Regeneration verses God's Drawing?

Certainly in John 3 we see "that you must be born again".
In 2Cor 5 we see that the one who accepts Christ is "a New Creation".

I accept these truths as speaking of the same new birth creation.

However - this is not the John 12:32, John 6 "DRAWING" and John 16 CONVICTING of the whole world.

The John 3 NEW birth and 2Cor 5 "NEW CREATION" only happens for those who RESPOND to God as a result of the DRAWING.

Agreed that is NOT "regeneration" it is "DRAWING"!

God "draws ALL"

But not ALL are "Born again" not ALL are "regenerated.

In Christ,

Bob

 

Why?

What do you get by hoping that the depravity of the sinful nature APART FROM GOD is very different from what Romans 3 says it is???

Why do you even need such a teaching so foreign to scripture and so unnecessary since God "draws ALL"???

In Christ,

Bob

 

Why??

Why not simply accept that this is the supernatural Work of God "For ALL" as he "Convicts the WORLD" and "Draws ALL" unto Him - and that without it all you have left is the depravity described in Romans 3?

What is the problem with that? Just "preference"?

In Christ,

Bob

 

GE:

I've just have had a strong cup of coffee; now perhaps I shall be able first to make out something of what you ask, and second may try answer something!

The will of natural man, i.e., 'unregenerate man', 'wills', accordingly. It is in bondage to sin; it serves sin; it loves it, and desires, sin. It naturally resists the very 'drawings' of God. "When we were HATERS of God", God LOVED .... US, these WRETCHES!

God's 'drawings' "with bonds (or 'ropes') of Love" (as Hosea says) are stronger that the 'bonds of death' by which we are bound IN DEATH. It 'regenerates' unto 'repentance unrepentable'; it converts the will directly into its opposite direction. Now this very SINNER finds himself DRAWN to God, irresistably and yes, spontaneously, freely and his own will, agreeably. "O God, forgive me this sinner I am!" is the prayer of a holy man, of the regenerate, of the justified, and, of the in the determination of God, already in Christ glorified man.

Take it, if you can. This subject is not for debating and never can; this subject is for experiencing only.

 

Originally Posted by Heavenly Pilgrim

I believe that God grants to everyman the necesssary abilities to respond to the gospel message as an intrinsic part of their moral make up. I do not believe that God has to do something to man to enable him to respond.



Why??

Why not simply accept that this is the supernatural Work of God "For ALL" as he "Convicts the WORLD" and "Draws ALL" unto Him - and that without it all you have left is the depravity described in Romans 3?

What is the problem with that? Just "preference"?

GE:

As I understand these two gentlemen, the Arminian has assumed the position of Calvinist; and the 'Calvinist-of-its own', the position of Arminian!

 

Drfuss:
"I think most Calvinists believe regeneration occurs just before repentance and faith."

HP:
"I do not believe in regeneration prior to man willingly, without force or coercion, yielding themselves to God in repentance and faith."

GE:

John owen has written a mighty paragraph on this issue. If his works are available to you, I would strongly recommend its reading.

Nevertheless. here's one thought that may help. One must distinguish mentally where in actuality there exists no distinction - which is here not only supposed, but imposed and conditional, in order to grasp the relationship between regeneration and faith. Calvin stood very strong on the reality of the experience of both, simultaneously and undivideably. For Calvin only one thing goes before any and all of the things that if not 'worked out' in the life-bases of being man, disappear into oblivion, and that is electing grace. I accept it exactly like that.

 

This is what is taught in Hebrews chapter six. I understand this passage to take under scrutiny the IM-possibility of a falling away of the elect; not any possibility of mere suggestion or supposition.

 

'Kroenung' - a German coffee made in Israel - really nice!

 

I in every way of life constantly find myself somehow falling back upon this dual forebears of me. Not that I always like it; but with the coffee, I do!

 

It is not very Christian to make such distinctions, but to me, John Owen is the greatest of the English theologians and greatest of the Puritans. He often found himself with Cromwell on the battlefields and faced many difficulties that never occur in our modern times. Nevertheless he, I would say, wrote about three times as much as Karl Barth - with all the modern and academic help he enjoyed. "Andrew Thomson said that Owen 'makes you feel when he has reached the end of his subject, that he has also exhausted it'." The editors of my edition" of his works, remark, "they all have a uniform quality of timelessness".

So I shall post a few quotations from the man himself, rather than try to say what he says in my own words.

 

"God is pleased to exercise a prerogative and sovereignty in this whole matter (of "cinviction of sin" and "disquieting and perplexing affections"), and deals with the souls of men in unspeakable variety. Some He leads by the gates of death and hell unto rest in His love, like the people of old through the waste and howling wilderness into Canaan; and the paths of others He makes plain and easy unto them. Some walk or wander long in darkness; in the souls of others Christ is formed in the first gracious visitation.

There is no certain measure or degree of these accidents or consequents of conviction to be prescribed unto any as antecedaneously necessary to sincere conversion and sound believing; but these two things in general are so :- first, Such a conviction of sin, -- that is, of a state of sin, of a course of sin, of actual sins, against the light of natural conscience, --- as that the soul is satisfied that it is thereby obnoxious unto the curse of the Law and the wrath of God. Thus, at least, does God conclude and shut up every one under sin on whom He will have mercy; for "every mouth must be stopped, and all the world become guilty before God", Ro3:19, Gl3:22. Without this no man ever did, nor ever will, sincerely believe in Jesus Christ; for He calleth none unto Him but those who in some measure are weary and thirsty, or one way or other, seek after deliverance. .... Secondly, A due apprehension and resolved judgment that there is no way within the compass of a man's own contrivance to find out, or his ability to make use of and to walk in, nor any other way of God's appointment or approbation, which will deliver the soul in and from the state and conditions wherein it is and and that which it fears, but only that which is proposed in the Gospel of Jesus Christ."

On the fine distinction between the indistinguishable acts of God's grace, next.

 

HP:

"I fully believe that the will of man indeed does come under bondage, even to the point that free will acts are no longer possible, but at this stage of development of bondage, the I fully believe that the will of man indeed does come under bondage, even to the point that free will acts are no longer possible, but at this stage of development of bondage, the man ceases to be morally responsible for any future acts. . ...."

GE:

You will find that you are in complete disagreement with John Owen as per above. Just by the buy.

You actually are in complete disagreement with yourself, here.
You, by saying, "... man ceases to be morally responsible for any future acts", contradict and deny yourself, saying, "I fully believe that the will of man indeed does come under bondage, even to the point that free will acts are no longer possible ...."

You confuse ability and responsibility. Able or no longer able, man remains responsible. First time sinner or veteran sinner, man still is obnoxious both to the curse of the Law and the holiness of God.

 

HP:

"We would consider such a one as a fit candidate for a mental hospital, unable, even rightfully said to be ‘impossible’ for one do be held accountable for their formed intents and subsequent actions."

GE:

You are very kind even though you have no right to be kind or wrathful. What "we consider" is of no consequence.
God though, would 'consider such an one as fit candidate', for hell, who, despite or exactly for, being unable, even rightfully said ‘impossible’, is, to be held accountable for his formed intents and subsequent actions!

This, is the fine line; this, makes the difference.