.
Dear Forum members,
We come now to the two passages which, more perhaps than any others are quoted in support of a gracious and well-meaning gospel offer. I refer to Ezekiel 18:31, 32: “Cast away from you all your transgressions, whereby ye have transgressed; and make you a new heart and a new spirit: for why will ye die, O house of Israel? For I have no pleasure in the death of him that dieth, saith the Lord God: wherefore turn yourselves, and live ye.” (See also verse 23.)
A similar passage is found in Ezekiel 33:11: “Say unto them, As I live, saith the Lord God, I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways; for why will ye die, O house of Israel?”
From a certain viewpoint, these passages from Ezekiel are the strongest proof for the well-meant and gracious gospel offer. Both mention the fact that God has no pleasure in the death of the wicked. Ezekiel 33:11 says also that God does have pleasure in the wicked repenting from their sins and living. And the rhetorical question is a powerful one: “Why will ye die, O house of Israel?”
Nevertheless, it is a perversion of the text to force it to prove an intention of God, or a desire on God’s part, to save all who hear the gospel. As a preliminary observation, we must point out that the text makes no mention of “grace.” After all, the well-meant offer is part and parcel of a common grace, which is an attitude of favor on God’s part and which he shows to all men in the preaching of the gospel.
I think this is crucially important. The grace of God can, in this connection also, be understood in two ways. It can refer to the fact that God looks with favor on all who hear the gospel and gives evidence of his favor towards them by expressing in the gospel his desire that they be saved. In other words (and it is not clear to me how this conclusion can be avoided) in the gospel God graciously gives all who hear a chance to be saved. God’s love, mercy, and grace are so great that God through the gospel makes salvation available to all that hear the gospel and earnestly desires that they seize on the opportunity and satisfy God’s desire.
But in the context of common grace, the grace that comes in the preaching of the gospel to all that hear is also a subjective grace given to each man so that he is put into a spiritual state in which he can make a choice either for or against the offer of the gospel. He has the grace to say, when he hears to the gospel, “No, I do not want to be saved;” or, “Yes I will accept the offer of Christ and so be saved.
In this respect, common grace as taught in the well-meant gospel offer is patterned after the Puritan conception of Preparationism. I have referred to this in earlier installments, and need not enter into this notion again.
But such a grace as is taught by the well-meant offer defendants leads directly into Arminianism. And Arminianism is contrary to Scripture, Calvinism and the Reformed faith.
But more important for our present purposes, no such idea can be gleaned from the texts in Ezekiel.
The second point we need to remember is that these passages must not be taken out of their context. In both passages in Ezekiel the Lord is answering an objection that Israel made against the Lord’s dealings with the nation.
In chapter 18 the context explains to us that the words of God in verses 23 and 32 were spoken because Israel charged God with double dealing. Especially, they said, this was true because they were being punished for the sins of their fathers.
God answers this by informing Israel when a righteous man turns from his righteousness, he will surely be punished; and when a wicked man turns from his wickedness, he will surely save his soul. For this reason God says that he will judge each man according to his own ways (30).
But God does not take pleasure in a righteous man turning away from his righteousness; but he does take pleasure in a wicked man turning away from his wickedness. And therefore he comes to Israel with the command, “Repent, and turn yourselves from all your transgressions” (30).
This is the command of the gospel of which I already spoke at some length and which must be preached to all men. This is bound on all Reformed ministers by the Reformed confessions, specifically in Canons 2/5.
Chapter 33 is somewhat different, and may very well been spoken at a different time. The context here is a charge to the elders in Israel to be watchmen on the walls of the city, whose responsibility it is to warn the inhabitants of the city of the approach of an enemy. If they fail to do this, and people perish as a result, the blood of these people will be required of the watchmen.
It is worth our while to note that the principle God lays down in Ezekiel 33 is still in force today. How dreadful it is when the elders of a church fail to warn the people of enemies who constitute a spiritual danger to the church. And how much more dreadful it is when these watchmen actually conspired with the enemies to assist them in entering the city, something they do when they approve of false doctrine.
Ezekiel is therefore told that he must warn the people of the enemy. If he does this, and the people do not listen, then Ezekiel will be free from their blood (verse 9).
Apparently, the people of the captivity, to whom Ezekiel prophesied, complained that they were so punished by God in being brought into captivity that they saw no possibility of living once again (verse 10). The implied criticism of God was that God had no interest in them any more and that he did not really care if they died in Babylon.
To this Ezekiel, speaking God’s word, tells them that God has no pleasure in the death of the wicked. He does have pleasure in repentance and a turning away from the wicked ways that characterized Israel’s life.
One more remark needs to be made. That is that Ezekiel is addressing the nation in captivity in their organic unity. That is, he is addressing the nation as a whole. But the nation, we must remember, consisted of many wicked who had gained control over the life of the nation and had led the nation into terrible idolatry so that the nation became ripe for judgment.
But there was also in that nation a remnant according to the election of grace. This remnant was small and seemingly insignificant. But it was represented by Daniel and his three friends, by Ezekiel himself, and by those who sang Psalm 137.
This word was spoken to the whole nation in its organic unity; that is, in such a way that the wicked and the faithful both heard it.
This truth remains always the same. The word of the gospel is proclaimed in the church in its organic unity. In that church are hypocrites and unfaithful members. But in that church are also believers, saved by the power of the gospel. To them all comes the word of God: “I have no pleasure in the death of the wicked; but that the wicked turn from his way and live: turn ye, turn ye from your evil ways, for why will ye die, O house of Israel?”
That is, as Canons 2.5 expresses it: God promises eternal life to all who receive the gospel and repent of their sins; but God condemns those who refuse to obey the command of the gospel.
Looking at the preaching from God’s point of view and from the viewpoint of his eternal purpose, God uses that gospel with its promise and its command to save his people through the work of the Spirit in their hearts. And he uses the same gospel to harden the wicked in their way that it may be shown that God is righteous in all his ways.
We will, God willing, look at the meaning of these passages in our next installment.
With warm regards,
Prof Hanko
Monday, January 31, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I'm wondering how the Gospel commands if it is a promise? Isn't that "law" if there is a command involved?
ReplyDeleteThe gospel is both a promise and a command. It is a command that men forsake their sin and believe in Christ. It is a promise that those who believe in Christ will be saved from sin. A command is indeed law, but man must always keep God's commands, for God is God and man is a creature. Prof
ReplyDeleteI'm a Japanese believer. Please excuse me of my awkward English.
ReplyDeleteMy question is not directly connected with this article above. I'm wondering if common grace has anything to do with propitiation by Jesus' death, because some Reformed people teach that common grace was purchased by the propitiation. But I can't find any scripture in the NT which connects C.G. and propitiation.
What about Noaic covenant? Does it have anything to do with Christ's death? Some people say that the burnt offering which Noah sacrificed after the flood symbolizes the cross of Jesus.
My question is not directly connected with this article above. I'm wondering if common grace has anything to do with propitiation by Jesus' death, because some Reformed people teach that common grace was purchased by the propitiation. But I can't find any scripture in the NT which connects C.G. and propitiation.
ReplyDeleteAnswer. If grace is umerited favor and it cannot be merited by us, then it has to be merited by Christ. Hence common grace must teach a universal atonement. Yet there is no mention in Scripture of Christ dying to merit common grace. Hence, the defenders of common grace deny the power of the cross, for Christ died for those who are not saved.
What about Noaic covenant? Does it have anything to do with Christ's death? Some people say that the burnt offering which Noah sacrificed after the flood symbolizes the cross of Jesus.
Answer: Yes, the Noahic covenant has to do with Christ, for Christ's death redeems the whole number of the elect, and also the whole creation. See Colossians 1:20. Yes. Noah's sacrifice was a picture of the sacrifice of Christ.
Thank you very much.
ReplyDeleteGod Bless!
A further explanation of these verses is coming soon. Prof
ReplyDeleteThank you for this article. My question to you centers around the apparent human responsibility and perceived ability of the people to turn from disaster when the watchman has warned them (33:2-5). How do you reconcile that with the doctrine of total depravity/inability? Thank you again.
ReplyDelete