Regeneration: Is it a prelude to OR the Act of Salvation ~Born Again~

Do you think that people who reject Christ really understand what they missed or are rejecting? Im not saying people cant understand right and wrong, that God exists, and even intellectually believe in Christ. What I mean by understand is when one really sees his heart and Jesus' heart. There is a difference between understanding blindly and understanding with spiritual eyes. When someone really sees and understands, then turning to God is irresistable.

All I meant was that I am not denying the passage, but upholding it.

I was just showing the similarities between how God works with bringing people to Christ vs people already in Christ, but just ignore that for now to avoid rabbit trails.

I emphasized what I want you to explain in light of Romans 30. It shows that all who God calls are justified etc... So if God calls every person the same then why isnt everyone justified...?

You may have to explain the "but working effectually to bring to Himself" part, how does this work in your view? Do you mean that God only effectually calls those who He already knew would believe?

I see two calls in Scripture, 1- The call that comes from the instruments, us, God sends us places to preach that people reject and God knows it. He also knows that they arent chosen vessels of His and therefore call 2 I am going to explain does not happen. Call number 2 is the effectual call in which God sovereignly does a work in a person at the same time call number 1 is happening. This creates the opening of eyes to our preaching, desire to come to Christ, understanding like never before, and ultimately repentance and faith. If God isnt at work, so to speak, our words or the way we present doesnt matter.

yes we have :)

 

Yes, that is correct. God does not make anyone believe nor does He beleive for them. They must, of their own willingness, believe. This is the same in Calvinist/Reformed theology 101.

Though God calls, regenerates, etc.. man still is one who determines where he will spend eternity. You state, well God brought him to that point (and I agree) however his eternal destiny still resides in the fact 'he' must believe. and it without it God can not and will not save him.

Remember when I said you are bring into the scripture what isn't here - with respect, you will see what I mean in this post and your next one - multiple times.

Note your #3 and 4. The passage does not state this nor does it infer this. And Mat 13 isn't even in view and can not be brought into the text for a contextual analysis. It isn't reference, the instance here isn't spoken of there as a parallel. Mat 13 has nothing to do with this passage - it has to brought in and superimposed upon the text to maintain your view.

I will deal with Mat 13 first since actaully it makes my case even stronger.
Yes, he who has ears, let him hear.
NOW you state these ears are ONLY given to the elect and thus NO non-elect can even hear. You are quoting a portion of something without examining the context of what is actaully being talked about assuming it works with your case.
You assume that because:

This is stated it 'must' illistrate your view all people are in the same boat and only a select few get to know spiritual things as is 'apparently' shown above. However in examining the text you actaully it not only denies your premise but in fact strengthens my own point. Notice 'why' these people (Jews) were not given to know the mysteries of heaven:

Note the prophesy of Isaiah (Isa 6:11-12) is the key link to what is going on, NOT that this is the natural condition all men because THIS is something coming to pass which was foretold, based upon God's judicial judgment against Israels unbelief. They (those who were in unbelief already) were therefore judicially sealed up to the darkness and disbelief which they deliberately preferred to the light and healing which Jesus brought nigh to them.

But what is most notable here is in verse 15 it 'explains' something most important. The heart is hardened, and thus though they can hear they were as one who has become hard of hearing, and 'they' have closed their eyes. Both of which are the effects of a heart that has been hardened do to unbelief. But here is the kicker - God hardened them so they would not believe and be healed. They continued in unbelief so long that God finally had turned them over to their sinfulness, as a nation, yet keeping for Himself a remenant of those who did still believe. IOW - He did not harden all Israels hearts because not all of them were in unbelief yet as a people the majority were and as such defined the nations view.

Thus they could hear, and see, but were hardened due to unbelief (this was the reason for the judicial hardening). This proves my point even more that the 'dead' will hear, speaks not only to the elect but also the non-elect as well. If those Israelites whom God judically hardened due to their unbelief could hear but were made 'not to' then my point is established as God had to harden them so they would not hear and believe.

Therefore your contension that only some of the dead hear and not others can not be validated using passages like Mat 12 nor John 6 since both speak specifically to the judical hardening of Israel due to their unbelief already present and active and NOT to the world. Don't get me wrong on this point though, no man can know anything spiritual unless God reveal it and thus no man can even hear God unless God purposesly speaks to them. However these passages refer to and only of Israel and the unique state of judgment they were in.

Now back to my initial verse:

The verbs 'hear' in both cases are active. Now I'm sure you know that this means the subject is the one doing the action. However there is a little more to it than that. Not only is subject doing the action but it relates to how is it being done, whether by reflexive or choosing to continue listening. Now here is where my view is made. The first 'hear' is a reflexive action but is not designed to show completion (thus it is an aorist active participle)..ie someone is speaking they reflexively 'hear' it. However the second 'hear' in not the same in that it designates a purposeful willing responce to the initial hearing (thus it is a future active indictive). Something done by the subject as intentional.

Another main point is that the passage speaks in general first and specifically last regarding those who hear. Note it does not state the elect or chosen will hear but the dead. Now this is important, He did not say the dead who hear will live but stated it in a very gerneral yet specific way. The dead shall hear hear voice.. and those who hear will live. Why not state and dead that hear shall live? Because not all who hear will listen. (Isa 55:3; Jer 17:23). Please NOTE - it does not state 'all who hears' but purposefully does not restate for the former phrase 'the dead will hear' which is general and inclusive but instead states 'and they who will hear/listen..', specific and exclusive

The parallel between this and raising the dead is one specifically apart of how the Jewish teachers taught. This is not something I just made up but is noted by most every commentary regardless of the side of fence on wishes to stand on. They might each see it somewhat differently, but there is almost complete agreement on the paralleling of the dead hearing him and the physically dead hearing him.

As I said, look it up and you will see both reformed and non alike agree this is paralleling, from Matthew Henry, to Jamison, Faussett, and Brown, Macarthur, etc.. The parallel is the dead (spiritual, physical), hearing (spiritual, physical), responding (spiritual, physical), life and death (spiritual, physical).

Nothing. The problem starts when you assume that all who are drawn come when no where in scripture does it state this. It is assumed. Secondly this portion of scripture is dealing with Israel with respect to their judicial hardening for continuing in unbelief which was prophesied to be. This does not and should not be used to describe all men because it can Not done so. If you will notice in John 17 in the prayer of Jesus, he states all those whom the Father has given Him He has kept. This is specically referencing the statements made in John 6 but Jesus in His prayer shows those whom the Father gave Him were the disciples and only one he has not who was the Son
of perdition -Judas.

 

No, we don't disagree, I only include the fact that he died not only for us but for the sins of the whole world :)

See, here it is again where you are adding to the passages your personal view. Scripture does not state nor imply any such 'sense' but specifically that God called and they refused, He was reaching out to them and rejected it. There is no 'in a sense' God is... It says God called them and they rejected it. Scripture never seperates the call from being drawn. All those who are drawn have been called and all those who are called are drawn.
Secondly, He can not call anyone to salvation if He has not prepared a way for them to be saved. If there is no provision for their salvation then God can not, in righteouness, call them to salvation. So in order to assume God calls to people - even in a non-effectual way, puts you at odds with Limited Atonement because Christ has not died for them, nor provided any means for any salvation. So to say God is calling them, and that calling is to repentance/salvation, then God has become the great trickster and deciever toward those whom no provision has been made.

Again, you are bring supposition into the text. It says nothing about God NOT drawing them since He is infact calling out to them to come. You keep adding things to help you see what you want but it your remove your 'additions' the text does not speak so. Paul is reflecting 'back' to chapter 3 but is specifcially speaking to God's elect Nation/people Israel and we see this in very next verse given in chapter 11.

AGAIN, with adding your view into the text. There is NOTHING in the parable which even alludes to any such thing as a 'effectual' calling as though it is something distinctly different for the God's call. There isn't two calling ever mentioned or alluded to in scripture, ever. It is an 'assume' or postulated position ONLY becuase of the reformed view that the dead 'can't' hear and so if a call goes out to all, then there 'must' be another 'special' call that affects believers differently. Yet there is NO scripture to validate to types or distinct calls which God gives to men.

Here it is again. There is 'nothing' in the text that says 'everyone who hears will come'. This is a view brought into the text. Just state what the text says. You will note you can't get 'everyone who hears, comes..'

No, I was saying that not everyone who hears will choose to learn. I would encourage you to look up and study what is meant by 'learned' and just who it is that is doing it. It is not passive in that God is doing the instilling but is active in that the person is recieving the knowledge being offered.

And see, on this statement I absolutely agree.
The difference is that you assume God must be the one making the person believe, where as I believe God does what is needed to bring them willingly to belief. No one will ever come to faith without the active, invasive and intervening work of God.

Acatully brother, it is on this aspect where it makes or breaks ones theological view. This subject and gospel call are two issues that will remove a person from 5 pointer fold.
Regeneration not preceding faith shows an issue with the reformed understanding of depravity and how God saves them. Because in the regeneration view of the reformed, faith is imparted to man, here.
The gospel call (being a ligitimate offer for all to salvation) causes issues for the view of Limited Atonement since God can not offer to someone what He has not provided for them.

 

I'll get to your other 2 posts later. MAN.. your making me work bro. :)

 

zrs6v4, you do not understand John 5:25

John 5:25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live.

Let me try to give an analogy that you might understand. Imagine a remote island with no radio or TV. One day a man from the National Weather Service arrives in a large helicopter and warns the 50 residents that a catagory 5 hurricane is bearing down on the island. There will be winds over 150 MPH and a giant storm surge over 20 feet. He tells all 50 residents they must evacuate immediately as the island will be destroyed.

25 men hear this and believe the man from the NWS and board the helicopter. The other 25 hear as well but disregard his warning.

The storm comes and drowns the 25 men who remained behind. They heard the warning but disregarded it.

And this is what Jesus is saying in John 5:25. He will speak to men who are spiritually dead and they will all hear him. Some will believe him, these are those "that hear". The others refuse to listen or disregard his warning and so perish.

Now, go back and read John 5:25 and you will see that "they that hear" shall live.

 

I totally agree and I wasnt implying god believes for anyone or makes anyone do anything against their own will. My point was that in your view, God does the same for everyone and leaves them alone in their sinful mind, heart, and will to choose Him.

The Key is that God makes us willing, and causes us to believe.

Much like Psalm 51:12 when David asked God to uphold him with a willing spirit. It must be our choice, our believe, and our willingness. The thing is that God does this, He does an effectual work within us that crumbles us as shallow or as deep as He desires.

I have to run also but I wanted to hit this question because you misunderstood me and it looked bad :).

 

There is very much truth to what you are saying although I do not think this is what Jesus is saying in this particular verse. There are other parts of Scripture that speak in the way you are speaking.

I understand that Jesus is speaking to spiritually dead people and that those who hear are the ones who live. This statement is true. So every one is spiritually dead, some hear and live and others do not hear and do not live. The people who choose to hear and incline their hearts to understanding are wise and will live.

Let me break it down again and see if this makes more sense to you.

#1 The dead are hearing Jesus preach.
#2 The dead that hear will live.

The word hear can not be the same in this verse because:

People heard Jesus audibly, but if they hear Him in their heart and understand they will turn to Him and live. Therefore not all dead people "hear" Jesus and thus not all dead people live. While on the other hand the dead that hear (spiritually) are the same ones that live.

If you think all dead people hear the Son of God the same way in this verse then you will have a problem b/c

If all the dead hear His voice the same, then all of the dead will live. I think it is clear that not everyone hears and lives.

I personally think Jesus is speaking of the sheep who are going to hear and live but either way please tell me how you see it differently?

A further question on the side would be, "Why do some choose to hear and others dont?" what is it that is different about me and my twin brother who both had the same experiences in life and chose different paths? Am I smarter, more wise, more careful, or was it an accident that I just happen to incline my ear to hear the Lord?

 

Yes no person can hear unless it is granted Him by the Father. Nobody knows Christ is the Christ without the Father revealing it to Him.

I disagree and am familiar with your view thanks to Skandelon. :)

I am familiar with this prophesy. I agree that there was a judicial hardening of Israel. How did God do this? Are you positive this isn't a natural condition by which people can get to the more they deny Christ? Remember all men hate the light and love darkness. Remember that No man seeks or understands God. All men hate God and love self. All men walk under the rule of Satan gladly. This especially fits the majority of the Jewish people because they were the primary haters of Christ. They committed the unpardonable sin and have reached a level of hardened hearts that Christ tells them that they will not come back because they have blasphemed the work of the Spirit.

How does God prevent people from coming to Him? that has been my remaining question. Does He leave men in their natural state or does He cause them to not see something they might see and prevents them from being saved? I think the primary people that the prophesy is fullfilled in is Israel, and those are the people spoken of by Isaiah. I believe that this hardening is a work of God for a greater purpose and thus it is Him working with the already sinful nature of man for His will. IOW- I dont think God has to prevent people to come to Him, because they already hate Him by nature. I also don't think God only hardens Jews.

I first want to say everyone is an unbeliever at some point. I also think in line of your thinking that the more we reject the more hardened we get. I would even further say that a greater hardening and sin comes when we actually hear and reject the Gospel (the worst thing to reject).

I would obviously disagree that the elect (at point of conversion) hear the same message to the same degree as the non-elect. For one the elect had the message penetrate their heart differently (good soil), then they also have found the hidden treasure that the non didnt see in the message, and so forth. I would further argue that God prepared their hearts and also that He revealed the treasure of His worth to them in a way that the non-elect did not see when they heard. Yes the dead hear Jesus' voice, and no they did not understand like the elect to the same degree. Notice that the elects response is while they were yet in love with sin, while they loved darkness, and while they didnt seek God that they sold everything for Christ. I would also argue that they realized their need for mercy much like David did at the point when God used Nathan to reveal Davids sin. The non-elect simply remain in the state that David was in before God opened his heart.

You placed John 6 back in the same context of Mathew 13, the judicial hardening. I dont understand why you told me I couldn't make that connection when you again linked them. Our only difference is that we both believe that the Jews were the targets, while I argue that all men still fall in that category based on their nature. IOW- I am just as stubborn as a Jew without God drawing me. Wouldnt I be wrong to look at the Jews and say what fools?

 

Yes active means that people are involved in hearing. Someone speaks and I listen. 2 parties are involved. My point was that when God speaks to someone in their heart effectually how can we not listen? I can't hear someone without them speaking to me. I somewhat agree that both "hears" are different, but we differ in the case that I believe it is God making Himself known to the person that causes the person to take ear in a saving way. So yes I also agree that the person isnt passive and careless, but more inclined to hear as you say. But again why? why not the other? My answer is because God said something to that dead person that He didnt whisper to the others who remain ignorant.

Your right it doesn't say elect or chosen. But this is what Mathew 22 implies that many are called but few are chosen. I also will add that In John 10 Jesus says that the sheep hear His voice and follow. This implies that these sheep are elect and that they "will" hear. In fairness it does not say that because God caused them or because God told them something different. But again Romans 8:30 then says that those who are called will be justified and Acts 2 39 says that as many as God calls to Himself are the number who are inclining their ears to hear and believe. The ones who God is calling to Himself are not the same as the ones who all "hear" audibly. These are the ones who have a change of heart and quit being stubborn. All of this is because of God's grace affecting their beings rather than their beings being affected in and of themselves. Now to respond to your comment, I agree that He could mean the dead hear His voice outwardly, but those who hear inwardly will live. Again you just state that it is because of man, and I say it was God. either way the result is the same.

I do see your point (I agree for the most part), but we still have to explain why some of them reacted differently. this goes back to my last post. It would be better in my view if the verse said that those who hear were given to hear. And in your view those that hear inclined their ears to hear without God doing anything differently. I still think it is plain that obviously some heard the same message differently that others.

Well, thats your opinion. "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent Me draws him; and I will raise him on the last day"

This verse seems to imply to me rather clearly that nobody comes to God but when God draws him then they will come. And when they come then they will be saved every time. It really doesnt imply that someone has the choice to come only when the Father draws him. I think the Father drawing is a direct relation to John 6:37 when Jesus is being given those by the Father.

 

That is not how I would teach that passage. I did it to show you my theology in comparison to other Scriptures. The passage does not say what I said, but I added that in light of other Scripture.

"causing" is a better word than "making".

I would disagree because God can do a work in the heart of a sinner dead in sins that causes them to see what they have been blind of without giving them the full benefits of your view of regeneration. This would still be God's power overcoming a totally depraved person, still unconditional election, still be irresistabe, etc..

Faith can still be imparted to an unregenerate man. I don't see why It couldn't. I'm not to worried about fitting in with reformers by the way, so I'm not worried to differ on views.

 

:laugh: yea Im about shot as well.. Im just interested how you respond to Romans 8:30 when describing God's "equal call to all". I know you have an answer by the way, I realize this is a common verse.

I also wanted to ask if you think you ever read things into the text or force things? :)

 

Yes. Read Psalms and Proverbs especially and you will see that God says a person is wise who will listen to and regard his words, and those who disregard are fools.

Some listen and some do not. We see this everyday. When hurricane Katrina was approaching New Orleans, the National Weather Service sent out warnings for people to evacuate. Many did and were safe, many did not and died when the hurricane hit. Did the National Weather Service have some supernatural "effectual call" that only convinced some people to get out of town?

I would ask you again, why did some people leave town when hurricane Katrina was approaching New Orleans and others remain behind? Did the National Weather Service give a different message to some people? Was there some supernatural "effectual call" that caused some people to believe and leave town, and did not effectually call those who stayed?

You know, I can relate to this, I grew up on the coast of Florida and have been through several hurricanes, and I know why some people stay. Some are afraid to leave because they think their homes will be broken into, which actually happens. Some believe their home strong and it will stand up to the storm. Some do not have transportation. There are lots of reasons people stay while some do not. Some think "it can never happen to me".

And you see this when Jesus preached. Look at the excuses they made in the parable of the wedding.

Matt 22:4 Again, he sent forth other servants, saying, Tell them which are bidden, Behold, I have prepared my dinner: my oxen and my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready: come unto the marriage.
5 But they made light of it, and went their ways, one to his farm, another to his merchandise:

The call to these persons was real, it was legitimate. But some made light of it, this is the old "it will never happen to me" attitude. Others were too concerned with making money and the things of the world. But notice Jesus gives the reasons they would not come, and the reason was within themselves. It is not that he did not sincerely call them to the wedding.

 

Winman- I do think the message of the Gospel does relate to heeding to warnings, but in another sense it doesnt relate because it is spiritual message about God rather than just natural life.

I disagree with you that the wise and understanding cannot recieve their own credit for being wise.

I also disagree that people do anything by chance or luck. If it werent for God my reading the bible, my praying, and my wholehearted turn to Him would have just been a lucky move on my part as I really didnt know what was going on. I didnt really notice at the time, but as I look back I realize that it was God who was carrying me in.

This chance and luck even goes to the shallowest degree, some say that all God is waiting for is the slightest interest and His spirit guides as we give heed, but again the smallest of interest in God cannot just be luck or chance.

I lastly want to say that I believe that salvation includes an effectual call because I believe it is biblical. I do not know how God works in sparing live in natural events, but again it isnt a luck of the draw thing that some people live and others die in hurricance, tornados, and earthquakes. God has control over all events including every step and breath we take. At least that is how I believe :)

 

As someone else pointed out, you start off many of your replies with "I think". Now, there is nothing wrong with thinking, but when it comes to God we must listen to what he says and not rely on our own reasoning.

Prov 3:5 Trust in the LORD with all thine heart; and lean not unto thine own understanding.

There are many things in scriptures that defy human reasoning. Is it really possible for a man like Peter to walk on water? My human reasoning says no, but I completely believe God's word and I believe Peter walked on water as the scriptures say.

The scriptures show over and over God calling men, and do not show that one man receives a different kind of calling from another.

Acts 28:24 And some believed the things which were spoken, and some believed not.

The scriptures often explain "why" some men cannot believe.

John 5:44 How can ye believe, which receive honour one of another, and seek not the honour that cometh from God only?

Why can't these men believe? Because they seek honour from men and not God. Jesus was speaking to Pharisees here, they were considered holy men. They were much respected in the community. They were given the best seats in the synagogue, they prayed in the streets so men could see them, they blew horns when they went to give charity to the poor. These men loved the respect and adoration that came with their position. They often believed themselves superior to other men.

But now Jesus is asking them to follow him and become just another believer. They will no longer be the leader but the follower. They are no longer special, the elite, they will become equal to other believers.

And they know this, and they are not about to give up their prestigious position among men. They love the honour they receive from men, and do not care for the position they would be in if they follow Christ.

And, in the parable of the marriage feast you see men going away to their farms and their merchandise, rather than come. They are too concerned with the here and now and making money to bother themselves with the things of God.

So the scriptures often explain why some men do not believe. It is a choice they make and are therefore accountable for this decision. If men do not have free will to make their own choices, then God would be unjust to hold them accountable. They are simply doing what he caused them to do. He could make them obedient, and they cannot be obedient unless he enables them by your doctrine. So God would be responsible for all men's actions whether good or evil.

The problem is that some have been taught that men do not have free will, even though it is obvious not only in the scriptures, but in everyday experience. As long as a person will not entertain the possibility that men have free will, you cannot possibly understand. You will always try to interpret scripture by your presupposition. If you cannot break free from this idea that men do not have free will, you will not accept it even when evidence is presented to you.

And being taught that there is a different kind of calling for some people is the same. That is not shown anywhere in scripture.

 

Winman nobody is arguing that men do not have free will. I believe man has free will. The problem is that because men have a sin nature they only choose within that nature. It is free, but yet sin has blinded them and affected their entire being.

I am yet to hear anyone deny man's free will. Do you ever interpret scripture by your presupposition?

I would like you just expound a little on these passages without throwing a bunch of other passages in. Please do not assume I am using them to argue I simply would just like to see how you interpret them. but before that, why does Paul thank God for the faith of the people he is writing to if God had nothing to do with their believing?

Romans 8:30 "And these whom He predestined, He also called; and these whom He called, He also justified; and these whom He justified, He also glorified."

Jude 1:1 "... To those who are called, beloved in God the Father, and kept for Jesus Christ"

1 Thessalonians 1:5, "for our gospel did not come to you in word only, but also in power and in the Holy Spirit and with full conviction."

Romans 11:29 "for the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable"

 

No, in my experience every Calvinist has said an unregenerate person has a free will.

But then in the very next breath they say the person is utterly enslaved to their will and will always choose against God.

Now, that is just silly. You can't be utterly enslaved to a will that will always choose for evil and say you have a free will at the same time. And I don't see how any reasonable thinking person could accept an explanation like that.

And this is what I see with Calvinism, a person must deny reality. It is obvious people have free will, but Calvinist's say that only when it comes to salvation a man does not. I'm sorry, but that is plain dumb. I was born at night, in fact I was born at 12:50 A.M., but it wasn't last night.

 

You don't get out much,do you? No Calvinist that I know personally says that the unregenerate have free will. No Calvinist author or scholar says that either.

AMEN.

 

If you would have read just two posts back in #135 zrs6v4 said:

And he is not the only Calvinist here that has said that, several have, although I am not going to take the time to search past posts to prove it to you.

And Spurgeon himself said men have a free will.

So, it is me that doesn't get out much?

 

And if you would read more intelligently you would have noticed that I had said any Calvinist I knew personally as well as any preacher or scholar of Calvinistic stripe.

See my comments above.

If you would read CHS more comprehensively you will note that he regards classical free-will as a myth.

Yep.

 

Well, now you personally know a Calvinist who believes in free will.

And that sermon I quoted was Spurgeon himself, and I highlighted where he said he cannot deny that men have free will.

I have read a bit of Spurgeon lately, and he was all over the map. Yes, he declared himself a Calvinist, but he often contradicted general Calvinistic doctrine in his sermons, this last sermon shown is one such example. I also showed "The Soul's Awakening" 3389 where he said the unregenerate dead can hear the voice of Jesus, and that the unregenerate man had to make his own response and believe Jesus's words to be made alive.

So, Spurgeon is hardly the poster boy of Calvinism you make him out to be.