From the "C-C's Really Agree" Thread

David Lamb,

I brought this over from rip's thread so we wouldn't derail that with our discussion (which I didn't feel was concluded). Here is the post in question:

Salvation obviates the need to "crucify Christ afresh" by repenting unto the justification of the soul but salvation activates the need to repent of each sin we find in ourselves unto the sanctification of our spirits (2Cor 7:9-11). Now I am aware that you have certain problems with that statement because Calvinists I've debated with don't see any distinction between soul and spirit which is also why they err regarding original sin. But we can discuss that if you think it would help you understand salvation better or in a new way.

This IS the issue of soul vs spirit, David. The soul is dead but the means by which we can believe, the spirit, is most certainly alive! What Calvinism is basically assuming in their defintion of "spiritually dead" is that the lost person, like Lazarus, is soul dead and "brain dead," too!

I know. As I told rip, I do try to "caricature" some facets of Calvinism in order to examine form and function. As I said above, a saved person does not need to "crucify Christ afresh" yet that is the ordo salutis that you attest to. You say that one must be regenerated/born again/saved in order to repent. In fact, Calvinism says that salvation is "unconditional" -- without any act on our part. How is it that you say that of course one must repent to be saved?

On the other hand, if you are already saved, repenting would, indeed, seem to be crucifying Him afresh, no? Or else seem to be like Catholic confessional in that your intention is to quit sinning, not be saved.

Why not believe it in the same manner in which you received salvation --- Your soul was dead - your not dead spirit (mind, emotions, will) heard God's Spirit - you repented from self and turned to Christ - you were regenerated by the Spirit/saved! Isn't that what Peter said would happen? Repent, be baptized, receive the Spirit (Acts 2:38-39)?

skypair

 

Do you really want the answer or are you merely posing your objections.

Here's the paradigm I believe the Bible gives us: Our souls are "dead" to God because of sin BUT our spirits (mind, emotions, wills) are still "alive" to every and any idea that is presented through physical hearing and seeing.

What do we do with the "idea" of the gospel of Christ? Our spirits "process" it intellectually and emotionally --- God's Spirit communicating with our spirits --- and we CHOOSE to BELIEVE or disbelieve. How many times have you heard the verse "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved?" So at this point, you don't have faith yet (faith is proof of what one believes) -- you don't have the regeneration of the Holy Spirit yet (only the Word and the understanding of what it says) -- you don't have salvation yet.

But the Word does say this if you believe: "RECEIVE" or "REPENT" Generally, both are the same idea of turning from self to receive God and Christ as Lord and Savior. Many call this the "application of biblical truth to one's personal situation." How? What the heart believes is then confessed with the mouth, Rom 10:9-10, etal. "Repent, be baptized (apply the Spirit, the "water" of the Word), and receive the Spirit" (a new heart) as Peter said at Pentecost, Acts 2:38.

Then what you receive -- what is termed the "grace" given of God -- is all received at once: 1) faith, the proof of belief, comes by the palpable receiving of the Holy Sirit to live in us; 2) etenal life of the soul; 3) salvation of the spirit progressively until the "day of Christ" and perfectly and eternally thereafter; 4) the new body of "terrestrial" glory, our evidence of that future body of "celestial" glory; 5) "adoption" into the family and fellowship of God; 6) spiritual gifts (listed in 1Cor 12:7-11); 7) access to God in prayer; and others may be able to add to the list.

So yes, technically "regeneration precedes faith" just as Calvinist's aver. And all these "gifts" precede or is received immediately with regeneration. But there is a point prior to regeneration that the "covenant" -- the "new covenant" -- is understood and entered into by the wills of both parties. raying:

skypair

 

There is much to be misunderstood, isn't there. :laugh: For instance...

God gives "unmerited favor" only to the saved. The rest get only "mercy" -- they don't get what they deserve. And this simple explanation of it that you use makes grace conditional upon salvation, right?

OK, you're making progress.[/quote] "Regeneration" of a person means INDWELLING of that person with the life/Spirit of God. To say one is "born again of the Spirit" before one is convicted of sin is to put the cart before the horse. "Conviction of sin" is what you call "common grace" --- given to all mankind, "the world," John 16:8-9. And it's not really "grace" if it is "common" and does not "favor" one over against another. And Jesus said, "I will draw ALL men unto me." So in this we see that the gospel is not a "favor" but a promise -- so much so that God says that even the heathen are "without excuse."

"Particular grace," right? And, of course, it is true that the saved will continue to respond in faith and repentance throughout their earthly lives.

I like the way you distinguish "upon whom the Holy Spirit moves" from "indwells." The Spirit is certainly WITH us prior to salvation and this is the "free will" model in which "drawing" means "persuading". It is the "free will" model, not Calvinism, that says that, as a result of this "drawing," we still must personally appropriate Christ by trusting in Him before we will be regenerated/indwelt.

In the Calvinist model, it seems to me that "drawing" means "indwelling" or, even more so, "possession." It seems so because, as with demon possession, the "regenerate" person does irresistibly (and without much thought of his own) what is not of his own will to do.

And it further seems that we enter into the "new covenant" (spiritual life)unconditionally whereas it is clear to me that we must enter in by the blood of Christ.

What you and I have is a basically different useages of terminology.

skypair

 

We'll discuss this.

You wouldn't believe how long I have been trying to convince Calvinists that calling, drawing, conviction of sin, etc. are NOT the regeneration the Bible talks about!! Regneration as they use it is a misnomer. Regeneration is "born again" -- saved -- indwelt by the quickening Spirit -- the Spirit IN us -- "spiritual man."

Most Calvies I know will not agree with you that the Holy Spirit works from without the elect to call, draw, convict, persuade, etc. unto salvation. For them, regeneration is a whole change of the heart (as salvation is) so that one can hear and understand spiritual things and not be driven alone by the natural impulse only to sin.

Yes, this is what I believe. You merely misuse the term regeneration to mean "persuade from without" rather than what regeneration really means -- "save from within."

Yes.

So your sotierology teaches, anyway. The truth of the matter is that 1) the Calvinist model knows nothing of the distinction between soul and spirit; 2) therefore, if one is "dead" spiritually, there is nothing in that person to communicate "life" to; 3) therefore, God has to give "life" to the person by indwelling them with His Spirit before they can be saved --- they must be spiritually born just to hear the gospel!

Of course, such a view works perfectly with predestination, total soveriegnty, unconditional election, irresistible grace, their version of sin nature, etc. But it doesn't work so good with human responsibility, the fact that no man is "brain dead," understanding God's omniscience, understanding God's hand in sin, etc.

Again, that is the "pat" answer that let's God be omnipotent and totally sovereign -- except why doesn't He do it all the time?? Was Satan right in Eden? Is God witholding something good from most people in the earth?

Exactly! But who has the different vocabulary? I use biblical terms, not Calvin's terms. I use biblical definitions, not Calvinism's. Why don't we get away from the Calvinist paradigm long enough to see if its notions even make sense regarding what we KNOW of scripture? Calvinism makes a "mousetrap" out of the Bible. It's hard to get the true "cheese" out without getting snapped in a Calvinist "trap" theological!

skypair