Featured The New Birth is a Pre-Pentecost Reality

Do you know the difference between a "spirit" and a "body"? One is immaterial substance and the other is material substance. Jesus says a spirit hath not flesh and bone but a body does. Do you know the difference???? The New birth is about your spirit while resurrection is about your body.

The new birth is about your "spirit" not you body as Jesus clearly and explcitly says "what is born of Spirit IS SPIRIT" - Jn. 3:6 But in regard to the body he says what is born OF FLESH IS FLESH" Do you know the difference between a "spirit" and a fleshly body?

The new birth is not about the resurrection of David's body or of Christ's body. Think about what I am about to say. Nicodemus was told that he must be born again, and yet Nicodemus was existing in a LIVING FLESHLY BODY that was not dead and did not need to be resurrected.

The New birth has to do with QUICKENING that which was DEAD but in LIVING BODIES (Eph. 2:1). The Ephesians were not dead bodies that had been quickened. They had "dead" spirits in living bodies that had been quickened. If you don't understand what a "dead" spirit is then let me explain. A "dead" spirit is not a non-existent spirit but an existing spirit that is SEPARATED SPIRITUALLY FROM GOD.

Do you know what a dead body is? A Dead body is not a non-existent body but the material substance of man SEPARATED from his immaterial substance at physical death.

Do you know what eternal death is? It is not non-existence but eternal SEPARATION of man, spirit, soul and body from God in a place called Gehenna.

DEATH = SEPARATION but it does not equal - non-existence.

It is the "spirit" of man that needs to be born again, because SEPARATION of the spirit of man from God is the consequential cause of both PHYSICAL death (separation of the material and immaterial human nature) and then eternal death - eternal separation of the whole man from God forever.

The spirit must be quickened, meaning separation from God must be reversed so that there is UNION between your spirit with God's Spirit. Why? Because God's Spirit IS life and IS light and IS holiness. That is why the unregenerated but physically alive man (Eph. 2:1) is described as "alienated from the LIFE of God" and in DARKNESS and in UNCLEANESS because he is SEPARATED from the Spirit of God which IS life and IS light and IS righteousness (Eph. 4:24).

Resurrection of the body is making the PHYSICAL BODY alive AFTER it has been laid to rest in the grave. The Ephesians had not been laid to rest in the grave (Eph. 2:1) and they were still PHYSICALLY alive in their bodies but yet they had been "quickened"! Hence, that proves your view is complete nonsense and you do not understand the new birth at all. Reread what I have said until you at least comprehend what I have said. Your view makes the Bible a book of complete contradictions and confusion simply because you don't know the difference between what a "spirit" is versus a "body" and Jesus tells a man in a LIVING BODY he needs to be born again, and if that is not plain enough, he tells him "what is born of Spirit IS SPIRIT"! Can't spell it out much clearer than that but he does as he goes on to deny the new birth is about his body as he says "what is born of flesh IS FLESH" and so no, he does not have to go back into his mother's womb and come out in a new BODY because the new birth IS NOTHING ABOUT THE BODY.

Dead bodies in the grave is called RESURRECTION not new birth!

Listen, if you are not born of the Spirit BEFORE YOU PHYSICALLY DIE you will not "see" or "enter" His kingdom. If you think new birth is the resurrection or something AFTER you die physically you are going straight to hell. That will be the ultimate destiny of all whose "spirit" is not born again BEFORE physical death. Is that clear enough for you to understand??????

Why do you take the words of Christ directed toward a man still living in his body (Nicodemus) and try to apply them to David's body still in the ground???? Don't you get it? Nicodemus is not physically dead but physically alive. The Ephesians were not physically dead but were SPIRITUALLY DEAD and that was what was QUICKENED! This is simple abc's unless you don't know the difference between a "spirit" and a "body"?????

What Jesus told Nicodemus and what Paul told the Ephesians had to do with quickening something that was dead OTHER THAN THEIR BODIES. These verses have to do with a DEAD BODY. Don't you know the difference between a "spirit" and a "body"? Apparently not! Don't you know that the Ephesians were PHYSICALLY ALIVE IN THEIR BODIES and yet still had been QUICKENED which should obviously tell you it had nothing to do with their bodies!

The new birth has to do with bringing your SPIRIT into UNION with the SPIRIT of God so that you share SPIRITUAL LIFE and SPIRITUAL LIGHT and SPIRITUAL RIGHTEOUSNESSS. It has NOTHING to do with the resurrection of your body. God will resurrect the bodies of both the righteous and the wicked but the wicked are NEVER born again so it cannot have anything to do with the body or else the wicked will be as much born again as the righteous! Think about it!

 

My oh my. I am not permitted to call you a liar. So I will just say it has been pointed out to you at least on THREE different occassions that the nature of faith in Romans 4:5-8 is defined both at the beginning of this topic in Romans 3:24-26 and at the conclusion of this topic in Romans 4:23-5:2.

24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;
26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

What justifies us is "the redemption that is IN Christ Jesus" which must be the object of faith "through faith IN HIS BLOOD...."beleiveth IN JESUS".

Hence, abstract faith justifies no one nor is abstract faith imputed for righteousness. What is imputed for righteousness is faith that has for its sole object the glad tidings that redemption is provided for in the redemptive person and work of Christ. Faith does not need to be regarded as righteous because faith has not sinned. GET IT??? It is Abraham that needs justification! It is Abraham that has sinned? It is Abraham that needs to be made righteous or can't you read Romans 4:5 "justifieth THE UNGODLY" not "justifies his faith." So what you are saying is patently FALSE!

But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe ON him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead;
25 Who was delivered for our offences, and was raised again for our justification.
1 ¶ Therefore being justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ:


God does not impute righteous due to ABSTRACT faith. God imputes righteousness to faith that has CHRIST and His redemptive work as ITS SOLE OBJECT for justification. So again, what you are saying is absolute baloney.

The "faith" that justifies has been defined both before and after Romans 4:5-11 and so there is no excuse for the absolute ignorance you are promoting. God does not reckon abstract faith as righteous, he reckons the believer as righteous due to the OBJECT of his faith - which is Jesus Christ.

Jesus tells you plainly that Abraham "saw" him and Paul tells you how he saw him - by faith in the gospel (Gal. 3:6-8). Paul tells you plainly that God's covenant with Abraham was made "IN CHRIST" - Gal. 3:17. Peter tells you plainly that the gospel of Christ was preached by all the prophets and Abel was the first prophet (Acts 10:43).

God does not reckon "faith" to be righteous, as faith does not need to be made righteous as faith has never sinned. It is the PERSON "the ungodly" that is justified - made righteous. He reckons Abraham, "the ungodly" to be righteous due to the OBJECT of his faith, that is how faith justifies. So stop repeating your nonsense that no one has direclty addressed your assertion. Stop ignoring the definition of the character of faith both before and after the text you are PERVERTING, due to the fact you are ignoring the contextual definition of that faith.

One more thing. The same text says that "ABRAHAM" his person as the "UNGODLY" was "jusitified by faith" as well as "his faith was imputed for righteousness". You interpret the latter to contradict the former!!!

 

It is amazing how anyone can read Romans 3:24-5:2 which is the complete section on justification and come to the conclusion that it is "faith" which is regarded as righteous when faith was never regarded as unrighteous and never sinned and never needs to justification.

The subject is about justification of "the ungodly" and that is THE PERSON, as it is THE PERSON who is "ungodly" and it is THE PERSON who has sinned.

Justification is to declare righteous and it is THE PERSON who is being declared righteous. His "faith" is counted for righteousness because of the object of that faith, which is the substitutionary redemptive work of Jesus Christ in the behalf of Abraham. Faith unites that redemptive provision to HIS PERSON, so that he is no longer regarded "UNGODLY" but "RIGHTEOUS" in the sight of God.

 

1. Is it the PERSON who is being justified or is it his FAITH that is being justified???

Where does it ever say it is the person's faith that is being justified?

2. Is it the PERSON who has sinned and is "ungodly" or is it his FAITH that has sinned and is ungodly?

Where does it ever say faith has sinned or is ungodly and needs justification???

3. Is Justification by definition either declare or make righteous? Hence, is it the PERSON who is declared or made righteous or is it FAITH that is declared or made righteous???


4. Does God regard righteous what he does not justify or declare or make righteous?

5. If it is the PERSON who is "ungodly" and is a "sinner" and is "condemned" then how can God "justify" the person and yet only regard his faith as righteous instead of him???????

What use is it to impute to faith righteousness if it is the PERSON who is unrighteous?

The truth is that the PERSON is JUSTIFIED declared or made righteous due to the OBJECT of His faith. The OBJECT of his faith is the good news that Jesus Christ died IN HIS PLACE FOR HIS SINS and that faith obtains the death and life of Christ to his account.

NOTE: I mention both "declare" and "made" but I personally believe justification is the legal declaration of righteousness in God's sight due to the substitutionary atonement which faith embraces.

 

regeneration and gospel conversion are inseparable simultaneous events just as repentance and faith are inseparable events. Both are in a proper cause and effect relationship. For example, Ephesians 2:8 says we are "saved" (quickened, see verse 5) "through faith." The word "saved" is a perfect tense of completed action that continues as a completed action. Thus if we were "saved....through faith" faith had to occur within that perfected action or we were not "saved...through faith" but saved before faith.

This whole phrase "by grace are ye saved through faith" is then defined "for we are his workmanship created in Christ Jesus" as quickening is a creative action by God but God does not create UNBELIEVERS in Christ Jesus as that is an oxymoronic statement. Hence, there is no such thing as an regenerated unbeliever any more than there is a unregenerated believer - neither exist.

Conversion is the completion of regeneration, regeneration the cause, conversion the effect. It is like the Old Testament prophet "turn us o God and we shall be turned" It is God that turns (regeneration - power - cause) but if he turns we are turning (conversion - turning from unbelief to belief, turning from resistance to submission, turning from love of darkness to love of light).

 

Again, you ignore the response to your previous arguements, and no doubt will later claim no one has ever responded to them - that is your MO.

Again, you simply turn to other arguments that have already been completely exposed and answered, which again you NEVER respond to those answers but ignore them and then later claim no one has ever answered them. I can't call you a liar but I will let the readers come to their own conclusions.

Matthew 23:13 teaches no such thing. He is speaking about those who receive a FALSE GOSPEL that makes them two-fold more children of hell. They were seeking entrance into heaven BY ANOTHER GOSPEL or the BROAD WAY as that is the same religious plight of the Hindu's, the Moslems, the Budhists, the Pharisees and Saduccess, the Roman CAtholics and every other false religion and children of darkness. However, you just don't get it, you continue to ignore the context. They no more sought or entered heaven or began to enter heaven than those who preached the false gospel to them. Neither can your false gospel save anyone. And you do not preach the gospel of Jesus Christ but "another gospel." You use the Biblical langauge but deny the Biblical content just like the famous ETC agreement about the gospel.

 

If faith is "credited as righteous" then faith is justified as the very meaning of justification is to declare or make righteous. You have Abraham being justified WITHOUT being declared or made righteous because you make his "faith" the recipient of righteousness not his person.

But you deny Abraham was put "spiritually into Christ" and therefore you deny God accepted his faith or justified him by the blood of Christ BY YOUR OWN DEFINITION ABOVE! Or have you changed your mind now and agree that faith of Old Testament saints are accepted by God, thus placed "spiritually into Christ"????????? (BTW I don't believe faith makes one acceptable to placed in Christ Jesus, but am simply following your own logic).

Yes, that is exactly what you are teaching! You do not credit the PERSON with righteousness but you credit faith with righteousness but it is the PERSON exercising that faith that is "ungodly" and "Condemned" and "sinned" and so it is the Person who NEEDS to be justified = declared/made righteous THROUGH faith rather than abstact faith being credited righteousness.

You don't understand the preposition "through" do you? The preposition "through" does not refer to a terminating point but something that transverses from one side to the other side. "Through" faith the righteousness of Christ is brought to the PERSON of the believer - meaning the person is justified as faith is the transitionary means to make Christ's righteousness Abraham's righteousnss (2 Cor. 5:21). Your doctrine has faith as the TERMINATING point thus making it impossible for any PERSON to be justified

To say the PERSON is justified but it is his abstract "faith" that righteousness is attributed to means the person is still UNJUSTIFIED still UNGODLY still CONDEMNED and will remain so until his PERSON is declared/made righteous.

The context defines the faith as inseparable from the PERSON and redemptive work of Christ, as it is through faith Abraham embraces the substitionary atoning work of Christ IN HIS PLACE thus that substitionary work is regarded, counted to abraham's account as though he has lived a righteous life, died for sin and is now free from the law - thus declared rightous in God's sight. That is exactly what Romans 4:23-25 spells out in black and white. That is exactly the "likeness" provided in baptism in Romans 6:4-5.

You repudiate the substitutionary atonement of Christ by making abstract faith IN DISTINCTION FROM the person to be justified - regarded as righteous in God's sight!

You do not understand the meaning of the PERSON being justified THROUGH faith, as you limit righteousness to merely faith leaving the PERSON still ungodly, still condemned and thus not justified in God's sight.

 

Robin, he does not believe that man comes into the world in a sinful state or condition. He does not believe Romans 3:9-18 refers to every human being but only to those who later choose evil. He does not believe in the gospel of Jesus Christ as a substitutionary atonement that THROUGH faith justifies the PERSON. He leaves the PERSON still "ungodly" and "condemned and in "sin" while crediting only his "faith" as righteous while his PERSON remains WITHOUT RIGHTEOUSNESS OF CHRIST. He makes faith the basis for acceptability to be placed spiritually "in Christ" while at the same time denying Abraham or any other Old Testament saint could be spiritually in Christ. He uses the Biblical terms but denies the Biblical definition of the terms.

 

We are justified "THROUGH" faith (Eph. 2:8 "dia" preposition). You make faith the TERMINATING point of righteousness, whereas God's word makes faith the TRANSITIONARY means between the provision of the righteous life and death of Christ UNTO the PERSON exercising the faith. However, you deny the "through" and make faith the terminating point so that the redemption provision is never actually applied to the Person. Thus you deny the gospel of Jesus Christ and deny the doctrine of substitutionary atonement.

 

This is the OP and van has not dared to address THE SPECIFICS that I have explicitly highlighted to refute his denial that pre-pentecost saints were regenerated.

Let me tell you a little secret! Van will NEVER address THE SPECIFICS simply because he can't and he knows he can't. So he will attempt to change the subject, redirect, ridicule as that is his MO when he is boxed in a corner. Or better yet, he will make the claim he has already answered THE SPECIFICS!!! However, he will NEVER be able to produce a post where he has because he has never yet done it. Of course on this forum you can't call a spade a spade.