The Doctor's Visit

Bob was having trouble hearing. In fact, he was quite sure he had gone deaf. So he went to the doctor. "Doc," he said, "I can't hear a thing." The doctor did some tests and wrote out his prognosis for Bob. "You can't hear because you have no ears."

So there I am, reading in Deuteronomy, and I come across this from Moses to the people of Israel:

"You have seen all that the LORD did before your eyes in the land of Egypt, to Pharaoh and to all his servants and to all his land, the great trials that your eyes saw, the signs, and those great wonders. But to this day the LORD has not given you a heart to understand or eyes to see or ears to hear" (Deut 29:2-4).

"Oh, man, here he goes again," I can hear some of you saying. And I understand the sentiment. But ... doesn't it beg the question?

Of course I read this through the lense of the rest of Scripture that I see. It seems in perfect accord. Paul speaks without ambiguity of the unwillingness and inability of Natural Man to accept or understand the things of the Spirit of God "because they are spiritually discerned" (1 Cor 2:14). And I understand that to mean, in Moses's terms, that the LORD has not given Natural Man a heart to understand, eyes to see, or ears to hear. Jesus repeatedly told His listeners "He who has ears to hear, let him hear." In this, He speaks of three groups of people. There are those who have ears and are not listening. There are those who have ears and are listening. And there are those without ears. And there's that same echo: "The LORD has not given you a heart to understand or eyes to see or ears to hear." It all seems pretty clear to me. Of course, that's to me. But those who disagree don't see it that way. So ... what do you see?

I know the objections. The most common, of course, are the emotional ones. It makes Man out to be incapable and it makes God out to be less than generous. The most common biblical objection is from Romans 1.

For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. For His invisible attributes, namely, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly perceived, ever since the creation of the world, in the things that have been made. So they are without excuse (Rom 1:19-20).

What can be clearer? It says that "God has shown it to them", that the existence and character of God are intrinsic to humans, that "they are without excuse." I mean, if the fact was that Natural Man was unable to respond -- especially unable to comprehend -- then what sense can we make out of this passage and in what sense would Man be responsible for not responding when he can neither understand nor respond?

Of course, I've beat this dead horse before ... over and over. I have explained that the Bible says that Natural Man lacks the ability to choose Christ. I expounded on the phrase above from Jesus regarding ears and hearing. I've offered reasons from Scripture why I hold that regeneration must precede faith. So, to me, Moses's statement to Israel isn't so surprising. But many of my readers disagree.

Here's the basic premise: Human beings, even though they are "dead in sin" in their natural condition, are fully capable of seeing and hearing the Gospel -- of grasping it as far as is necessary -- and of choosing Christ. They need some sort of encouragement, some "wooing", some "drawing", something like that, but their grasp of the Gospel and their choice of Christ is fully their own in their state of slavery to sin and hostility to God and requires no fundamental change to their being to accomplish. This change occurs after they grasp the Gospel and choose Christ. (We call it "born again" or "regeneration".)

I find this position untenable. I know that Romans says that we have built into us an intrinsic knowledge of God. I even understand that the words of God are understandable, that they can be understood by all and that they are not unclear. I get that Natural Man can learn and even repeat biblical truth. I'm clear on all that. But it appears from 1 Cor 2:14 and Eph 2:1-3 and Rom 8:5-8 and so many others including this Deuteronomy passage that there is still something missing in Natural Man. Israel, in the Deuteronomy passage, wasn't unclear on either the commands or the covenant with God. They weren't unaware of God's power or authority, as at Mt. Sinai. But despite all of that, they missed what seemed to be absolutely plain and built a golden calf to worship. There seems to be something missing -- a lack of eyes and ears, a failure of the heart to understand. The signs and wonders were there. The words were clear. And they still didn't seem to get it. So the idea that we possess within ourselves all that is necessary to come to faith in Christ seems to me to contradict all this.

But to many of my readers it's perfectly clear. "No problem. What's the objection? How can you not see it? It's obvious to us!" So perhaps some of you can make it clear to me. How do you correlate "the LORD has not given you a heart to understand or eyes to see or ears to hear" or 1 Cor 2:14 or Eph 2:1-3 or Rom 8:5-8 with "we possess within ourselves all that is necessary to come to faith in Christ"? What is the impact of the lack of "ears"? What is the meaning of Paul's statement of Man's inability? If what I've said about it makes no sense to you, how do you make sense of it? I want to know. What does Bob do about his condition?