Gospel regeneration, is it biblical? Yes? No?

Gotta go, duty calls, don't know when I'll be back.

 

Does regeneration mean spiritually alive? Does it mean born again?

How can you be spiritually alive before your sins are forgiven?

 

Well, that may be true. However, only by a look at all factors taught in scripture will we be able to examine this.

When terms like "external means regeneration" are used, I understand that we are dealing with a doctrine that is held by some, rejected by others.

If it is thought that I am a "gospel means" folk, because I believe that prior to Chrsist's death men did not understand the role He would play concerning our redemption...then I am truly a "gospel means" folk.

However, let's not try to force a rigid adherence to one side or the other, but look at what is in view.

I have not once implied that men play a part in salvation, but have several times denied a belief in such.

What I have said, though, is that man must have a focus for their faith in these last days that they might focus their faith in it.

The Gospel is the means of understanding that man is condemned, and that there is but one remedy that will help him escape condemnation, namely, Jesus Christ.

The hindu will not be born again until he first hears of Christ and then turns to Him. The hindu may come to saving faith while reading a tract, and it will be the Holy Spirit that accomplishes this work in his life, not the tract.

The Hindu may come to saving faith through hearing a preacher who is a mediator of the New Covenant which is the provision of God, as he preaches Christ and Christ crucified, even as Paul did. But it is not the preacher that acomplishes the work...it is God.

Agreed. The Law is in view...this is not to say that it is believed that the Law saved men, is it? That is a question, not an accusation, by the way, I am not saying anyone is "blind to the truth."

The law failed in that it was weak through the flesh.

If these men were regenerated through the law, because they kept the law, what need was there that Christ should come? But we are told over and over that it was necessary for Christ to die, because the law could not take away sins.

And if the law could not take away sins...then sacrifice is still necessary for them.

And if sacrifice is still necessary...then there is still a promise of rest awaiting them.

Lastly, if we view the LAW, as is said here, as what is in view, we then have the problem of dealing with those before the law. Thankfully, the writer of Hebrews deals with this for us, giving us a concise statement in regards to them, and points to the literal work of Christ as the missing componenet in the lives of the faithful before Christ, both pre-law, as well as those that were under the law.

The law performed the ministry which is now performed by the Comforter, Wo shows man his sin, his impending judgment, and his need for righteousness, and more specifically...the means of righteousness, which scripture is going to always end with Jesus Christ, and the work He accomplished.

If they were true "Jews," then what do we do with this:


Ephesians 2:15

King James Version (KJV)

15Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;

In His flesh.

Until Christ died, both Jew and Gentile were "one" in condemnation and lack of both the righteousness of God and means to obtain it.

But in His flesh, that is, His death, both Jew and Gentile are become "one," that is...redeemed.

Paul does not contradict his teachings. He declares in Romans that all are guilty, and he does not distinguish between Jew and Gentile. That the Gentile was a "doer" of the law, though he had never heard it, illustrates the internal knowledge man has of God, and, unless we want to teach that in fact man is saved through works (and here the keeping of the law), we will understand that Paul declares all guilty before God.

Which is why he says...



Romans 1:16

King James Version (KJV)

16For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.

Both Jew and Gentile are referenced here, a they are in the following chapters.

Paul does not imply that Gentiles could "believe in the Gospel" through internal knowledge, but that man is without excuse, because he does have an internal knowledge that should result in compliance with that internal knowledge, but as he illustrates...the opposite is the result.

He will later imply that his very knowledge of the law would result in a stronger desire to sin, even as children are wont to do exactly what parents tell them not to do.

This is left hanging...I am sitting here thinking, "and..."

Not trying to be a smart-aleck, but this has to be finished.

If we take this to mean that Jews had an advantage in the law because they were more likely, because they had the law, to obey the law, then his entire point concerning Gentiles becomes meaningless.


Romans 3

1What advantage then hath the Jew? or what profit is there of circumcision?

2Much every way: chiefly, because that unto them were committed the oracles of God.

3For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith of God without effect?

4God forbid: yea, let God be true, but every man a liar; as it is written, That thou mightest be justified in thy sayings, and mightest overcome when thou art judged.


The word of God did not guarantee belief.


Psalm 51

1Have mercy upon me, O God, according to thy lovingkindness: according unto the multitude of thy tender mercies blot out my transgressions.

2Wash me throughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin.

3For I acknowledge my transgressions: and my sin is ever before me.

4Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and done this evil in thy sight: that thou mightest be justified when thou speakest, and be clear when thou judgest.


Even the quotation points to man's sinfullness.

I don't. I think it is just a point people like to argue because they feel they have a "higher understanding" than others.

I have spent a lot of time looking at issues concerning "traditional belief" in the Church, and what I have found is this: God is still building His Church, and He is still giving understanding of His word to His people.

There is a reason for many of the things that, unfortunately, are "taken on faith" among the body of Christ, rather than a diligent, studious examination, but unfortunately, there are many out there that would undermine some of the basic understandings that have through the centuries been held as true.

That the Gospel is used by God through gifted men is an apparent truth in scripture, and that includes the preaching, teaching, and evangelistic efforts of God as He works through men.

When the extreme is proposed, whichever side one may find themself on, it has to be either verified in scripture to be a dogmatic and immutable fact, or held as a facet, not the sum total, of understanding.

I prefer to recognize the latter as taught in scripture, though I must say that where I differ from some of my brethren is that I do not believe that the new birth preceded Pentecost.

And I think this is where the last post ends, so I will have to end here, as i need to get going (and if I can squeeze in one more before I actually leave [though I shouldn't] I will do so).

But, I look forward to further conversation with you.

God bless.

 

And that, my friend, is the very question we have to ask.

If the Cross of Christ is said to be the means of forgiveness (in completion, as opposed to the temporal remission of the law) and we see a ministry and work of the Holy Spirit clearly foretold by the Prophets as well as Christ Himself, would we not consider that the events of the New Birth coincide with the establishment of the New Covenant as well as the Church?

Gotta run,

God bless.

 

Does it not mean that one's sins are forgiven WHEN they are regenerated?

Is one not made "spiritually alive" WHEN they are regenerated?

Further, is not justification an instantaneous legal decision BY GOD to remedy our standing before Him?

All this "before and after" talk does not compute except that we argue the logical order of salvation, ordo salutis, not the timing.

Berkhof, in Systematic Theology offers this:

I searched for resources that show this issue and came up with this (with some work from various perspectives):

http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/twoviews.html

http://evangelicalarminians.org/files/FACTS vs. TULIP Chart.pdf

 

I would say the reverse, when one's sins are forgiven, then they are regenerated. They are no longer dead in sins. Justification must precede regeneration.

This is what I was asking you. How can a person be spiritually alive (regenerated) until they believe and their sins forgiven? How can you be spiritually alive and spiritually dead in sins at the same time?

Yes, once they believe. We are justified by faith. Faith must precede justification, faith is the cause, justification is the effect. So, how can you be spiritually alive or regenerated before faith? Until you believe you are dead in sins.

It makes all the difference in the world. If man has the ability to believe, all men could potentially be saved. If man does not have the ability to believe, then only those God regenerates and gives the ability to believe can be saved. HUGE difference.

I'm asking you, not Berkhof. I want to know what you believe.

Thanks, I have seen both sites, but rarely read there.

 

I will give an example;

Acts 16:29 Then he called for a light, and sprang in, and came trembling, and fell down before Paul and Silas,
30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved?
31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.
32 And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house.
33 And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway.
34 And when he had brought them into his house, he set meat before them, and rejoiced, believing in God with all his house.

This of course, is the story of the Philipian jailer. It is certain he was convicted of sin, for he burst in and asked Paul and Silas what he must do to be "saved".

Now, most Calvinists would say this man was regenerated, else he could not desire or even see his need to be saved.

Had he believed yet? NO, because Paul told him he needed to believe to be saved. Was he justified from all his sins at this point? NO, because we are justified by faith, and he did not even understand what he had to do to be saved. Paul had to tell him he must believe on Jesus to be saved.

So, how could he be regenerated here? He is still dead in all his trespasses and sins. Only after he heard the gospel and believed on Jesus was he justified and his sins washed away. Only when his sins were removed could he be spiritually aliive.

Do you not see this? So, this passage proves an unregenerate man can be convicted of his sins and desire to be saved.

 

You are right to question the order of events, but don't neglect to consider the work on the cross. Because ALL sins are forgiven for all humankind (for on the cross they certainly were) a person can then be regenerated by God - this was not the relationship God had with humankind before the cross. Justification is another step or stage of the process.

A person is not condemned merely because of sin. If it were not so, even the believers would loose for we all sin (Romans 7). But Romans 8 teaches that there is no condemnation, and the condition of that state is to be "in Christ." A person is condemned because of unbelief (john 3).

Regeneration is a process and not a one time big bang starting life happening. There is no problem with God laying claim to a person and beginning a work in them to make them self aware of the need of Christ.

The person must be spiritually conceived (alive) before they are born again. Consider the ability of one to become self aware of the need of salvation is a condition of already being spiritually alive. Examples: Saul/Paul, Eunuch, Macedonian family, jailor and family, ...

All men could potentially be saved.

That some who desire to vilify a view might make a claim to the contrary doesn't make it so.

Will all be saved? no

The seed is scattered to the ground well prepared (regenerated - fertile) as well as to ground designated for other duty.

Does the ground have the authority to question the owner of the dirt?

 

Yes, Jesus paid for and atoned for all our sins, but we must receive it by faith. A gift can be refused. A man can ask a girl to marry him and offer her an engagement ring. The ring is fully paid for. But the girl can refuse this free offer. It is the same with salvation, in fact, salvation is compared to marriage.

Rom 7:4 Wherefore, my brethren, ye also are become dead to the law by the body of Christ; that ye should be married to another, even to him who is raised from the dead, that we should bring forth fruit unto God.

Marriage is an instantaneous transaction. The moment the preacher says "You are NOW man and wife" you are married. And this is how salvation works also. The moment you place your trust in Jesus you have passed from death to life and shall NEVER come into condemnation.

John 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

Salvation is not a prolonged process. The moment you hear the word of God and believe on Jesus you are justified from all your sins and made spiritually alive. You will never come into condemnation, you cannot lose your salvation. You are sealed by the Holy Spirit who will never leave you.

We are preserved by God, we do not persevere.

 

There is a problem with considering the modern cultural view of marriage with the Biblical writing times of marriage.

Marriage in the time of Christ was not an instantaneous "I do" and off they go. Rather, marriage was when a man became what we might consider engaged. The family barter arrangements were made and the ceremony had taken place. On a side note: it was during this time that Christ indicated divorce was acceptable if one or the other were found unfaithful. The marriage was under "contract"

However the marriage union (as we would consider it) did not happen until the groom had built a place for the bride. When, according to the grooms father (or family authority) the place was complete, then the groom would come and take the bride away from her family and to the new home. On a side note: From this point on, divorce was not to be considered an option. It was no longer a "contract" but a union. Unfortunately, many in our modern age consider marriage a contractual agreement rather than a union, and therefore they think that divorce is an option - it isn't. At least not Biblically.

Put that into the Scriptures you posted and you can easily see how regeneration is used by God before salvation.

One further point. Whether one receives the gift or not does not mean that the gift has not been paid for. Years ago, I gave my soon to go off to college son a second hand car. I didn't require him to pay for the car, the upkeep, the insurance or even the gas. It was freely paid for in complete and offered to him. That is the condition of all humankind.

It is lack of belief that condemns a person "already."

Salvation is certainly not a long process. Salvation is instantaneous. However, there is a process that one goes through "on the road" to salvation. How long that road is, and in what manner and mode the traveling takes is part of the historical experience that makes salvation unique to each believer. We are all saved exactly the same, but the journey to that point and since that point are all unique to the purposed work of God within the heart of the person.

That is what in part makes it all so very special and meaningful.

As was rightly posted, "A person knows when they were saved."

It is an outstandingly personal experience.

 

Who justifies? You cannot escape the fact that God acts first.

God gives faith, and God justifies. We cannot justify ourselves. As goes the familiar Sunday school refreain, God makes me "just as if I" had not sinned.

We are not spiritually alive until we are legally placed into a position to be spiritually alive. That is justification.

Faith is a gift of God. We've been through that before, and you have STILL not answered the questions I posed to you in the other thread... Let me know if you need a reminder.

Do you realize that you just argued the exact opposite of what you argued above? So, which side of that proposition do you believe. So far, you are arguing that MAN can believe if he wants, and if he does, then God reacts to that belief.

I am saying just the opposite, in fact, we cannot believe unless or until God gives us a gift of faith, and once given that gift we can be saved with all that entails (the gift of faith being one of the elements of salvation).

I believe you know precisely what I belive. I have made it abundantly clear inmultiple threads. My doctrine is coherent and cohesive, not to mention scriptural. There is no "before and after" in the instantaneous actions of God in salvation (which does not include sanctification and perseverence, which are life-long pursuits), only a logical order, which was precisely why I quoted Berkhoff who said the same thing.

 

basically, you either have to accept the simple biblical fact that we are ALl dead spiritually as a direct result of the fall of adam, and in such a state, there are NONE that would seek after the Lord jesus, as darkness is repelled by the light!

ONLY God can call a dead man back to life, and we can do NOTHING to add to that, as salvation process is of the Lord, as to unto his glory!

 

Per John Gill:

Immediate Infusion - John Gill
The instrumental cause of regeneration, if it may be so called, are the word of God, and the ministers of it; hence regenerate persons are said to be "born again by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever" (1 Pet. 1:23), and again, "of his own will begat he us with the word of truth" (James 1:18), unless by the Word in these passages should be meant the Eternal Logos, or essential Word of God, Christ Jesus, since λογος is used in both places; though ministers of the gospel are not only represented as ministers and instruments by whom others believe, but as spiritual fathers; "though you have ten thousand instructors in Christ", says the apostle to the Corinthians (1 Cor. 4:15), "yet have ye not many fathers, for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel"; so he speaks of his son Onesimus, whom he had "begotten in his bonds" (Philemon 1:10) yet this instrumentality of the word in regeneration seems not so agreeable to the principle of grace implanted in the soul in regeneration, and to be understood with respect to that; since that is done by immediate infusion, and is represented as a creation; and now as God made no use of any instrument in the first and old creation, so neither does it seem so agreeable that he should use any in the new creation: wherefore this is rather to be understood of the exertion of the principle of grace, and the drawing it forth into act and exercise; which is excited and encouraged by the ministry of the word, by which it appears that a man is born again; so the three thousand first converts, and the jailor, were first regenerated, or had the principle of grace wrought in their souls by the Spirit of God, and then were directed and encouraged by the ministry of the apostles to repent and believe in Christ: whereby it became manifest that they were born again.....”

Heard of em', haven't met any yet.

They've been referred to in several negative terms, the most common being 'Hardshells', denoting obstinance, or refusal to change or implement new beliefs or practices into the Church. IMO, some of their doctrines were reactionary, or were drawn out, due to the changes that were sweeping through the Church at that time, particularly in the early 1800s. They refused to accept 'The Great Commission' of the Church to populate heaven (thus the term 'anti-missionary'), or that the means to populate heaven is the gospel (thus the term 'anti-means').

 

That is correct.

I've heard it preached, and believe it, that all that has transpired has been in 'the twinkiling of an eye' to God; the whole thing at once.

 

Name calling aside, your saying you believe that the preaching of the gospel is God's ordained means of bringing eternal salvation to the sinner?

Shouldnt it be by only the direct operation of the Holy Spirit that eternal life can be brought to the dead sinner (John 3 : 6-8) .The gospel brings life and immortality to light, but doesn't produce life (llTim.1: 10).

 

the Gosel itsefls is the chosen agent to bring about the work of completing the salvation process, its just that God enables by His effectual Grace that those who hear and are the elect will respond by it!

It accomplishes it desired work among the elect, to bring them to placing their faith in Christ, as God has enabled them to do!

 

Just a quick point in regards to the discussion at hand:




Romans 1

King James Version (KJV)

1Paul, a servant of Jesus Christ, called to be an apostle, separated unto the gospel of God,


What does Paul mean when he says here he is "separated unto the Gospel?"

He explains:


2(Which he had promised afore by his prophets in the holy scriptures,)


What did God promise?

He explains:



3Concerning his Son Jesus Christ our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to the flesh;


4And declared to be the Son of God with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead:


We see a reference to both the scriptures as well as the prophets themselves (v.2), and this takes on a twofold importance though it does not negate that it is the effectual work of redemtpion in Christ for us.

We cannot, I believe, negate the importance of either in the sum total of God's ministry toward men.




5By whom we have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations, for his name:


Paul declares that "we" (speaking of himself and close associates though we can see include ourselves I think) have received grace and apostleship...first, what would most see this as speaking of?

Myself, it again takes into view both the reception of grace as well as the ministering of grace to others for...obedience to the faith among all nations. This speaks of Paul's ministry which he had been given in delivering the Gospel, not just a repetition of the message itself, but of the very faith, the goal, which his ministry was intended to bring as a result.

Okay, had a call during the time I started this so my train of thought was thrown off a little...lol. Submitted for consideration in regards to the discussion at hand.

God bless.

 

I agree that God initiates salvation.

I would say God enables faith. All men have the God-given innate ability to believe, but no man can believe what he does not know. Through the revelation of Jesus Christ through the reading or hearing of scripture, a man is taught and enabled to believe. I agree that God justifies, only God is able to forgive sin, but it is conditioned upon us believeing the gospel.

Exactly. You cannot be spiritually alive until you are justified, and you cannot be justified until you believe, so faith precedes regeneration.

Faith is a gift in the sense that all abilites we have are gifts from God. The ability to think, the ability to reason is a gift from God. But all men have these gifts, including the ability to believe. However, no man can believe what he does not know, and no man could believe on Jesus unless he were revealed to him. In this sense faith is a gift, for without this revelation from God, no man could possibly believe. But a man does not have to be supernaturally changed to believe, all men have this gift and ability. Even animals have faith, a dog will often trust it's owner, but fear a stranger. Jesus said a sheep knows it's shepherd's voice and will not follow another. So, even animals have faith.

God requires that we believe. Jesus said we will die in our sins unless we believe he is the Christ.

We could not believe unless Jesus was revealed to us, so God must initiate salvation. But that does not mean God has to make a man spiritually alive to believe, man already has this ability. Once a man chooses to believe the gospel, his sins are forgiven (justified) and then only is he spiritually alive. You cannot be spiritually alive while you remain under condemnation and are dead in your sins.

Actually, I have learned you have to ask each Calvinist individually what they believe, as all seem to differ on various points, otherwise I am falsely accused of misrepresenting Calvinism, when in reality I am only misrepresenting your PERSONAL view of Calvinism. I might be accurately representing another Calvinist.

I would agree that Calvinism is coherent and cohesive, and very consistent within itself. That does not mean it is true, but this is why many are deceived into believeing it is true. It works, it agrees with itself. The problem is that it does not agree with scripture.

 

God not only initiates Salvation but God completes that good work!


Philippians 1:6, KJV
6. Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform [it] until the day of Jesus Christ: