A question for the Calvinists

I don't think anyone has argued the Holy Spirit did not empower or dwell within those whom He chose...but it was not the same indwelling that came at Pentecost where all believers were indwelt, not just certain individuals.

 

Thank you Webdog, that is exactly what I said. Just because the HS came upon individuals and yet could leave them doesn't indicate that was the same as God regenerating them. And what happens when the HS leaves them, are they then unregenerated once the HS leaves them??

Darren

 

Hmm, you must be a one off, thats not the usual Calvinist position is it?

There is a difference in that Arminians believe man can respond to God. I do not call that response regeneration or quickening or being born again. The history of God's intervention to man has man making a positive response to God's grace and His laws/word, yet this doesn't qualify it to be regeneration, being born again or a spiritual awakening. The issue is man needs atonement before man can be reborn, thats the way I see it. This Jews in the OT were like yo yo's, I see no sign that they were spiritually reborn and obedient to God, the only ones that were, were usually the prophets and the Priests and some leaders whom were ordained and the HS worked with them for that ministry. The rest I cannot see a widespread regenerative work. Even the short OT revivals ended quickly when the leaders departed.

No, eternal life was given solely on the basis of God's grace through those whom believed God. Having eternal life doesn't assume a spiritual awakening, yet through the NC the Blood of Jesus makes indwelling of the HS a real factor and therefore spiritual rebirth became possible. To those whom believed gave HE them the power to become children of God, because of the atonement of the Blood of Jesus.

Darren

 

I haven't followed this entire thread, so forgive me if you have already answered this question. Are you saying OT saints are not born again (regenerated)? I don't see regeneration and the gift of the Comforter as being mutually inclusive. Clearly the thief on the cross passed from spiritual death to life (regeneration) and this before Pentecost. Thanks in advance...

 

It is not the 'mainline' view but is a prominant one. A current systematic theology text book taught colleges, from a 5 point Cal, is Millard Erickson who holds this view. There are others as well but I bieve his is the most current

 

It is not the usual position.

It is called prevenient grace, given to everyone.

So how did they please God? Remember, the natural man cannot please God. The Bible is explicitly clear about that. So how did OT people please God apart from regeneration and Spirit indwelling?

That is still true today.

So it doesn't require the NC, only God's grace? (That's what I would say.)

How not??

That was said before Jesus died, BTW. But the HS was a "real factor" prior to the death of Jesus. AGain, there is no other way to explain how people please God. If an OT person could have eternal life and please God without regeneration and the Holy Spirit, then man today would be able to, because man hasn't changed.

 

Without FAITH its not possible to please God... :thumbsup:

Darren

 

What I believe is that the indwelling HS was possible for the NC because the new believer has received the atoning Blood of Christ. The OC, God did not put His laws in the inner man, as quoted in Jer 31:31 and Heb 8. Man in the OC could be saved by faith (through God's grace) and that pleases God, however they needed to follow the law and do right under the grace of God and yet they could respond to God and follow the law to a certain extent. I don't see that regeneration and being spiritually alive are the same thing, my primary concern is regeneration preceding faith as the OP remarks on regeneration.

I had no idea that my objection to OC regeneration, being born again would open so many cans.... :laugh:

Darren

 

I haven't followed this thread closely, but the issue of whether OT saints were regenerated may merit a new thread.

When I read Galatians and see that Christians relate to Abraham by having the same faith he did, then it is hard for me to think that there is a radically different account of the Spirit's presence in both parties. I suppose one related issue is the differences between the old and new covenant communities, which of course is a whole other discussion.

Brandon

 

Erickson holds to four points; not five.

 

Good point, you're correct.

I also guess it would depend on how one views Calvinism according to 'lapsarianism', either supra or sub as both correlate to the systemaitic views Calvinism.

 

Exactly, and romans 8 says that the natural man, the fleshly man, cannot please God ... is not able to do so. that means that natural man cannot have faith, because if he did it would please God. So even in the OT, it was necessary to be regenerated to please God, to have the Spirit in order to follow God.

 

Again I would point out that is 2 issues. Regeneration period doesn't infer this regeneration precedes that faith (issue 1). So Abraham was justified by faith (we know), on the other side of that faith for the NC the new "believer" becomes regenerated, born again, spiritually alive (passing from death to life), indwell by the HS. None of these issues makes the automatic assumption that all these factors could have happened before they believed. As previously noted, the OT consisted of those "born into it" by birth BUT within that group were those actually faithful to God and were considered to be saved by faith through God's grace.

Now my question was did that JEW believe (Abraham's justified by faith believing - for salvation) for the reason he was regenerated first (issue 1) and further was that JEW considered "born again" according to the discussion Jesus had with Nicodemus? I just want to make sure we keep the issues in context to their specific category. And all these issues take into account Eze 11:19, 36:26, Jer 31:33-34 or Heb 8:7-10.

Darren

 

I agree, and tried to make that point earlier.

but not regenerated? You see, that's the problem I have. I am not talking here about logical order. I am simply questioning how anyone can have eternal life apart from regeneration.

 

Hi Darren,

I'll echo Pastor Larry here in that I was not speaking about the logical relationship of regeneration and faith, but on whether individual OT saints had the Spirit in the same way that NT believers do (a different issue than the constitution of the old and new covenant communities). Admittedly, I jumped in without reading the several pages in this thread, which usually ends up being a mistake. I'm sorry if this is in bad form.

Blessings,
Brandon

 

Back to the start as I said, not in the same way as the NC as far as I can see for the reasons I gave. Interesting topic nevertheless... :godisgood:

Darren

 

I haven't read through all the posts, but I wanted to offer some thing in relation to this:

1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith

Chapter 9: Of Free will

3._____ Man, by his fall into a state of sin, hath wholly lost all ability of will to any spiritual good accompanying salvation; so as a natural man, being altogether averse from that good, and dead in sin, is not able by his own strength to convert himself, or to prepare himself thereunto.
( Romans 5:6; Romans 8:7; Ephesians 2:1, 5; Titus 3:3-5; John 6:44 )

Chapter 6: Of the Fall of Man, Of Sin, And of the Punishment Thereof

2._____ Our first parents, by this sin, fell from their original righteousness and communion with God, and we in them whereby death came upon all: all becoming dead in sin, and wholly defiled in all the faculties and parts of soul and body.
( Romans 3:23; Romans 5:12, etc; Titus 1:15; Genesis 6:5; Jeremiah 17:9; Romans 3:10-19 )

3._____ They being the root, and by God's appointment, standing in the room and stead of all mankind, the guilt of the sin was imputed, and corrupted nature conveyed, to all their posterity descending from them by ordinary generation, being now conceived in sin, and by nature children of wrath, the servants of sin, the subjects of death, and all other miseries, spiritual, temporal, and eternal, unless the Lord Jesus set them free.
( Romans 5:12-19; 1 Corinthians 15:21, 22, 45, 49; Psalms 51:5; Job 14:4; Ephesians 2:3; Romans 6:20 Romans 5:12; Hebrews 2:14, 15; 1 Thessalonians 1:10 )

4._____ From this original corruption, whereby we are utterly indisposed, disabled, and made opposite to all good, and wholly inclined to all evil, do proceed all actual transgressions.
( Romans 8:7; Colossians 1:21; James 1:14, 15; Matthew 15:19 )

Edited in:

What I think your OP touches on is the doctrine of Total Depravity. What is often confused because of the term used for it (total depravity) that it means that people are as bad as they can be. This is not the Calvinist teaching on that subject. Total depravity teaches that there isn't an area untouched by the corruption of sin. It does not teach that all men are as bad/evil as they can be.

 

Winman,

I think its far more simple than what your making it be brother.

You wrote:

In this reply I observe:

1. Malcontent with your brethren who are Calvinist in their theology.
2. Calvinists are not able to be clear with their theology because they are trying to prove something that isn't true.

The term "Total Depravity" is an inconvient term. The misunderstandings surrounding the doctrine are not the result of calvinists, but of the person reading/trying to understand them.

One good habit to form I believe is to let someone define their own terms. If I want to understand what an Arminian/non-calvinist believes about free-will, I will read their doctrinal statement or ask them. And I will let them define what it means.

Every calvinist believes in free-will. We of the Baptist sort have a whole chapter dedicated to it in our statment of faith: "Chapter 9: Of Free Will" And the very first article states:

1._____ God hath endued the will of man with that natural liberty and power of acting upon choice, that it is neither forced, nor by any necessity of nature determined to do good or evil.
( Matthew 17:12; James 1:14; Deuteronomy 30:19 )

This is "calvinist" teaching.

If you want to understand what calvinist believe, read their statements of faith/creeds. Then work from there.

I would think you would have less questions.

 

winman,

I wanted to comment also that I love seeing this commitment to the Holy Scriptures wherever I find it. I love the Scriptures as well. They are absoute, incorrupted, unadulterated truth.

Praise the Lord!