"I will give them an undivided heart and put a new spirit in them; I will remove from them their heart of stone and give them a heart of flesh....I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh." (Ezekiel 11:19 - 36:26)
Does this prove that men have no control over the condition of their hearts?
Ezekiel 18:31
Rid yourselves of all the offenses you have committed, and get a new heart and a new spirit. Why will you die, O house of Israel?
Or, does the context still validate the NEED for mankind to respond?
No one denies the need for man to receive a new heart, we are only saying that the person is not born totally unresponsive to God's revelation. In fact, the text indicates that they are RESPONSIBLE for the condition of their hearts.
Calvinists make this same mistake many times. Two other examples are listed below:
1) They teach that men have a veil covering their eyes as proof that they have no response-ability or control over not being able to see (as if man can't do anything about this veil), but they ignore the text just before which clearly teaches, "a veil covers their hearts. But whenever anyone turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away."
2) Calvinists do this with the potter and the making of vessels for noble and common use, in the all too overused passage in Romans 9. They ASSUME that to mean men aren't response-able or in control over this in any way, because after all they aren't the potter. But they ignore the text which clearly states, "If a man cleanses himself from the latter, he will be an instrument for noble purposes..." (2 Tim 2:21)
Of course God is the one who gives a new heart, cleanses the vessel, and removes the veil but only if the man turns to Him for cleansing/veil removal/forgiveness. IF you confess, THEN He is faithful to forgive, not the other way around.
Do these scriptures deny human RESPONSIBILITY?
Discussion in 'Calvinism & Arminianism Debate' started by Skandelon, Dec 10, 2013.
Page 1 of 5
-
pinoybaptist Active MemberSite Supporter
Are the dead responsible for their rotten smell and inability to move even if where they are is about to catch on fire ?
Did Lazarus know he was dead, saw he was dead, and said, "okay, it's up to me to bring myself back to life" ?
Is God such a monster that you would have Him requiring accountability and responsibility from those who are spiritually dead and detached from Him, the source of life, when He Himself knows they cannot and then chastise them for their unrepentance and disobedience ?
Take a look at the scriptures you say require responsibility to God, and see that they are addressed to ISRAEL, the ONLY PHYSICAL NATION on earth to whom God revealed Himself and to whom God gave His oracles, His words.
Did He reveal Himself to the Jebusites ? Or all the other ITES in the Old Testament other than to prove there is a God in Irael, among Israel, and who fights Israel's battle for them ? Even the imprecatory psalms indicate that.
Even to Nineveh, He sent His prophet, an Israelite. Did He reveal Himself to the Babylonians ? No. But He did use, again, Israelites.
If there is responsibility that is being unheeded, that blame belong to those who name the Name of Jesus as their own. Are Christians, the ones who live both in Spirit and in Truth, living up to what they are supposed to be on earth, that is, a people separated unto the Lord God their Creator so that the crooked generations they live among in this time world know that ''there is a God in Israel" ? -
Further, if you read the immediate context of the Ezekiel passages you will find that human responsibility is very much validated:
"Therefore say, 'Thus says the Lord GOD, "I will gather you from the peoples and assemble you out of the countries among which you have been scattered, and I will give you the land of Israel."' 18 "When they come there, they will remove all its detestable things and all its abominations from it. 19 "And I will give them one heart, and put a new spirit within them. And I will take the heart of stone out of their flesh and give them a heart of flesh, 20 that they may walk in My statutes and keep My ordinances and do them. Then they will be My people, and I shall be their God. 21 "But as for those whose hearts go after their detestable things and abominations, I will bring their conduct down on their heads," declares the Lord GOD.
Their receiving a new heart and spirit is a direct response to their 'removing the detestable and abominations' just as in Chapter 18, where it goes on to say, "31 "Cast away from you all your transgressions which you have committed and make yourselves a new heart and a new spirit ! For why will you die, O house of Israel ? 32 "For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone who dies," declares the Lord GOD. "Therefore, repent and live." -
-
The Biblicist Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Taken by itself, Ezekiel 36:26 is mallible in the hands of the interpreter to make of it what they will. However, when verse 27 is include then we have a complete cause and effect relationship which directly contradicts how you are using the text. However, when verse 27 is included then giving the new heart in verse 26 provides ability to do what is described in verse 27 just as Deuteronomy 5:29 and 29:4 explicitlly declares is inseparable from the new heart, without which there is no ability to perceive, to see or to hear. You just eliminate the relationship and so manever around the whole issue.
By insisting on your definition of "respons-ability" you effectively deny it is possible for anyone to be judged by God for forfeiting any kind of ability, and so abilties once convyed are eternal without the possibility of any kind of loss or forfeiture that they can be justly held accounted for. So I will drop the term "responsibility" and "accountability" and simply say they are to account for their own forfeiture or loss of ability when they acted in unison as one insepable human nature in the person of Adam so as to willfully forfeiture their ability to "perceive, and eyes to see and ears to hear" due to sin.
Now, that I have addressed your thread, Please attempt to go back to my thread on Deuteronomy 5:29 and point out any error in my logic and application of those two scriptures. I made it easy as I gave a numerical sequence of my logical steps. Just point out any of those steps and demonstrate why it is error. -
But I think it happens because of God "Convicting the WORLD of sin and righteousness and judgment" John 16 and it is "Drawing ALL men unto Me". John 12:32.
Yet even so - if a man can harden his heart - it means the starting point for man cannot be "fully hardened". Though man may be in need of that "Drawing of ALL mankind to Me" even in his not-fully-hardened state - it still tells us that there is a change over time.
A change toward fully hardened.
Or a change toward the Gospel.
And that is what probationary time on earth for mankind is all about.
Not God "sabotaging His own will that there should not be any who perish - but rather all come to repentance".
in Christ,
Bob -
The Biblicist Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
Romans 1 goes a very long way to suggest that all men are indeed responsible and even without excuse. To suggest that all men are born unable to even understand God's revelation, much less respond to it is the best excuse in the world. The very basis of Paul's conclusion that all men are without excuse rests on the fact that God's revelation is clear and understandable, yet your dogma undermines that very premise. -
Calvinists continually put the cart before the horse. You think one must be brought to life in order to believe yet what does John say? "But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life..."
How much more clear can he be? Life, like cleansing, like a new heart, like new birth, like forgiveness all come AFTER the turning, not before.
Now, I know you don't see it that way. I didn't see it that way when I was a Calvinist either. I get it. You don't have eyes to see it my way. I'm okay with that and I know nothing I'll say will probably convince you otherwise, so we may just have to agree to disagree on this point. -
The Biblicist Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
-
Okay, I think I know what you are asking...
I am not ashamed of the gospel, because it is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: first for the Jew, then for the Gentile. For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: "The righteous will live by faith." The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth...
Look the entire context without the verse numbers or chapter breaks.... It shows the truth (righteousness can be attained by faith) and then those who suppress that truth and the wrath being revealed against them. Abraham's belief was credited to HIM as righteousness, thus he would be an example of one who did NOT suppress this truth and thus receive the wrath being revealed.
How can it be that Paul declares 'no one is righteous' while just a few chapters later teaching that Abraham was righteous? See my signature line below for the answer. -
The Biblicist Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
Spiritual life is inseparable from spiritual knowledge (jn. 17:3) which is given only to "as many as" the Father has given to the son (Jn. 17:2). Hence, there is no chronological order between spiritual life and faith but one cannot exist apart from the other any more than repentance can exist without faith as they are two sides of the same coin and inseparable graces.
No, the cure is not the issue but the issue lies deeper in the willingness of the cancer patient to submit to the cure. Curing him of cancer also cures the deeper problem of the will. -
Brother Skandelon, neither side of the debate denies human responsibilty in reagrds to salvation. Here's a blog that I wrote awhile back concerning this very subject:
http://hardshelloldregularbaptist.w...-must-i-do-to-be-saved-luke-1818-acts-162930/ -
Iconoclast Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
-
-
Earth Wind and Fire Well-Known MemberSite Supporter
The "Will" ...... I fail to understand how this addresses the Will.
Earlier, LUKE had a thread where he emphasized "Persuasion" as a ground braking event in a new believers life. This is something I questioned because persuasion is a tool to get someone to buy into something.....I called it a "Salesmans" tactic. But when I examine my own regeneration I have to comclude that George Whitfield's Sermon "Method Of Grace" became a persuasive tool in my conversation. But brother, there was another element unearthed......ENLIGHTENMENT.
An excerpt if you will permit me is below:
And now, my dear friends, examine your hearts, for I hope you came hither with a design to have your souls made better. Give me leave to ask you, in the presence of God, whether you know the time, and if you do not know exactly the time, do you know there was a time, when God wrote bitter things against you, when the arrows of the Almighty were within you? Was ever the remembrance of your sins grievous to you? Was the burden of your sins intolerable to your thoughts? Did you ever see that God"s wrath might justly fall upon you, on account of your actual transgressions against God? Were you ever in all your life sorry for your sins? Could you ever say, My sins are gone over my head as a burden too heavy for me to bear? Did you ever experience any such thing as this? Did ever any such thing as this pass between God and your soul? If not, for Jesus Christ"s sake, do not call yourselves Christians; you may speak peace to your hearts, but there is no peace. May the Lord awaken you, may the Lord convert you, may the Lord give you peace, if it be his will, before you go home!
But further: you may be convinced of your actual sins, so as to be made to tremble, and yet you may be strangers to Jesus Christ, you may have no true work of grace upon your hearts. Before ever, therefore, you can speak peace to your hearts, conviction must go deeper; you must not only be convinced of your actual transgressions against the law of God, but likewise of the foundation of all your transgressions. And what is that? I mean original sin, that original corruption each of us brings into the world with us, which renders us liable to God"s wrath and damnation. There are many poor souls that think themselves fine reasoners, yet they pretend to say there is no such thing as original sin; they will charge God with injustice in imputing Adam"s sin to us; although we have got the mark of the beast and of the devil upon us, yet they tell us we are not born in sin. Let them look abroad into the world and see the disorders in it, -
-
Biblicist, much of your argument hinges on the distinction in what you refer to as "natural" ability versus "spiritual" ability.
Can you explain to me how one is naturally able to 'see, hear, understand and turn to be healed' and someone who is spiritually able to 'see, hear, understand and turn to be healed.' Maybe give us an example of someone who has seen, heard, understood and been healed naturally but not spiritually? -
I believe Calvinists get the cart before the horse on this issue as John 20:31 states, "by believing we may have life..." not the other way around. Scripture continually places man's response to God's appeal FIRST....we confess to be forgiven...we turn to Christ to have the veil removed...we repent to be cleansed... we believe to gain life...etc etc. This is at the heart of human RESPONSE-ABILITY...the ability of man to respond to God's invitation...his appeal for all men everywhere to be reconciled to God.
Page 1 of 5