This is one of the most difficult texts for our modern Hardshell brothers. This is true in spite of the fact that it is often quoted by them (though rarely expounded upon).
The Problem With Hearing The Voice
The "direct speaking" view of the Hardshells, first formulated by Two Seed Primitive Baptist Gilbert Beebe and his cohorts (via his periodical "Signs of the Times), affirms that the "voice" of the Lord Jesus (John 5: 25-28 and John 10, etc.) that is heard by the dead, or by the lost sheep, is the personal speaking of Jesus to the sinner. They contend that one does not hear the "voice" of Christ except when he personally speaks to them. One does not hear the "voice" of Christ, therefore, in hearing his words orally communicated. One cannot hear the voice of the Lord in reading his word. The only way to hear the voice of the Lord, in Hardshell thinking, is for one to personally hear the sound of his voice.
When this voice (sound) is first heard, it could not be a voice that is "recognized" from experience, for it has never been heard before. Yet, our Hardshell brothers, think that the sheep "know" the voice of their shepherd the first time they hear it. Also, as we will see, they do not know what is involved in "knowing" the voice of the Shepherd (pun intended).
Many heard the literal voice of Christ as he preached for three plus years and who did not "hear" it in the way the sheep hear it. This is obvious from the Gospel narratives. Thus, hearing the voice of the Lord in itself is not what saved anyone. The Israelites who were assembled around Mt. Sinai heard the "voice" of God and yet were not saved, were not sheep. The message to these unbelievers (goats, if you will) even after Sinai was "today, if you will hear his voice, do not harden you hearts as in the rebellion." Heb. 3: 7) In this statement "hear" does not mean a simple hearing of the words but a giving attention to those words. But, the text not only speaks about the voice or speaking of the Lord, but also of the speaking of the Spirit.
"Therefore, the Holy Spirit says, today if you will hear..." Notice that not only is the Lord one who "speaks" to the sheep, to the regenerate (to believers), but also the Holy Spirit. "The Holy spirit says." So, if hearing the voice of Christ the Shepherd is a direct speaking (apart from the written or preached word) then so is the speaking of the Spirit. To whom does the Spirit speak? To only the regenerate? The context of these verses will not allow such an interpretation. What the voice of the Lord says, and what the Spirit says, he says to all, even to the lost. The difference is not in the mere hearing of the word of God, but in giving heed to it.
It is also evident that all men who hear the voice of the Lord and the Spirit are obligated to pay attention to it, to heed it. But, this is denied by our Hardshell brethren, and the Strict Baptists, who deny it to be the duty of all men to hear the Lord and his word.
The verb for the word "says" is present indicative and if taken as a customary present tense, which it most often is, then it is "what the Holy Spirit is continually saying." The context also shows this to be the case, from the words "after so long a time" the Lord still says "if you will hear his voice."
"Again He designates a certain day, saying in David, “Today,” after such a long time, as it has been said: “Today, if you will hear His voice, Do not harden your hearts." (4: 7)
Men who lived long after Sinai, when the people heard audibly the voice of the Lord, were told to "hear" that very voice. But, how could it be hearing it directly as at Sinai? The idea of the text is that God has continually been uttering his voice to the people and yet they refused to hear and heed it, hardening their hearts to the message.
What is being spoken and said, by both Christ and the Spirit, are 1) said to all who audibly hear it (and this is not limited to the elect or the regenerate) and 2) is said continually. It is not a case where the people are waiting to hear the word or voice of God but rather God who is waiting upon the people to hear it.
The most important thing is not who simply "hears" the voice of Christ and words of the Spirit but rather who "hears" in the sense of pay attention to, or in the sense of heeding, those words and that voice. Some, said the apostle, heard the word and voice but "hardened their hearts" and were therefore refused entrance into the land of promise. They were also destroyed by the Lord in judgment during the wilderness journey. Now, logically, if merely audibly hearing the voice and words of God denote salvation, then we would find no record of God rejecting any of them who heard it as being unregenerate, nor of any of them rejecting God. But, this is not the case, and thus the premise is false.
In Hebrews chapters three and four Paul identifies this class (who heard the voice but did not pay attention to it), saying of them what God had said about them in his indictment - "they do always err in their hearts" and "they have not known my ways" (vs. 10). That cannot be a description of regenerate and godly people. The regenerate have the word of God written in their hearts in the work of regeneration as the Lord said - "I will put my law within them, and I will write it on their hearts." (Jer. 31: 33) Thus, those who have not known God's ways have not been regenerated even though they have audibly heard the voice and word of God.
The Greek word for "hear" ("my sheep hear") is "akouo" and means to listen, to heed or pay attention, to hear with comprehension. It is the root of our word "acoustics" having to do with sound. In verse 27 "hear" is from akouosin. Notice how Jesus spoke about two ways of hearing the words of Christ.
"Therefore speak I to them in parables: because they seeing see not; and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand. And in them the prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled, which says: ‘Hearing you will hear and shall not understand, And seeing you will see and not perceive; For the hearts of this people have grown dull. Their ears are hard of hearing, And their eyes they have closed, Lest they should see with their eyes and hear with their ears, Lest they should understand with their hearts and turn, So that I should heal them.’ But blessed are your eyes for they see, and your ears for they hear." (Matt. 13: 13-16)
By "hearing" our Lord does not mean simply hearing audibly the voice and words of Christ, but rather hearing them so as to understand and heed them. Jesus defines the kind of "hearing" that is done by the sheep, by those who are regenerate. Is the "hearing but not understanding" the kind of hearing done by the sheep? Yes, according to Hardshellism. That is why they will insist that the people Christ is describing in the above words are regenerate people. Only soft (regenerate) hearts can be hardened, they have said. Thus, those who heard but did not understand and heed were sheep. The ones who did not follow were sheep! Who can believe such nonsense?
On the words "and hearing they hear not" (καὶ ἀκούοντες οὐκ ἀκούουσιν οὐδὲ συνίουσιν) Dr. John Gill wrote:
"they heard externally, but not internally; they heard the sound of Christ's voice, but did not understand his words, even when he spake in the plainest and most intelligible manner; nor were they concerned to know the meaning of them." (Commentary)
Who can imagine sheep "hearing" their shepherd's voice and not knowing who it is that is speaking to them? Who can imagine that the sheep "hearing" means no more than hearing audibly the words but not knowing what they mean? Hardshell Baptists!
Thus, it is not a subconscious, non cognitive, hearing! Also, "obey" (or one of its forms) is included in what it means to "hear." Jesus even uses the word "follow." The sheep not only audibly hear the voice and word of the Lord but they pay attention to it, obey it, and "follow" the instructions of the shepherd.
In the explanation of the parable of the sower (from when our text, Matt. 13: 13 is taken), Jesus says to his disciples: “Therefore hear the parable of the sower." (vs. 18) Obviously "hear" in this case does not simply mean to audibly hear, but to hear with understanding. Jesus had just given them the parable of the sower and so they had already heard it. So, when Christ says, in his beginning explanation of the parable (which they did not understand), "hear the parable," he does not mean hear it as they had heard it previously. He meant "hear" in the sense of understand.
We regularly tell people who are hearing our words but not understanding them - "you are not hearing what I am saying." Sometimes we will ask rhetorically "do you hear me?" (as a parent to a child), and the meaning is "do you understand me?" But, our Hardshell brothers will tell us that the ones who "heard" but did not understand, who heard but did not heed or pay attention, were born again children of God! Again, who can believe such nonsense?
They argue that the words "their eyes they have closed" and "hardened their hearts" are descriptions of born again people! Folks, that is the worst of interpretations! Talk about giving hope to hypocrites and unbelievers! That, as they say, "takes the cake." I have heard Hardshells argue that since such hardened sinners audibly heard the word, and visibly seen the Lord, that they were saved (even though they did not understand or obey what they heard). By that logic, everyone who heard Christ preach was a born again child of God. Again, such nonsense! It is unworthy of any professed teacher of the bible.
The command of the Father, in respect to his Son, is "hear him." (Matt. 17: 5; Mark 9: 7; Luke 9: 35)
This is said to all men, and it is not a mere call to audibly hear the word but to hear it attentively, to heed it. God not only wants people to hear the word read or taught but to hear it with understanding. Further, where in Hardshellism is there room for God to be saying to all "hear my Son"? Obviously, the people had a choice whether to hear it rightly, as God intends, or not to hear it. Our Lord said "Take heed how you hear." (Luke 8: 18) Hearing the word of God without faith and understanding avails nothing, yea, it rather increases the condemnation. This is not the way, the "how," to "hear." Jesus later in this same discourse said:
“Why do you not understand My speech? Because you are not able to listen to My word...He who is of God hears God’s words; therefore you do not hear, because you are not of God.” (John 8: 43, 47)
The ones that Jesus here addressed, even by Hardshell admission, are not regenerate. Their reasoning for this is because Christ says "you cannot hear my word" and "you are not of God." Yet, the Hardshells have failed to see the consequences of this admission.
This text is often used by them to teach that sinners must be regenerated before they can "hear" the words of God. But, it teaches no such thing. In this interpretation they have interpreted "God's words" to be his preached words (orally or verbally communicated). To them one must first hear the word of God directly spoken to him before he can later hear "God's words" in the preaching of the word of God. But, who gave them the right to so interpret the meaning of hearing God's word (or words) in two different ways in the same text? Notice that Jesus says that these unregenerate folks actually heard his "speech." The Lord's condemnation was not that they had not heard his speech, his audible words, but that they had not "understood" it, nor "listened" to it, nor "hear" it with any depth. They only heard it superficially like most of those who hear it. What they heard did not penetrate into the depth of the soul.
Jesus is not giving an ordo salutis in these words, as our Hardshell brethren contend. He is not saying that one must first be "of God" (via regeneration or birth) before one can hear the word of God. That would be to contradict what is taught elsewhere in scripture. Further, to put it into Hardshell jargon, we would have it read "whoever is not of God by directly hearing the voice or word of God does not hear God's words as told afterward by others." Do you see how foolish is such a twisting of words? Hearing the word of God means two different things in the same text! But, if hearing God's words ("you therefore hear them not") denotes hearing the word preached then by this they admit that hearing the word of God does not always denote hearing Christ personally preach.
Rather than giving an ordo salutis that puts being of God before hearing the word of God, our Lord is rather identifying those who are "of God" and those who are not. Will the Hardshells take the implied opposite of Christ's words? So that not only is it true that "whoever is not of God does not hear attentively the words of God," but also that "whosoever is of God attentively hears God's words." If you do not pay attention to God's words, then you show that you are not of God.
Another problem with the Hardshell twist on John 8: 43 & 47 is that it affirms that one must hear the word of God (directly spoken) in order to hear it (indirectly spoken).
Jesus condemns these unregenerate folks for not hearing his word (in the way it should be heard). But, if they have no duty to do so, then how could he chastise them for not believing? Further, though they affirm that those "not of God" CANNOT hear "God's words" (as spoken by preachers) yet they say (out of the other side of their mouths) that the unregenerate will effectually hear the word that he personally speaks to them and in this hearing they have no choice, for they are passive in this hearing (as Lazarus when spoken to by the Lord when dead). Hearing "God's words" after being "of God" is not irresistible, but hearing the direct speaking is irresistible. Their interpretation takes what is simple to understand and makes it difficult.
Most bible students, when they read about hearing the voice of the Lord, do not divorce this from hearing the Lord speaking to them through the scriptures. The fact that the Hardshells have given to the idea of hearing the voice of the Lord an unusual and novel interpretation is an anomaly. It is not the normal sense of what is intended by hearing the Lord speaking. The Hardshell idea is more akin to mysticism.
The "if" of this text ('today if you will hear his voice') is a third class conditional clause, indicating the uncertainty as to whether the readers will indeed hear and heed the voice of the Lord. That is, they may hear it (in the sense of attending to it) or they may not hear it.
What Christ says about his "sheep" is true of all of them. But, those who die in infancy are not under consideration. It is what is true of all adult saved people. Even our Hardshell brethren must admit this. Christ is speaking of his people comprehended as old enough to hear, understand, and follow. Do Hardshells believe that infants who die in infancy hear, heed, and follow the Lord?
Assuming the Hardshell direct speaking view, we may well ask "in what language does Christ speak when he speaks to a sinner in his regeneration?" What does he say? Does he say anything with the design to communicate ideas or truth facts? Or, is his speaking the same kind that he speaks when he speaks to the wind and the waves? If so, do the wind and waves "hear" his voice as do the sheep? Are the winds and the waves active or passive in hearing the Lord speak in commanding them? Notice these words of the apostle:
"So likewise you, except you utter by the tongue words easy to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? for you shall speak into the air. There are, it may be, so many kinds of voices in the world, and none of them is without signification. Therefore if I know not the meaning of the voice, I shall be unto him that speaks a barbarian, and he that speaks shall be a barbarian unto me." (I Cor. 14: 9-11)
Does Christ "utter words easy to be understood" when he speaks to his sheep? Does he intend that his sheep "understand" what he says to them? Do the sheep "know the meaning of the voice" of the Lord when he speaks to them? Is his voice that of a barbarian to the sheep? Would it not be such if the sheep did not understand the "significance" of that voice? Does the "voice" of the Lord in speaking to the sheep exclude "words"? What words? What is the "signification" of the words that Christ speaks to his sheep?
What will our Hardshell brothers say in reply to these pertinent questions?
The Problem With The Active Voice & Present Tense
In the text given from John 10 at the heading of this posting I have indicated how the verbs "hear," "know," and "follow" are all in the active voice. Thus, by applying these words to regeneration (as they do) our Hardshell brethren have given up one of their leading tenets which says "the sinner is totally passive in regeneration." But, they are not passive in hearing the voice of the shepherd, but active in hearing and giving attention.
The other problem is seen in the same verbs being in the present tense and should likely be viewed as linear ongoing action. Thus, it is "my sheep are continually hearing my voice," and "my sheep continually know me," and "my sheep continually follow me." But, this is denied by most Hardshells today. They rather affirm that very few of the sheep continually follow Christ as sheep and disciples. Thus, there is a problem with applying the hearing and following to regeneration alone, and there are problems for the Hardshells in making it apply to the life after regeneration.
Who did Christ die for? "My sheep," said Christ. But, who are the sheep? Are any of them unbelievers? Are any of them worshipers of other gods? Are any believers in salvation outside of Christ? Are some of the sheep non hearers, non followers? Hardshells say yes. They affirm that many who are Muslims, Hindus, etc., are sheep who are hearing and following Jesus! What nonsense!
Another problem for those Hardshells who deny the perseverance of the saints are those words where Christ speaks about the negative action of his sheep (in contrast to the positive actions of hearing, knowing, following), saying "a stranger will they not follow" and "they know not the voice of strangers." I would like to ask our Hardshell brethren whether by "voice" in "voice of strangers" he denotes the direct speaking of strangers? Does it mean mere "voice" as in sound to the exclusion of comprehensible words? Also, again, the not "knowing" is present tense, a customary present, denoting continuous action. Is Christ saying that his sheep do not know the voice of strangers only in the instant of regeneration? Does he exclude the life following regeneration? Hardshells think so but that is foreign to the text. The negative statements about the sheep show that Jesus taught that the sheep would adhere to the faith and not fall away.
No comments:
Post a Comment