistake, and his superior does not want to take

responsibility for this mistake. When it was not a mistake, but

rather deliberate, he is even more eager to avoid responsibility.

He assumes that his initial transfer of responsibility downward

completely absolved him for any participation in the mistake or

rebellion of his subordinate. Even when the individual has been

lured into the mistake or the rebellion, he wants to blame the

subordinate. Everyone wants to avoid responsibility. At the same

time, everyone wants the benefits of such delegation.

This is another way of saying the people want the benefits, but

they do not wish to bear the costs. They want to take

responsibility for successes of their subordinates, and they want

to transfer liability for failure to those subordinates. There is

an old saying: "Success has a hundred fathers, but failure is an

orphan."

The subordinate does whatever he can to identify someone even

lower on the chain of command to whom liability can be

transferred.

There is no escape from the division of labor. There is no escape

from hierarchy. There must always be a transfer of

responsibility downward. This is because nobody can do

everything. Everybody who wishes to achieve anything of

significance must find subordinates who will cooperate with him.

He needs to find people to whom he can safely delegate

responsibility.

Once he delegates responsibility, he cannot avoid the

consequences of mistakes or outright rebellion by those to whom

he has delegated responsibility. He is responsible for delegating

responsibility wisely. If he has delegated responsibility

unwisely, he will suffer the consequences. In other words, there

is never a complete transfer of responsibility. The authority to

transfer responsibility itself involves responsibility. The power

to delegate creates a liability.

Each person in the hierarchy must take responsibility for the

actions of the person under his authority. He must find a way to

build in safeguards against bad decisions by those under his

authority. He is expected to monitor performance of those under

his jurisdiction. In other words, he has to exercise judgment in

order to avoid the negative consequences of any review by his

superior in the future.

BUDGETING AS ACCOUNTING

Household budgeting is a form of accounting. Husbands and wives

must make periodical reviews of their spending. They must make

reviews of whether this spending is furthering their goals.

If we want to use the example of Adam and Eve in the Garden, red

ink is the equivalent of green leaves. The green leaves revealed

to God the nature of the violation. The red ink reveals to

husbands and wives the violation of the principle of counting the

cost.

Jesus said that we must count the costs. We must not take action

before we count the costs.

For which of you, intending to build a tower, sitteth

not down first, and counteth the cost, whether he have sufficient

to finish it? Lest haply, after he hath laid the foundation, and

is not able to finish it, all that behold it begin to mock him,

Saying, This man began to build, and was not able to finish (Luke

14:28-30).

This being the case, we need to budget in advance. We also need

to have a system of accounting in which we judge whether or not

the execution of our plan has been cost-effective. We have to

find out whether we are spending more than we earn. We must also

find out whether or not we are drawing down our savings because

we have misjudged our expenditures.

Counting the cost is basic to all of life. Jesus gave the example

of an imminent war.

Or what king, going to make war against another king,

sitteth not down first, and consulteth whether he be able with

ten thousand to meet him that cometh against him with twenty

thousand? Or else, while the other is yet a great way off, he

sendeth an ambassage, and desireth conditions of peace (Luke

14:31-32).

This involved counting the costs of starting a war. If the person

in charge of the nation judges that the cost of the war will be

greater than the cost of making peace, he is supposed to make

peace.

Similarly, when the head of the household recognizes that a

particular expenditure is greater than the benefits that will

result from an expenditure, he is to instruct his wife not to

make the expenditure. He is not to let red ink flow. His goal is

to have more money at the end of the accounting period than when

he began.

The example of this is Jesus' parable of the three servants. He

tells the story of a rich man who transfers wealth to his

subordinates, and then departs for a long journey. At some point,

he returns and demands an accounting from his subordinates. All

of his subordinates were required to return more to him than he

gave them when he departed. He expects a positive rate of return

on his investment. He had transferred the investment capital to

them, and they are responsible to return more to him than he

transferred to them. When they are successful at this, he rewards

them with even more responsibility.

And it came to pass, that when he was returned,

having received the kingdom, then he commanded these servants to

be called unto him, to whom he had given the money, that he might

know how much every man had gained by trading. Then came the

first, saying, Lord, thy pound hath gained ten pounds. And he

said unto him, Well, thou good servant: because thou hast been

faithful in a very little, have thou authority over ten cities.

And the second came, saying, Lord, thy pound hath gained five

pounds. And he said likewise to him, Be thou also over five

cities (Luke 19:15-19).

This parable tells us that what we are really aiming for is

greater responsibility. We want to be in a position to exercise

greater dominion over our sphere of jurisdiction. We want to

increase the realm of our jurisdiction.

This is not how most people think of profit. They think of profit

without thinking of responsibility. They think of increasing

their profits without increasing their responsibility. They want

to get something for nothing. The parable tells us that the goal

is not profit; the goal is greater responsibility in the kingdom

of God. We are constantly supposed to be increasing our zone of

responsibility.

So, we must pay close attention to our expenditures, in order to

have more capital at the end of the month or quarter or year than

when we started. The fact that we have more money at the end of

the time period indicates that we have increased our level of

responsibility. This is what progressive sanctification is all

about. This is what Christian maturity is all about. It is not

about escaping responsibility; it is about increasing personal

responsibility.

Adam, in answering God, attempted to deflect this responsibility

downward. Eve, in answering God, also attempted to deflect this

responsibility downward. This was contrary to what the parable of

the servants tells us we should do. Our goal is to increase our

responsibility, not decrease it. Our goal is to make better

decisions, and these decisions have to be motivated by our

understanding that we are responsible for the outcome of our

decisions.

BUDGETING FOR RESPONSIBILITY

Keeping a household budget is an objective way of a determining

whether or not we are successful in increasing our level of

personal responsibility. If we find that we are not increasing

our net worth, as measured by the digits we call numbers, we know

that in all likelihood we are decreasing our responsibility. In

some cases, this is not true. When we purchase capital, which

includes education, we may have to borrow money to do this, but

we are not doing this in order to decrease our responsibility. We

are attempting to increase our responsibility.

Household budgeting is an objective and necessary way to increase

our level of personal responsibility. The biblical principle is

this: we must master the little things of life in order to

prepare ourselves for attempting to master even greater things in

life.

We master our household budgets in order to extend our influence

beyond our household. We are not to build up capital simply to

spend on consumption. We are to build up capital in order to be

in a position to exercise leadership outside the household. This

is what the parable of the servants teaches.

So, when you set a household budget, you must discipline yourself

to do the accounting necessary to determine whether or not you're

sticking to your budget. You must also be aware of expenditures

that are keeping you from meeting your budgetary goal. This is

why a systematic program of budgeting and recording expenditures

and income is so important.

This is the first step in a young couples experience to train

them in the discipline of responsible leadership. They get

control over their budget. This means that they get control over

their expenditures. This means that they must get control over

their emotions. If they are present-oriented, this compromises

their ability to lead. Leadership requires future-orientation.

Setting up a budget and sticking to it is one of the most

important disciplines in achieving future-orientation.

Present-orientation is the affliction of the lower class.

Extremely future-orientation is the outlook of the upper class.

Your class position is not primarily a matter of your money; it

is a matter of your perspective on time. Some medical student may

not have any discretionary income at all. We do not think of him

as a lower-class person.

The husband lays down the law. He has the final authority to

establish the budget. His wife is a partner with him in managing

the household budget. She may even be the person who runs the

numbers. But her job is not to assert her independent authority

over the budget. Her job is to make the best use of the money.

The husband delegates responsibility to her to keep household

expenditures within the range of the budget. Her job is to meet

or beat the projections of expenditures. This is a joint effort.

If the wife is unsuccessful in sticking to the budget, the

husband must intervene and help her to readjust her spending

habits. If she repeatedly is unable to do this, he has got to

take over the budgeting. It may be that he will have to keep her

away from the credit card.

The numbers testify to us, loud and clear, whether or not we are

successful in disciplining our spending habits. This is why

people do not like to set up budgets, and why they do not like to

keep careful records on how they spent their money. They do not

like responsibility. They do not wish to increase their

responsibility. They do not wish to exercise leadership. So,

their spending habits keep them in the position of subordination.

They are constantly worried about paying the bills at the

beginning of the next month. They were about money. They worry

about the day of reckoning. They worry about bill collectors

calling them on the phone. They don't like the day of reckoning.

They don't like it, because they do not like to count the costs.

They do not like future-orientation. They do not like the

self-discipline required to keep expenditures at or below budget

carrier estimates.

This is why household budgeting is so important for young

couples. It enables him to get control of their lives by getting

control of their spending. If they are not willing to do this,

they are headed for trouble in their marriage.