Deuteronomy 5:29

Discussion in 'Calvinism/Arminianism Debate' started by The Biblicist, Dec 10, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,145
    Likes Received:
    207
    23 ¶ And it came to pass, when ye heard the voice out of the midst of the darkness, (for the mountain did burn with fire,) that ye came near unto me, even all the heads of your tribes, and your elders;
    24 And ye said, Behold, the LORD our God hath shewed us his glory and his greatness, and we have heard his voice out of the midst of the fire: we have seen this day that God doth talk with man, and he liveth.
    25 Now therefore why should we die? for this great fire will consume us: if we hear the voice of the LORD our God any more, then we shall die.
    26 For who is there of all flesh, that hath heard the voice of the living God speaking out of the midst of the fire, as we have, and lived?
    27 Go thou near, and hear all that the LORD our God shall say: and speak thou unto us all that the LORD our God shall speak unto thee; and we will hear it, and do it.
    28 And the LORD heard the voice of your words, when ye spake unto me; and the LORD said unto me, I have heard the voice of the words of this people, which they have spoken unto thee: they have well said all that they have spoken.
    29 O that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep all my commandments always, that it might be well with them, and with their children for ever!


    I have quoted a larger portion of the immeidate context to show that verses 28-29 were said at the time that Israel first came to Mount Sinai when they were initially given the ten commandments after just coming out of Egypt. Hence, the time frame for this statement was just about a week after they left Egypt. Notice the time frame spelled out beginning in verse 23:

    23 ¶ And it came to pass, when ye heard the voice out of the midst of the darkness, (for the mountain did burn with fire,) that ye came near unto me, even all the heads of your tribes, and your elders;

    Now continue to follow the tense used in verses 24-29

    1. "ye said" - vv. 24-27
    2. "And the Lord heard your words" - v. 28a
    3. "And the Lord said unto me" - vv. 28b-30.

    So there can be no question that this text recounts the historical acts and words exchanged between Israel with Moses and the Lord with Moses at the time of Exodus 19-20.

    Now, look at verse 29:

    29 O that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep all my commandments always, that it might be well with them, and with their children for ever

    This text necessarily infers the following:

    1. They did not possess such a heart when God said this or else the Lord's words are senseless.

    2. Such a heart if possessed "would fear me, and keep all my comandments always" as there is no other stated reason for them to obtain such a heart.

    3. Thus exposure to the revealed Word of God did not enable or provide such ability but that ability only comes with such a heart.

    4. Hence, from the time they came out of Egypt they did not possess this kind of heart.

    Now, consider Deuteronomy 29:4 which is stated 40 years later after God had said Deuteronomy 5:29:

    4 Yet the LORD hath not given you an heart to perceive, and eyes to see, and ears to hear, unto this day.

    This verse demands the necessary infererences:

    1. Such a heart must be "given" to them by the Lord and the Lord had not "given" such a heart to them "unto this day."

    2. The reason stated for possessing such a heart is "to perceive, and eyes to see, and ears to hear"

    3. Therefore, without such a heart there is no ability "to perceive, and eyes to see, and ears to hear."

    4. They have been without this kind of heart at least from Deuteronomy 5:29 until Deuteronomy 29:4 "The Lord hath not given you an heart to.....until this day."

    CONCLUSION: Skandelon and the Arminian position claims that all lost men have such a heart "to perceive, and eyes to see, and ears to hear" from natural birth and that "hardening" is the willful resistance to truth that produces "hardening" where they lose this ability or cease to have eyes to see and ears to hear or ability to perceive. However, Deuteronomy 5;29 and 29:4 prove that such ability "to perceive, and eyes to see, and ears to hear" or such a heart with that spiritual ability had NEVER been given to them and yet they HARDENED the heart they were in possession of. This proves that hardening occurs without the ability to "perceive, and eyes to see, and ears to hear" but rather has reference to the heart they are naturally born with, or the fallen heart, which can "harden" or resist and reject light but is without SPIRITUAL ABILITY to "perceive" or "eyes to see" or "ears to hear" without a NEW heart being first given. Hence, hardening refers to the natural state and the natural conscience and its natural response to light whereas spiritual perception only comes with being given a NEW HEART by God as demanded by Deut. 5:29 and 29:4.

    If you disagree with my conclusion, note that my conclusion is based upon the numerical defined points above and is the natural conclusion to those points. If you disagree, please be kind enough to identify the number above where you believe my logic or inference drawn is incorrect and why.
     
    #1 The Biblicist, Dec 10, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 10, 2013
  2. Earth Wind and Fire

    Earth Wind and Fire
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Jun 5, 2010
    Messages:
    18,926
    Likes Received:
    95
    Well, Well, Well.......look who has returned! Praise God from whom all blessings flow. :thumbs:
     
  3. Skandelon

    Skandelon
    Expand Collapse
    <b>Moderator</b>
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 19, 2003
    Messages:
    9,638
    Likes Received:
    0
    Funny...while you were starting this thread I was starting a thread that answers this line of reasoning.

    You can read it HERE....
     
  4. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,145
    Likes Received:
    207
    My friend, your thread simply omits the very thing that I address in this thread. Please try to point out where you think my logic or application of the texts above are inaccurate and please provide reasons.
     
  5. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    In the Calvinist model - God continually sabotages His own efforts

    "HE came to His OWN
    and His OWN received Him not" John 1 - by failing to give those He leads out of Egypt a "heart to know him" an "ear to hear". Same with the Jews at the first coming of Christ.

    Even in the OP - The Calvinist POV would have us believe God sends the ten plagues and then frees Israel and speaks directly to them --- only to "forget to give them hearts to know Him"

    So in Calvinism no matter that Christ said "O Jerusalem ... How I WANTED to save your Children... but YOU would not" Matt 23:32 -- yet still in Calvinism it is only so because "God sabotaged his own will" by not remembering or not deciding to "give them a heart to know me" or "ears to hear".

    By contrast in the Arminian Bible model "men loved darkness rather than light" -- but "To as many as believed to THEM he gave..." so that it is up to them to believe AND THEN to receive the benefits of belief.

    "I STAND at the door and KNOCK - if ANYONE hears my voice AND OPENS the door I WILL come in" Rev 3.

    This is not place where massive Calvinist "inferences" can insert calvinism - rather it shows that God enables free will and it is the choice of those HE CAME TO - to reject Him... it is NOT God "forgetting" or "sabotaging" His own plans.

    in Christ,

    Bob
     
    #5 BobRyan, Dec 10, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 10, 2013
  6. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    Now, look at verse 29:

    29 O that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep all my commandments always, that it might be well with them, and with their children for ever

    This text exhibits the following details:

    1. God WANTED them to have a heart to know Him and ears to hear - but they would not. Clearly they did not have it.

    2. God is not blaming himself for forgetting to give them what they needed to hear Him. He obviously does not think that He is making the difference that causes them to fail after all the work He has done to bring them to this point.

    3. God is not accusing himself as if He could not help himself - could not keep himself from sabotaging his own work, by not giving them what He knows full well they must be given - to succeed.

    4. Ezek 18 "Oh WHY will you die? ... as I live declares the Lord I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked"

    There are numerous Bible accounts where God describes Himself as doing all that could be done to bring Israel out as a loving, faithful, servant fully obedient to God and destined for blessing upon blessing. (and indeed SOME of the individuals in Israel did choose to serve God faithfully).

    But Free will is the boundary - is the limit - that God Himself sets because He does not want the whole thing to "melt down" to nothing more than "robot programming".

    However even in the "robot programming" model - God would have to be sabotaging his own work - to get the robots to work against Him and fail.

    in Christ,

    Bob
     
    #6 BobRyan, Dec 10, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 10, 2013
  7. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,145
    Likes Received:
    207
    I am still looking for anyone to straightforwardly take on my points and demonstrate why any of them are wrong or where I have abused the context. Some have tried to derail this thread already by diverting and ignoring the OP and change the discussion to some other contexts or texts but no one has yet had the integrity to simply confront the evidence presented and show why any point given is wrong.
     
  8. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    So yes -- that would be vs 29 as noted above.
     
  9. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,145
    Likes Received:
    207
    Bob, just for a change, try to deal directly with an OP rather than repeat favorite texts that are nowhere mentioned in the OP in order to derail the op for you text instead of the one presented in the OP. Try dealing direct with the evidences presented and demonstrating they are not contextually correct and point out why instead of providing your own points which you provide absolutely nothing from the context to substantiate them but are direct contradictions to what the text actually says. I don't treat your OP's this way but deal with OP in a direct straightforward manner as presented. Why not simply try dealing with the OP and points directly as requested?
     
  10. Winman

    Winman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    14,768
    Likes Received:
    0
    LOL, this is what The Biblicist considers an argument. You are not allowed to consider any scripture outside his argument.

    And this guy thinks he is a scholar. :laugh::laugh::laugh:
     
  11. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    Hey I gave him almost his exact statement on Deut 5:29 -- wonder why he did not go for that? :jesus:
     
  12. Winman

    Winman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    14,768
    Likes Received:
    0
    Probably because it refuted his view. NOT ALLOWED.
     
  13. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    1. First of all - my reference to Deut 5:29 was from your OP and my comments around it were almost verbatim patterned after your own musings about Deut 5:29.

    Only with the Arminian observations stated - not the Calvinist inferences.

    2. Secondly your own post states that your case has to be made by 'inferences' -- in fact extreme inferences for ideas not at all in the text.

    So the limits/bounds/test of that inference has to be applied - which I do using the very same concepts and showing where the Bible puts a limit on how far one may go with one's extreme 'inferences'.

    1. First of all they are not my texts - they are God's.

    2. Secondly God's texts are already "substantiated". That is how the Bible works as it turns out.

    3. Thirdly - the link between the texts and the OP is the subject. They deal with the very premise you are trying to establish showing where it is bounded by the texts.

    Taking one text and adding unlimited "inferences" bent to promote a given aprior bias such as you have -- as if the rest of scripture does not exist works FINE - if the rest of scripture does not exist.

    I think we all see that point clearly.

    The texts that I quote in response to your OP are indeed "direct contradictions to" your inferences.

    But it can hardly be argued that they are direct contradictions to Deut 5.

    Examples will follow.

    in Christ,

    Bob
     
  14. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,145
    Likes Received:
    207
    If I used this kind of rhetoric I would be charged with being unChristlike, threatened with being banned.
     
  15. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,145
    Likes Received:
    207
    I am simply asking for common courtesy to address the OP and its points. I am not asking you to do anything I do not practice as I address OP's directly with their arguments.

    You have not yet done that.
     
  16. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    From Biblicist's own quote of Deut 5 (so he cannot say it is being ignored)

    24 And ye said, Behold, the LORD our God hath shewed us his glory and his greatness, and we have heard his voice out of the midst of the fire: we have seen this day that God doth talk with man, and he liveth.
    25 Now therefore why should we die? for this great fire will consume us: if we hear the voice of the LORD our God any more, then we shall die.
    26 For who is there of all flesh, that hath heard the voice of the living God speaking out of the midst of the fire, as we have, and lived?
    27 Go thou near, and hear all that the LORD our God shall say: and speak thou unto us all that the LORD our God shall speak unto thee; and we will hear it, and do it.
    28 And the LORD heard the voice of your words, when ye spake unto me; and the LORD said unto me, I have heard the voice of the words of this people, which they have spoken unto thee: they have well said all that they have spoken.
    29 O that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep all my commandments always, that it might be well with them, and with their children for ever!

    From Ex 19


    18 Now Mount Sinai was all in smoke because the Lord descended upon it in fire; and its smoke ascended like the smoke of a furnace, and the whole mountain quaked violently. 19 When the sound of the trumpet grew louder and louder, Moses spoke and God answered him with thunder. 20 The Lord came down on Mount Sinai, to the top of the mountain; and the Lord called Moses to the top of the mountain, and Moses went up. 21 Then the Lord spoke to Moses, “Go down, warn the people, so that they do not break through to the Lord to gaze, and many of them perish.

    from Exodus 20
    account of the SAME thing as we find referenced in Deut 5.


    20 Then God spoke all these words, saying,
    2 “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of slavery.
    3 “You shall have no other gods before Me.
    ...
    18 All the people perceived the thunder and the lightning flashes and the sound of the trumpet and the mountain smoking; and when the people saw it, they trembled and stood at a distance. 19 Then they said to Moses, “Speak to us yourself and we will listen; but let not God speak to us, or we will die.” 20 Moses said to the people, “Do not be afraid; for God has come in order to test you, and in order that the fear of Him may remain with you, so that you may not sin.” 21 So the people stood at a distance, while Moses approached the thick cloud where God was.


    22 Then the Lord said to Moses, “Thus you shall say to the sons of Israel, ‘You yourselves have seen that I have spoken to you from heaven. 23 You shall not make other gods besides Me; gods of silver or gods of gold, you shall not make for yourselves. 24 You shall make an altar of earth for Me, and you shall sacrifice on it your burnt offerings and your peace offerings, your sheep and your oxen; in every place where I cause My name to be remembered, I will come to you and bless you.


    Exodus 24

    3 Then Moses came and recounted to the people all the words of the Lord and all the ordinances; and all the people answered with one voice and said,All the words which the Lord has spoken we will do!”

    Notice that, Miriam, Aaron, Joshua, Caleb and a number of other OT saints are in that group.

    Yet "over time" Israel turns to wickedness. And the Levites (among some others) choose to remain faithful to God.

    When we look for "details" with the golden calf - at no point does God claim he has sabotaged the system and not given Israel the necessary means to persevere in the initial strong commitment where THEY say Ex 24:3 and all the ordinances; and all the people answered with one voice and said, “All the words which the Lord has spoken we will do!”

    Now Deut 5:29 -- 29 O that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep all my commandments always, that it might be well with them, and with their children for ever!.

    God's lament is not about "himself" being saboteur of his own plans, or about Himself forgetting to provide the necessary means. Nobody can doubt that.

    Is 5:4
    What could have been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done in it? wherefore, when I looked that it should bring forth grapes, brought it forth wild grapes?

    Well the Calvinist would have an answer for God on that one - informing Him of just what He did wrong - sabotaging His own plans or at the very least - being forgetful to "do the necessary" as the saying goes in India.
     
    #16 BobRyan, Dec 10, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 10, 2013
  17. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,145
    Likes Received:
    207
    You never addressed the evidence at all. You substituted them with your own assertions of which you provided no contextual basis to support them. I did provide contextual evidence to establish the time and context of the statement. I did provide contextual explicit statements to support each conclusion, none of which you attempted to demonstrate were dishonest or erroneous but made only your completely unsubstantiated assertions as though they were based on some kind of contextual evidence.

    There is a difference between "inferences" and necessary inferences and my points are necessary inferences based upon explicit statements found in the text.


    They are not God's text when jerked out of context and placed in YOUR context but are perversions of God's Word.

    They are never substantiated when jerked out of context but perverted.

    Separate the link and there is no connection and that is what you are doing.

    According to your logic in steps 1-3 above there is no such thing as jerking a text out of context as every scripture text automaticaly is "substantiated" regardless how one uses it. So why charge me with what you claim cannot be charged????



    The explicit statements in the text demand that my inferences or conclusions are necessary due to what the text actually states. If not, prove my statments are violating the text. The fact you make no attempt to demonstrate this shows you can't so you avoid, divert, distract and deny.
     
  18. BobRyan

    BobRyan
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2002
    Messages:
    30,837
    Likes Received:
    4
    Exodus 24

    3 Then Moses came and recounted to the people all the words of the Lord and all the ordinances; and all the people answered with one voice and said,All the words which the Lord has spoken we will do!”

    Notice that, Miriam, Aaron, Joshua, Caleb and a number of other OT saints are in that group.

    Yet "over time" Israel turns to wickedness. And the Levites (among some others) choose to remain faithful to God.

    When we look for "details" with the golden calf - at no point does God claim he has sabotaged the system and not given Israel the necessary means to persevere in the initial strong commitment where THEY say Ex 24:3 and all the ordinances; and all the people answered with one voice and said, “All the words which the Lord has spoken we will do!”

    Now Deut 5:29 -- 29 O that there were such an heart in them, that they would fear me, and keep all my commandments always, that it might be well with them, and with their children for ever!.

    God's lament is not about "himself" being saboteur of his own plans, or about Himself forgetting to provide the necessary means. Nobody can doubt that.

    Is 5:4
    What could have been done more to my vineyard, that I have not done in it? wherefore, when I looked that it should bring forth grapes, brought it forth wild grapes?

    Well the Calvinist would have an answer for God on that one - informing Him of just what He did wrong - sabotaging His own plans or at the very least - being forgetful to "do the necessary" as the saying goes in India.
     
  19. Winman

    Winman
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2009
    Messages:
    14,768
    Likes Received:
    0
    You seem not to understand what a debate is. You can't set down rules that prohibits your opponent from presenting evidence that refutes your argument.

    You want to cherry pick verses that you can interpret to support Calvinism. That is how you frame almost 100% of your arguments. You insist that only the verses you have cherry picked can be considered.

    That is not a debate, and that is not scholarly. You have to be prepared to defend your view against the opposition.

    Your idea of debate is like the legal system in some dictatorships where only the prosecution is allowed to present evidence.

    That I have to explain this to you shows you are not a scholar at all.
     
  20. The Biblicist

    The Biblicist
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2011
    Messages:
    14,145
    Likes Received:
    207
    Moses is addressing the NATION as the covenant at Mount Sinai was not made with individuals but with the NATION as a whole "all the people answered." It is the nation that agreed to this covenant. The nation as a whole was made up of individuals who did not have a heart for God's commandments at the time it was given and the Lord did not "give" them a heart from that time to Deuteronomy 29:4.

    The only heart they had from the very point they agreed to the very day explicitly referred to in Deuteronomy 29:3 is a heart unable to "perceive and eyes to see and ears to ear UNTO THIS DAY"

    God's lament is not about "himself" being saboteur of his own plans, or about Himself forgetting to provide the necessary means. Nobody can doubt that.[/QUOTE]

    Deuteronomy 5:29 simply notes the fact they are without such a heart, whereas Deut. 29:4 gives the reason they have no such heart is because God has not "given" it to them. Justice can never demand that God give spiritual ability to sinners as they forfeited that ability as the human race acted in one man - Adam - Rom. 5:12-19.


    God is speaking in regard to the natural realm. No fault can be found in God for their rebellious heart as God is not the cause but God has provided them every possible natural advantage just as a vinedresser does everything in the natural realm to insure productivity of a vineyard. However, the fault is internal not external, supernatural not natural. God did not give them a heart "to perceive, and eyes to see and ears to hear" as that is the plain meaning and express statement of Deuteronomy 29:4
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Loading...