Watching and Growing

[Netchaplain]

In the days of Moses and the Law, many among Israel were fearful of a relationship with God, they knew He expected them to live a godly lifestyle by their own power according to His holiness (Lev 11:44; 20:7, etc.). This was often accompanied with dread among those believing in God, who often saw His judgements in their times of disobedience, which were worst upon the unbelievers. Though the desire to obey God among the believers was often lacked (no new nature), He manifested His love to them by repeatedly delivering them out of their troubles, which availed in turning their hearts back to Him continually.

In the present and eternal Covenant, the desire to obey God is now implanted within the believer, via the Spirit using the new nature or “new man”—“which is renewed in knowledge after the image of Him that created him (it)” (Col 3:10). Thus permanently retaining a means of unbroken desire after that of seeking to “please” God (Phl 2:13; Gal 5:17); which safeguards our minds and hearts against being “lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God” (2Ti 3:4).
NC

Watching and Growing​

What was the effect of looking at the glory in the face of Moses? The Jews were afraid (Exo 34:30), because it convicted them of their sins. But when I look at the glory of God in the face of the Lord Jesus, far more glorious than upon Moses’ face, does it alarm me? No, on the contrary, it is the proof that I am brought to my Father; it is the testimony that I am saved, because I see it in the One who bore my sins upon the Cross.

I see the love that He showed in dying for me, and I see the efficacy of His work in Him being there, because He is there and glorified as the Man who died for me and bore my sins (1Pe 2:24). Instead of being terrified, “we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, even as by the Spirit of the Lord” (2Co 3:18). I see the glory of my Father in the One who has put away my sins, in the One who did not spare Himself, but drank the dreadful cup for me; and I can delight to look at it. I have got an Object that makes my conscience perfect before my Father (Heb 9).

The effect of thus thinking of the Holy One who gave Himself for my sins, is, that I am being changed into the same image (i.e. in our walk, not rebirth which is sudden, complete and unchangeable - Rom 11:29—NC); it has the sanctifying power. I can look into the very glory of God with joy and delight, and know moreover, that I shall be like the One who is there (completely - 1Jn 3:2—NC). As we have born the image of the earthly, so shall we bear the image of the heavenly” (1Co 15:49). The heart is thus filled with the Lord Jesus, and the results (fruits in our lifestyle—NC) are soon manifested. Of course there is progress in this, and watchfulness in our ways is needed to preserve and manifest it; but how we get it (godly walk—NC) is by contemplating the Lord Jesus Christ in glory.

The Word of God, and all the helps that He has given us by the Spirit come into operation, that we “may grow up unto Him in all things” (Eph 4:15). I am not trying to find out how I can get accepted there; I am accepted (Eph 1:6). All that is settled, in order that I may be free for fellowship and worship. We are positionally (Christ now representing us—NC) before or Father according to the righteous requirements of His holy nature. But this is not holiness (not our holiness but His—NC). Holiness is that I love the good because it is according to my Father, and hate the evil because it is contrary to my Father. Naturally I cannot rest there until my soul is settled as to whether I am accepted or not (Eph 1:6). Then I can go on to follow holiness, as that in which my Father delights, and I delight too; and bear more of the Lord Jesus’ image day by day.

—J N Darby




MJS devotional excerpt for July 13

“What is the good of a man being ennobled, made a prince of, if he feels he has gained no more sensible acquisition by it? This is the disappointment which souls feel without being able to account for it; and they are subject to nights of wrestling, because they have rested in their grand title, instead of in the means of supporting their titles, which is dependence on, and ever deepening acquaintance with, the One who has conferred them.” -J.B.S.
None But The Hungry Heart

 

[Randy Kluth]

Good message from Darby. I'm not Pretrib, but he obviously was a solid minister of God's word in ways we might both agree on. However, I might take issue with your stated sense that there was "no new nature" in OT Israel. I think there is some accuracy in the sentiment, but the thrust of the idea seems to be that there lacked spiritual resources in the OT that we do not have in the NT.

You said, "Though the desire to obey God among the believers was often lacked (no new nature)..."

Certainly, itt's true in the matter of having eternal life that the OT saints did not yet have that. We have it now. But they didn't.

But I don't believe that OT saints lacked the ability to be holy, to walk in righteousness, to fight spiritual warfare. So I'm a little confused by what you meant when you said that the OT saints had "no new nature?"

You were suggesting that *believers* lacked a new nature. Are you saying that they were utterly unable to fight their "old nature?" Are you saying they were powerless to fight against sin? I seriously doubt you were saying that, so I'm just trying to get the language straight.

I personally believe that even from the beginning, after the Fall, Man was given the capacity to overcome sin. That's what God told Cain, that he could master sin if he wanted to.

Gen 4.6 Then the Lord said to Cain, “Why are you angry? Why is your face downcast? 7 If you do what is right, will you not be accepted? But if you do not do what is right, sin is crouching at your door; it desires to have you, but you must rule over it.”

 

[marks]

But I don't believe that OT saints lacked the ability to be holy, to walk in righteousness, to fight spiritual warfare. So I'm a little confused by what you meant when you said that the OT saints had "no new nature?"

My thinking here . . .

No one could be baptized into Christ's death until He had died and risen again. In being baptized into Christ's death, we now become reborn from God, sharing His nature in our new creation, the "new man".

Those OT faithful could attain to a righteousness which is by the Law. Those who trusted with 'believing Abraham' would receive imputed righteousness, but not a new creation. Those who attained righteousness which is by the Law could lose that righteousness if they returned to wickedness.

Much love!

 

[Randy Kluth]

My thinking here . . .

No one could be baptized into Christ's death until He had died and risen again. In being baptized into Christ's death, we now become reborn from God, sharing His nature in our new creation, the "new man".

Those OT faithful could attain to a righteousness which is by the Law. Those who trusted with 'believing Abraham' would receive imputed righteousness, but not a new creation. Those who attained righteousness which is by the Law could lose that righteousness if they returned to wickedness.

Much love!

I think that's fairly well said. There is a difference between the nature of the covenants, and between the appearance of the two kinds of righteousness. The righteousness of the Law was real, spiritual, and accepted by God. But its form was a clear statement that atonement by animal sacrifices was purely a temporary fix, and not an eternal fix.

By contrast, NT righteousness assumes the form that Christians rely on the record of Jesus for their righteousness. They participate in it, but it is his righteousness that has made us accepted by God on an eternal basis.

In my view, both OT and NT righteousness were the same internally and spiritually. It is purely the external form that renders one of temporary value and the other as of eternal value.

Thanks much! It's an interesting subject, and requires just the right words.

 

[marks]

Simply stated, no one was reborn until Jesus came out of the tomb.

Much love!

 

[Randy Kluth]

Simply stated, no one was reborn until Jesus came out of the tomb.

Much love!

Generally, yes. However, I'd like to ask the question: Is "rebirth" meant to be applied as a strictly NT concept, which is how we normally apply it? I suspect that Jesus meant it to be applied in an OT sense, as well, particularly since he was speaking to Nicodemus while still under the Old Covenant?

 

[marks]

Generally, yes. However, I'd like to ask the question: Is "rebirth" meant to be applied as a strictly NT concept, which is how we normally apply it? I suspect that Jesus meant it to be applied in an OT sense, as well, particularly since he was speaking to Nicodemus while still under the Old Covenant?

I'm not sure what you are asking here.

To my understanding, rebirth, being born from God, happens as we are baptized into Jesus, being baptized into His death, and then coming alive from death in Him, which corresponds to being born from God.

Until Jesus died and rose again, there was no death for us to share, no new life in His resurrection.

Being reborn renders us righteous not only by imputation, as they were given in OT times, but makes us righteous in nature, as we now share God's nature. Being made righteous in nature, being crucified with Christ, these are what free us from our Adamic nature, and these are what bring us to "therefore there is no condemnation", because we are "in Christ".

Those passages which speak of the new covenant also speak of the the new heart, a heart of flesh for the heart of stone, as something future.

Much love!

 

[Randy Kluth]

I'm not sure what you are asking here.

To my understanding, rebirth, being born from God, happens as we are baptized into Jesus, being baptized into His death, and then coming alive from death in Him, which corresponds to being born from God.

Until Jesus died and rose again, there was no death for us to share, no new life in His resurrection.

Being reborn renders us righteous not only by imputation, as they were given in OT times, but makes us righteous in nature, as we now share God's nature. Being made righteous in nature, being crucified with Christ, these are what free us from our Adamic nature, and these are what bring us to "therefore there is no condemnation", because we are "in Christ".

Those passages which speak of the new covenant also speak of the the new heart, a heart of flesh for the heart of stone, as something future.

Much love!

Yes, I do mean that Jesus applied the term in the context of the OT Law, because when he was saying these words to Nicodemus, they were still under the Law! I know this is not how we, Christians, normally use the term "born again." We almost always are speaking in our own NT context, of a new birth into Christ.

But there may be the idea of a new nature under the OT, as well, even though that nature was not sufficient for eternal life. There was a spiritual life and a carnal life in the OT era, as well. It's just that spiritual life, such as existed in King David, Elijah, and John the Baptist, was a spiritual life that did not yet accrue to eternal life.

In other words, there was a spiritual life in the OT, which is how the OT saints lived. They also had to fight against their flesh. It's just that the spiritual life they enjoyed at that time did not yet merit resurrection from the dead--not until Christ himself had risen from the dead.

So we may speak of being "reborn" in the OT sense of choosing to live a spiritual life, as opposed to the carnal existence, even though it did not yet merit eternal life.

 

[marks]

So we may speak of being "reborn" in the OT sense of choosing to live a spiritual life, as opposed to the carnal existence, even though it did not yet

But there is no change of nature there. No new man. No new creation. What becomes "reborn"?

I think being "born again" or "born from above" is meant to mean a certain thing, becoming something new, as opposed to changing your mind on something.

Much love!

 

[Randy Kluth]

But there is no change of nature there. No new man. No new creation. What becomes "reborn"?

I think being "born again" or "born from above" is meant to mean a certain thing, becoming something new, as opposed to changing your mind on something.

Much love!

Well, I could be wrong, but the question remains--this was spoken to a Jewish leader under the OT Law. Jesus seemed to expect him, while he was still under Law, to understand a reborn nature. So obviously, there was living in a new spiritual life even under the OT Law. At least that's what I'm asking?

We can't possibly think God gave everybody in the OT up to their carnal nature until Jesus died on the cross? What about Jesus' disciples *before* he died on the cross? Were they relegated to a carnal nature even as Jesus told them to preach the Gospel of the Kingdom?

I think the word of God was active prior to the Incarnation, and accomplished the same thing as it does in the NT--only it did not yet come packaged together with the final atonement for sin, along with eternal life. What do you think? I don't ever hear anybody talk about this.

 

[Netchaplain]

G I might take issue with your stated sense that there was "no new nature" in OT Israel. I think there is some accuracy in the sentiment, but the thrust of the idea seems to be that there lacked spiritual resources in the OT that we do not have in the NT.

But I don't believe that OT saints lacked the ability to be holy, to walk in righteousness, to fight spiritual warfare. So I'm a little confused by what you meant when you said that the OT saints had "no new nature?"

I think the point is that until the Spirit was given, rebirth was not possible yet and with rebirth comes the new nature, and the Spirit through this nature keeps the old nature from causing us to willfully desire sin. Believers among Israel could physically obey but they were still lacking the new nature, which by "putting on" the nature is how we "put off" the old nature, i.e. no longer desiring after it. This shows we are no longer "in the flesh" (Ro 8:9), and this is the goal in this life, not to want sin anymore. Prior to Christ's coming, Israel walked on their own natural power in obedience. Now, the believer walks in the Spirit in the new nature from Christ, never again desiring the old nature.

For Israelite believers in God, His forgiveness was required to avoid guilt, which came from the Law's sacrificial ordinances shadowing Christ's atonement. Now, forgiveness comes from, not the shadow but the "very image." Our walk, regardless of its maturity level can never effect forgiveness, but God's pleasure. Both OT and NT believers receive forgiveness via Christ's sacrifice; theirs, ahead of Christ's coming, ours after His coming. "For the law, having a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who approach perfect" (Heb 10:1). "For the law made nothing perfect (complete), but the bringing in of a better hope did (new covenant - Heb 7:19). The new nature is eternal!

I believe the primary difference between the OT and NT is that they, not possessing the indwelling of the Spirit of God and new nature could still desire again to be in the flesh. Thus the issue isn't sinning or not sinning but not willfully desiring sin, which is where the heart and treasure is.

Concerning holiness, it's not only a state of being, but it's related more so to a believer's walk or lifestyle, which purpose is to manifest and glorify God (in drawing the lost and strengthening the saved). Those who outwardly profess Christ but inwardly are unchanged will eventually and unavoidably manifest so (apostate, hypocrite).

 

[Randy Kluth]

I think the point is that until the Spirit was given, rebirth was not possible yet and with rebirth comes the new nature, and the Spirit through this nature keeps the old nature from causing us to willfully desire sin. Believers among Israel could physically obey but they were still lacking the new nature, which by "putting on" the nature is how we "put off" the old nature, i.e. no longer desiring after it. This shows we are no longer "in the flesh" (Ro 8:9), and this is the goal in this life, not to want sin anymore. Prior to Christ's coming, Israel walked on their own natural power in obedience. Now, the believer walks in the Spirit in the new nature from Christ, never again desiring the old nature.

For Israelite believers in God, His forgiveness was required to avoid guilt, which came from the Law's sacrificial ordinances shadowing Christ's atonement. Now, forgiveness comes from, not the shadow but the "very image." Our walk, regardless of its maturity level can never effect forgiveness, but God's pleasure. Both OT and NT believers receive forgiveness via Christ's sacrifice; theirs, ahead of Christ's coming, ours after His coming. "For the law, having a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who approach perfect" (Heb 10:1). "For the law made nothing perfect (complete), but the bringing in of a better hope did (new covenant - Heb 7:19). The new nature is eternal!

I believe the primary difference between the OT and NT is that they, not possessing the indwelling of the Spirit of God and new nature could still desire again to be in the flesh. Thus the issue isn't sinning or not sinning but not willfully desiring sin, which is where the heart and treasure is.

Concerning holiness, it's not only a state of being, but it's related more so to a believer's walk or lifestyle, which purpose is to manifest and glorify God (in drawing the lost and strengthening the saved). Those who outwardly profess Christ but inwardly are unchanged will eventually and unavoidably manifest so (apostate, hypocrite).

Yea, I thought that's where you were coming from, and there's certainly a lot of truth in it. The only part I question, though I'm not sure, is how we compare OT and NT truth. I personally believe that the same spiritual warfare is fought in both testaments. In both OT and NT the saints rely upon a new spiritual nature to fight against the old carnal nature.

But I agree with you that the new spiritual nature in the OT was not "new" in the sense that it was yet a NT gift. It was just a "different nature" from the autonomous nature that men had come to be born with after the Fall.

In other words, after the Fall of Adam, all of mankind were born with a carnal, autonomous nature. They wanted to do their own thing, and resisted obeying God's word.

But they could overcome sin, just as Christians can overcome sin today. It's the same battle--the spiritual nature vs. the carnal nature. The saints in the OT had just as much responsibility to overcome sin as NT saints do. The only difference seems to be that the new nature Christians now are given comes with the guarantee of eternal life. The spiritual nature of the OT saints did not yet have eternal life.

But this is speculative to me, and I'm not really sure if I have the language right. We most often refer to the "new nature" as the Christian rebirth. But was there a pre-Christian rebirth, as well? I think so largely because Jesus referred to the new birth to Nicodemus while they were still under the OT system. Christianity had not yet come, and still Jesus acted as if Nicodemus, a teacher, should've known what the new birth was.

At any rate, I agree with your sense of the Christian new birth. Since the OT is past, the only new birth that concerns us today is the Christian new birth. Thanks.

 

[marks]

Well, I could be wrong, but the question remains--this was spoken to a Jewish leader under the OT Law. Jesus seemed to expect him, while he was still under Law, to understand a reborn nature. So obviously, there was living in a new spiritual life even under the OT Law. At least that's what I'm asking?

I'm not sure how much Jesus expected him to understand, myself. There is such a limited exchange. Only that a man must be born again, and that being born of the spirit is not like a natural birth with natural results, it's spiritual birth with spiritual results.

Under the Law you could attempt to keep the Law, which would really make your sinning worse. But by the Law you could keep bringing sacrifices, and as you kept bringing sacrifices, your sins wouldn't catch up to you. But you had to keep offering, so those sins weren't really gone.

The prophets foretold a new heart to be given, and that having received the new heart, all the Law would be kept.

So perhaps Jesus was telling Nicodemas, You must be born again, looking for Nicodemas to connet the dots on those things, How to keep the Law . . . a new heart . . . will keep the Law . . . you must be born again . . . Hey! Maybe that's the new heart?

Maybe something like that?

We can't possibly think God gave everybody in the OT up to their carnal nature until Jesus died on the cross? What about Jesus' disciples *before* he died on the cross? Were they relegated to a carnal nature even as Jesus told them to preach the Gospel of the Kingdom?

If you continued in the righteousness of the Law, God accepted you, but not into heaven. Only the reborn could enter heaven. So, Sheol. Until Christ died, and preached to the spirits in prison, then rose, and led captivity captive.

Before rebirth it was all about what we'd call character, I think, the accuracy of our values combined with the strength of our will, leading us to do the right thing.

Ezekiel 18, wickedness is forgetten when the man does righteousness, but righteousness is forgotten when he does wickedness. Christ is made unto us righteousness, and sanctification.

We have been reborn, to become new sorts of beings, not like Adam's children, now God's children, but living in Adam's kid's body. The vile body of sin. Corrupt and condemned. Philippians 3 calls it "the body of our humiliation"! Fitting, isn't it!

But now we are new creatures that cannot sin, do not sin, are righteous, and share God's very nature. Now, after Christ transforms our vile body to be like His glorious body, since we are already new inside, we are fit for heaven.

We are spiritually fit for heaven now. And in fact in a number of places God attests that we, being His children, do in fact live with Him in the celestial realm.

Much love!

 

[marks]

But they could overcome sin, just as Christians can overcome sin today. It's the same battle--the spiritual nature vs. the carnal nature.

Perhaps a conversation about justification?

Much love!

 

[Randy Kluth]

I'm not sure how much Jesus expected him to understand, myself. There is such a limited exchange. Only that a man must be born again, and that being born of the spirit is not like a natural birth with natural results, it's spiritual birth with spiritual results.

Under the Law you could attempt to keep the Law, which would really make your sinning worse. But by the Law you could keep bringing sacrifices, and as you kept bringing sacrifices, your sins wouldn't catch up to you. But you had to keep offering, so those sins weren't really gone.

The prophets foretold a new heart to be given, and that having received the new heart, all the Law would be kept.

So perhaps Jesus was telling Nicodemas, You must be born again, looking for Nicodemas to connet the dots on those things, How to keep the Law . . . a new heart . . . will keep the Law . . . you must be born again . . . Hey! Maybe that's the new heart?

Maybe something like that?

I think maybe Nicodemus should've known about the prophecy of Eze 36, which could've referred to the Persian Restoration or even to the endtime Restoration. At any rate, getting a new heart was simply about repentance, although today we Christians usually refer to this "new heart" as NT rebirth.

In reality, OT adherents of the Law were told that they must dig deeper than purely external application of the Law, or what we call "perfunctory observances." They had to apply the Law with faith, and to thereby exhibit a "new spiritual heart," following not just the externals of the Law, but also the spirituality inherent in those laws.

Just like today, they were required to know God, and not just the laws of God. The following presents a "new heart" as an OT phenomenon, and not just as a NT phenomenon.

Eze 18.31 Rid yourselves of all the offenses you have committed, and get a new heart and a new spirit. Why will you die, people of Israel? 32 For I take no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Sovereign Lord. Repent and live!

If you continued in the righteousness of the Law, God accepted you, but not into heaven. Only the reborn could enter heaven. So, Sheol. Until Christ died, and preached to the spirits in prison, then rose, and led captivity captive.

Before rebirth it was all about what we'd call character, I think, the accuracy of our values combined with the strength of our will, leading us to do the right thing.

Ezekiel 18, wickedness is forgetten when the man does righteousness, but righteousness is forgotten when he does wickedness. Christ is made unto us righteousness, and sanctification.

We have been reborn, to become new sorts of beings, not like Adam's children, now God's children, but living in Adam's kid's body. The vile body of sin. Corrupt and condemned. Philippians 3 calls it "the body of our humiliation"! Fitting, isn't it!

But now we are new creatures that cannot sin, do not sin, are righteous, and share God's very nature. Now, after Christ transforms our vile body to be like His glorious body, since we are already new inside, we are fit for heaven.

We are spiritually fit for heaven now. And in fact in a number of places God attests that we, being His children, do in fact live with Him in the celestial realm.

Much love!

Yes, that is an apt description of NT rebirth. However, the question is, was Jesus' conception of this, which he expected OT Nicodemus to understand, an OT rebirth? Just as the "new heart" was OT, and not just NT, so also the "rebirth" may have had an OT application, as well as a NT application?

It's something I have to consider in view of the fact Jesus did say that Nicodemus should've known these things, and he was still living under the Law, in the OT!

 

[Randy Kluth]

Perhaps a conversation about justification?

Much love!

Yes, I'll look into it. I'm just running this initially by you, to see what you think. I appreciate it! I've held these views for a little while, but nothing is set in stone. I want to base my views solidly on both Scriptures and my understanding of them in context.

 

[Netchaplain]

But this is speculative to me, and I'm not really sure if I have the language right. We most often refer to the "new nature" as the Christian rebirth. But was there a pre-Christian rebirth, as well?

I think it could be said that man with only the old nature cannot be improved upon, because it's all about the nature of an individual. There's nothing good in the old nature, as it resists the Spirit (Gal 5:17) and "it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be" (Rom 8:7). God accepted as His own people and forgave believers in Him, and His love desired us to be of another nature that would be compatible to His.

 

[Randy Kluth]

I think it could be said that man with only the old nature cannot be improved upon, because it's all about the nature of an individual. There's nothing good in the old nature, as it resists the Spirit (Gal 5:17) and "it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be" (Rom 8:7). God accepted as His own people and forgave believers in Him, and His love desired us to be of another nature that would be compatible to His.

Well yes, we wouldn't have any problem proving that, whether in the OT era or in the NT era. The old man is a despicable creature, and there is no taming it. However, we then must ask ourselves, is there an alternative in both testaments, both in the OT and in the NT? Are we confined to the NT to have the ability to overcome this old nature?

I'd have to say no. If God told Cain he could overcome sin, then it's true that in the OT dispensation, the old man could still be overcome.

When we talk about the ability to overcome the old man, we may speak of the new nature, or rebirth, when speaking in the NT sense. But what about when saints overcome the old man in the OT era? Do they not equally have opportunity to resist the carnal nature, and to put into effect a "new heart," a "new spirit," and a "spiritual rebirth?" It seems to me that there is such a thing.

Again, Jesus told Nicodemus that as an OT teacher, he should've already known about this spiritual rebirth. That is, it was an OT concept, fully made known under the Law. It had to do with living by the Spirit and by the word of God, rather than by the independent, carnal man, aka the "flesh."

Secondly, we read of having a "new heart" while Israel was still under the Law, showing that indeed, this was an OT concept, and not strictly a NT novel idea.

Eze 18.31 Rid yourselves of all the offenses you have committed, and get a new heart and a new spirit. Why will you die, people of Israel? 32 For I take no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Sovereign Lord. Repent and live!

 

[marks]

I'd have to say no. If God told Cain he could overcome sin, then it's true that in the OT dispensation, the old man could still be overcome.

I agree with this in the sense that we can work on our character, and our discipline, to control our behavior.

Again I feel the need to emphasize the future aspect of the new birth. God said through Ezekiel, "I shall", something He would do at a future time, coupled with the return of Israel to their land.

God did the same with Jeremiah, promising this new covenant when their hearts will be changed, to Ezekiel, a priest and prophet, and Jeremiah, a prophet.

Jesus said to the Samaritan woman, "the time is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship God in spirit, and in truth".

Something new. Better promises by which we don't just control the flesh, but transcend the flesh.

They could become condemned even after doing righteousness, if they abandoned that righteousness and returned to doing wickedly. Why? How? We cannot. There is no condemnation for those in Christ. The did not become His children, and we have. Better promises.

Much love!

 

[marks]

Just like today, they were required to know God, and not just the laws of God. The following presents a "new heart" as an OT phenomenon, and not just as a NT phenomenon.

Eze 18.31 Rid yourselves of all the offenses you have committed, and get a new heart and a new spirit. Why will you die, people of Israel? 32 For I take no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Sovereign Lord. Repent and live!

I've been thinking about this since you posted it.

There is another reference to a new heart that we haven't mentioned yet, King Saul. God gave him a new heart, and he became a new man. But then he was still later rejected.

I just looked at the LXX on this Ezekiel 18:31, there it's rendered, "make for yourself a new heart and a new spirit". Which focuses for me my thought on the KJV, "get a new heart and a new spirit" while God tells Israel, "I will put a new heart in you". In the one case, something we do, in the other case, something God does.

Much love!