Gospel regeneration, is it biblical? Yes? No?

[kyredneck]

I agreed until you stated, "It required their faith to enter into God's rest..."

I don't think it was faith - rather obedience and submission.

Moses did not obey. The Israelite nation was not submissive.

For your perusal:

18 And to whom sware he that they should not enter into his rest, but to them that were disobedient?
19 And we see that they were not able to enter in because of unbelief. Heb 3

And Jehovah said unto Moses and Aaron, Because ye believed not in me, to sanctify me in the eyes of the children of Israel, therefore ye shall not bring this assembly into the land which I have given them. Nu 20:12

Unbelief on the part of a child of God IS disobedience.

 

[Amy.G]

AmyG
I am just showing that sometimes God can regenerate someone who cannot hear or understand the word preached....he is sovereign. earlier in the read they were saying a person could not be saved unless they hear and believe.

Ok, I gotcha. I agree.

:laugh::laugh::laugh:...not sure yet,lol:wavey:
i do not think so though...good posts this year!

LOL...I walked right into that one didn't I?

 

[agedman]

For your perusal:

18 And to whom sware he that they should not enter into his rest, but to them that were disobedient?
19 And we see that they were not able to enter in because of unbelief. Heb 3

And Jehovah said unto Moses and Aaron, Because ye believed not in me, to sanctify me in the eyes of the children of Israel, therefore ye shall not bring this assembly into the land which I have given them. Nu 20:12

Unbelief on the part of a child of God IS disobedience.

Thank you for the Scripture post. I need to go back and reread that part of the Bible again.

But, didn't your post originally use the word "faith?"

I agree with the claim that unbelief can certainly be considered as disobedience - failure to obey.

However, unbelief could also be displayed when presented with a situation so incomprehensible as to appear as "pie in the sky."

When the Israeli folks faced the prospects of doing hand to hand combat with trained armies of Giants, it may have been that the outward display of disobedience came from the inward "fight or flight" compulsion.

They did not have within them the Holy Spirit to provide all that the believer enjoys. They were people with the carnal nature as their mode of operation. As God revealed Himself to them, over and over and the people showed no ability to comprehend or accept the revelations.

 

[psalms109:31]

Psalm 95:

7 for he is our God
and we are the people of his pasture,
the flock under his care.

Today, if only you would hear his voice,
8 “Do not harden your hearts as you did at Meribah,[Meribah means quarreling.]
as you did that day at Massah[Massah means testing.] in the wilderness,
9 where your ancestors tested me;
they tried me, though they had seen what I did.
10 For forty years I was angry with that generation;
I said, ‘They are a people whose hearts go astray,
and they have not known my ways.’
11 So I declared on oath in my anger,
‘They shall never enter my rest.’”

Matthew 4
Jesus Is Tested in the Wilderness
1 Then Jesus was led by the Spirit into the wilderness to be tempted[The Greek for tempted can also mean tested.] by the devil. 2 After fasting forty days and forty nights, he was hungry. 3 The tempter came to him and said, “If you are the Son of God, tell these stones to become bread.”

4 Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Man shall not live on bread alone, but on every word that comes from the mouth of God.’[Deut. 8:3]”

5 Then the devil took him to the holy city and had him stand on the highest point of the temple. 6 “If you are the Son of God,” he said, “throw yourself down. For it is written:

“‘He will command his angels concerning you,
and they will lift you up in their hands,
so that you will not strike your foot against a stone.’[Psalm 91:11,12]”

7 Jesus answered him, “It is also written: ‘Do not put the Lord your God to the test.’[Deut. 6:16]”

8 Again, the devil took him to a very high mountain and showed him all the kingdoms of the world and their splendor. 9 “All this I will give you,” he said, “if you will bow down and worship me.”

10 Jesus said to him, “Away from me, Satan! For it is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God, and serve him only.’[Deut. 6:13]”

11 Then the devil left him, and angels came and attended him.

Ephesians 6: 10 Finally, be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power. 11 Put on the full armor of God, so that you can take your stand against the devil’s schemes. 12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. 13 Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand. 14 Stand firm then, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness in place, 15 and with your feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace. 16 In addition to all this, take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one. 17 Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.

Matthew 10:34
“Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.

 

[kyredneck]

Thank you for the Scripture post. I need to go back and reread that part of the Bible again.

But, didn't your post originally use the word "faith?"

And the difference between faith and belief is.........? (read Ro 4)

I agree with the claim that unbelief can certainly be considered as disobedience - failure to obey.

However, unbelief could also be displayed when presented with a situation so incomprehensible as to appear as "pie in the sky."

I believe for the sake of the types the Spirit put the emphasis on unbelief as the sin of 'the wilderness generation'.

 

[convicted1]

Willis, I spologize for missing your intent with the OP.

Question for you:

What percentage of the Old Regulars would you say hold to immediate regeneration today?

You're alright, everything's cool. What you are esposing is time salvation, and I know next to nothing about it. That's why I was needing clarification.


Immediate regeneration? I don't know, maybe fifty percent. Two ORB assocs have both Calvinistic churches mixed with the FW side. They have decided to not let that be a stumbling block to fellowship, Union and New Salem.

 

[glfredrick]

You're alright, everything's cool. What you are esposing is time salvation, and I know next to nothing about it. That's why I was needing clarification.


Immediate regeneration? I don't know, maybe fifty percent. Two ORB assocs have both Calvinistic churches mixed with the FW side. They have decided to not let that be a stumbling block to fellowship, Union and New Salem.

Are you saying that God's justification and regeneration are not instantaneous? How very Catholic of you! :laugh:

 

[convicted1]

Are you saying that God's justification and regeneration are not instantaneous? How very Catholic of you! :laugh:

I believe that regeneration/salvation are simultaneous.

 

[glfredrick]

I believe that regeneration/salvation are simultaneous.

But regeneration does not equal "salvation." You have a deficient view of salvation if you think it does.

Salvation, as has been expressed here multiple times of late, includes ALL the aspects that go into the act, including regeneration, but also justification, adoption, election, effectual call, etc.

 

[kyredneck]

.....Immediate regeneration? I don't know, maybe fifty percent.

About half. I used to know more about the history than I do now, oh well. I've heard of free will/gospel means PBs but know of none around here.

Two ORB assocs have both Calvinistic churches mixed with the FW side. They have decided to not let that be a stumbling block to fellowship, Union and New Salem.

Wow. Don't know whether to say halleluyah or beware. I like halleluyah! But my guts tell me beware.

 

[convicted1]

About half. I used to know more about the history than I do now, oh well. I've heard of free will/gospel means PBs but know of none around here.



Wow. Don't know whether to say halleluyah or beware. I like halleluyah! But I sill want to beware.

I say hallelujah. We are Brothers through Christ, not theology.

 

[HankD]

When you ask "born again" Christians when they were saved, most will give you a calendar date (though they may not know the specific date, they remember the specific day).

A few will say - at Calvary on the day of the crucifixion.

Others will say when their names were written in the lamb's book of life slain from the foundation of the world.

I may be wrong but I think Primitive Baptists emphasize the latter.

God created time to keep everything from happening at once (or so it seems).

HankD

 

[Darrell C]

for not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified: (for when Gentiles that have not the law do by nature the things of the law, these, not having the law, are the law unto themselves; in that they show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness therewith, and their thoughts one with another accusing or else excusing them); Ro 2:13-15

You think it conceivable that Gentiles that had not the law, had not heard the law, could have that law supernaturally written upon their hearts?

Absolutely...that is Paul's primary thrust in this passage: that man has an internal knowledge that there is, not gods, but God.

I recently was taken to task by some atheists for declaring to them that they were a very religous people. Talk about indignation...lol.

What was humorous (and only to me, I was definitely in the minority) was that one of them had posted a mocking description of "religious people" (and of course they do not understand the difference between religion in itself and Christianity) which listed the earmarks of religion. I think the one that got them the worst was "religions have symbols," which they denied athiesm as having...until I showed them a link that was easily pulled up by googling "atheist symbols" (or something of that nature.

Another earmark of religion is a system of thought that explains the universe...and we know their system of thought on that.

All that to say, man is a religious creature, needing only a focus in which to express his worship. For the most part, mankind will express a belief in either a god or gods, but ew can see that even for the secular humanist, there is a god, which is himself.

Paul relates this internal knowledge within man, and if we trace back to the Garden, we understand that man has from the beginning had knowledge of God, the burden of passing down that knowledge given to parents, who, being human, are sure to corrupt that knowledge except that God be merciful and intervene, that knowedge is not corrupted, but that man has a true understanding of God and His will.

And, though I have but a short time, I am getting long-winded, despite my efforts to hurry, and, because the discussion is fascinating, I hope to actually look at this issue in detail, so I will be breaking this up, first, so that if it becomes necessary to leave due to time limitation, I can step away, and secondly to make it a little easier to respond to in a point by point fashion.

Continued...

 

[psalms109:31]

I didn't mean to break up your continue, here is an article that you might find interesting

The meaning of the parable for Calvin was, instead, that "compassion, which an enemy showed to a Jew, demonstrates that the guidance and teaching of nature are sufficient to show that man was created for the sake of man. Hence it is inferred that there is a mutual obligation between all men." In other writings, Calvin pointed out that people are not born merely for themselves, but rather "mankind is knit together with a holy knot ... we must not live for ourselves, but for our neighbors." Earlier, Cyril of Alexandria had written that "a crown of love is being twined for him who loves his neighbour."

After receiving this tidbit of information I did some searching on John Calvin on the teaching of God by nature and came across this what do you think or what can you add to this train of thought?


Professor Michael Sudduth

Readings in Religious Epistemology

Handout VI

John Calvin and the Knowledge of God

I. The Sensus Divinitatis (Sense of Divinity)

Calvin claims that there is an awareness or sense of God (sensus divinitatis) implanted in all people by nature. Belief in God is universal according to Calvin. The context of this universally distributed belief is rather minimal: there is a God, He is the Creator, and that He ought to be worshipped.

Background: Cicero, De Natura Deorum (in which Cicero makes roughly the same point)

A. Calvin's Grounds for the Sensus Divinitatis Thesis

Simple Observation: Belief in God seems to be Universal

The diversity of religious practices and beliefs all presuppose some basic conception of divinity or a Supreme power in the Universe.

Those who are impious and object to the existence of God nonetheless have in their minds an idea of such a being, so even they are aware of God.

B. Function of the Sensus Divinitatis

The function of such an awareness of God is to render humans without excuse before God. They cannot plead ignorance when it comes to divine judgment on their lives. Hence, this knowledge of God possessed by people by nature is closely related to distinctly moral and theological concerns.

C. Possible Objections (Anticipated by Calvin)

It might be objected that certain people have invented religion in order to control the masses or common folk. Calvin thinks that such attempts would not be effective unless people already possessed some awareness of God. How else could religion have power over people? There must be some antecedent sympathy or seriousness about religious matters, if leaders or others are able to use it to manipulate people.

It might also be objected that some people (i.e., atheists and agnostics) do not believe in a God of any sort. So belief in God is not universal. Calvin has at least three responses here.

First, perhaps some do lack such belief and knowledge, but perhaps this is the result of their doing and does not represent their original condition. Calvin says that it is possible to affect adversely this knowledge, perhaps not just its intensity but also its very presence. How? Acts of sin, especially great wickedness, can deaden the conscience and remove God from our awareness. Such individuals would still be morally accountable because originally they had such knowledge of God, perhaps as a young child, but then lost it as the result of choices freely made.

Another point suggested by Calvin and compatible with the prior point is that lack of belief in God may only be a temporary thing. There is a universal awareness of God, even if not everyone has such an awareness of God at all times.

Third, though not explicitly addressed by Calvin, is the possibility that some people do believe in God but either do not believe that they do or believe that they do not believe in God. Perhaps there is a kind of self-deception here. This response depends, contra Descartes, on the mind not being fully transparent to itself. There could be a subconscious realm where religious beliefs can reside though we are not conscious of them. So people might know God without knowing that they know God. This suggestion seems plausible given our understanding of the human psyche since the 19th century (e.g., Freudianism). Consider also the fact that we are only conscious of a very limited number of our beliefs at a given time. The rest are non-occurrent and must be brought to consciousness. Usually this is easily, but sometimes we forget things or just can't recall them at will. This can be drastic in cases like amnesia. Normally we don’t say that people who once consciously believed something, then not conscious of it but later become conscious of it again did not hold the belief in the intervening period of unconsciousness.

II. The External Witness

In addition to the sense of divinity within (Institutes, Book 1, chapter 3), Calvin recognizes that there is an external witness to God in creation, in the physical, visible world (Institutes, Book 1, chapter 5).

A. Inferential Natural Knowledge of God

One of the main questions surrounding these passages is whether Calvin is presenting something like an argument for God's existence. More generally, is Calvin claiming that human persons infer God's existence from observations of the physical world?

Clearly Calvin is not offering the sort of extended syllogistic reasoning found in Aquinas and other medieval theologians. However, it certainly seems that he thinks that some of God's attributes, such as wisdom and power, are "displayed" or "revealed" in creation. But this presupposes the kind of causal principle we find in Aquinas, namely that effects resemble their causes. Owing to Calvin's rhetorical style of argument, we should not expect him to formulate formal arguments like Aquinas. But it looks like there is at least a hint of some inferential knowledge of God, which, like Aquinas' arguments, takes as its starting point observations of the physical world. (For an explanation and defense of inferential natural knowledge of God in Calvin account, see my paper "The Prospects for Mediate Natural Theology in John Calvin," Religious Studies (March 1995)).

B. Objection and Response

It might be objected that inferential knowledge of God is superfluous since all people already believe in God by way of the Sensus Divinitatis.

The knowledge delivered by the sensus divinitatis is rather minimal in content. Calvin says nothing about it delivering or producing beliefs about God being wise, good, or powerful. The attributes of God seem to be the sort of thing that is discovered through observations of the physical world, not the operation of the sensus divinitatis by itself. So perhaps the sensus divinitatis and external witness each deliver different sorts of beliefs, but are intended to work together to produce a more complete knowledge of God as the creator, with attributes of goodness and wisdom. (Reformed theologians subsequent to Calvin typically distinguished between these as two independent but mutually supportive modes of knowing God by reason).

As we shall see later in the course, Alvin Plantinga maintains that the sensus divinitatis can be interpreted a disposition to form certain religious beliefs, and it is triggered by the kinds of circumstances mentioned by Calvin as parts of the external witness. This does not involve drawing an inference from observations of nature, but rather an automatic cognitive response to the experience of the starry night sky, the complexity of the human body, etc. According to Plantinga, the sensus divinitatis and the external witness are two aspects to one process by which human reason comes to know truths about God as creator. (See my paper, "The Prospects for Mediate Natural Theology in John Calvin.")

III. The Knowledge of God as Redeemer

Calvin distinguishes between the knowledge of God as creator and the knowledge of God as redeemer. The former is accessible to human reason and constitutes our natural knowledge of God; the latter is not accessible to human reason but must be revealed by God and is believed, not because of reason, but because of what Calvin called the internal testimony of the Holy Spirit.

The knowledge of God as redeemer includes as central the truths about the person and work of Jesus Christ. Since such truth is found only in Scripture, the internal testimony of the Spirit is closely connected to belief that the Bible is God's Word. God's Word, the Bible, at once corrects mistaken beliefs about God as creator and clarifies the knowledge of God as creator had by reason. Furthermore it reveals many new truths about God, specifically in relation to salvation. For Calvin, Scripture clarifies, corrects, and augments the natural knowledge of God. (Compare this with Aquinas' distinction between the preambles and articles of faith and the relationship between faith and reason).

Calvin thinks that salvation involves the indwelling of God's Holy Spirit in the person, this indwelling imparts spiritual sight and enables people to see the truth of Christianity, specifically the truth of the Bible as God's Word. Calvin says that for believers the Bible is "self-authenticating." Calvin rejects the idea that believers need to prove that the Bible is God's Word, though he permits and actually himself engages a use of argument for the purposes of "useful confirmations." Calvin is clear that faith is first and argument second, but faith is not based on argumentation.

 

[Darrell C]

That these same Gentiles, referred to as 'doers of the law', did so by nature because of the spiritual birth?

We have to keep in mind that these "doers of the law" were still going to be judged...by the law.

Those that are born again will be judged, assuredly, but, Paul makes it clear that their salvation will remain intact.

In ch.2 of Romans, we can see that Paul's comparing Gentiles (who were not given the law) with Israel, who were given the law. He is getting ready to reiterate a point he made in ch.2:


Romans 3

9What then? are we better than they? No, in no wise: for we have before proved both Jews and Gentiles, that they are all under sin;

He had already said...


Romans 2

3And thinkest thou this, O man, that judgest them which do such things, and doest the same, that thou shalt escape the judgment of God?


6Who will render to every man according to his deeds:


11For there is no respect of persons with God.

12For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;


In view, I believe, is a contrast between Jew and Gentile...both coming under judgment.

We do not have all three primary groups, Jew, Gentile, and Christian...but only the first two.

If we try to make the Gentiles to fit the New Covenant pattern of relationship with God through the work of the Holy Spirit, we must also conclude that the "knowldge" (meaning an intimate relationship here) of the Jew who himself is found guilty because he did not in fact keep the law (as posed in question form by Paul when he asks "Do you teach yourself? Steal? Commit adultery? Commit sacrilege?) but caused the name of God to be blasphemed specifically because they had the law...but did not keep it.

He then goes on to find both Jew and Gentile guilty, despite the advantage of the Jew in receiving the oracles of God. Found here.


And while Paul does say...



Romans 2

King James Version (KJV)


6Who will render to every man according to his deeds:

7To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life:


...I do not think, according to the whole counsel of the word, that we can make a case that through the internal awareness of God, and of righteousness, that this can be taken to mean that men were regenerated under the law.




8But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath,

9Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile;


And again, Paul maintains his declaration of those that will be judged, meaning, Jew and Gentile. Only two groups, whereas after that Christ had come, accomplished atonement and sent the Comforter, we then see three groups discussed by Paul, Jew, Gentile, and believers.

While the Old Testament Saints were justified through faith, we read in Hebrews:



Hebrews 11

King James Version (KJV)

39And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise:


Israel awaited the promise of God, said to be rest in the promised land, fulfilled in part in Canaan, to be fufilled further in the temporal sense in the Millennial Kingdom, and will find its ultimate fulfillment in the spiritual sense in Christ as well as the eternal state, so that when we read:


Hebrews 4:1

King James Version (KJV)

1Let us therefore fear, lest, a promise being left us of entering into his rest, any of you should seem to come short of it.

...we do not have a warning of "losing salvation," or making "shipwreck" our faith, but we see an exhortation to belief and perseverence...in Christ. This is why the writer goes through the trouble to contrast the First and New Covenants.




Hebrews 11

King James Version (KJV)

39And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise:

They obtained a good report through faith, and we see Paul's teaching concerning justification through faith: they had a positional standing which reflects that expressed by Paul concerning "law-keeping" Gentiles and "law-breaking Jews," but, one thing they yet lacked...that was completion which would come only through Jesus Christ.


40God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.

The "they" are the Old Testament Saints, not restricted to the Covenant of Law, but intentionally referring to all that had "faith" and were deemed "just" before Christ.

The writer, throughout the book of Hebrews, details "perfection" and how that applies to the believer.


Hebrews 12

1Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us,

2Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.


The faith of those that came before Christ witnesses to the fact that we are "saved by grace through faith."

Even a faith expressed that has it's focus on God, whereas in these last days God has spoken to us through His Son, and the focus of faith is specifically in Christ, that He died in our place, our sins being placed upon Him, the penalty...paid in full, or...completely.

Jesus is the Author and "perfecter" of our faith. But...it was necessary for Him to first come, that believers be made perfect, or, complete, in regards to remission of sins and being set apart from God. While the Old Testament saint was, as we often say, "Saved on credit," their faith being counted as righteousness, I think it a mistake to equate the faith which they had with the completion that Christ accomplished for those that call on His name.

The Old Testament Saints did not receive the promised rest, but now, they, with us...have. And that was accomplished through the work of Christ.


I don't think I am going to get to all of this this morning...lol.


Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

I didn't mean to break up your continue, here is an article that you might find interesting

Hello Psalms, a good read, which, I think, shows that it is true, "there is nothing new under the sun."

The denial of atheists, I think, in most cases, can be ascribed directly to the knowledge of God which they receive which does not line up with how they would create God...one of man's biggest problems.

They assume a moral superiority over the God of the Bible which, at its heart, can be due to a very poor understanding of scripture, coupled with the internal nature of man that leads to rebellion against submission to the God of the Bible.

It is said, "The single greatest cause of atheism is...Christians."

I believe that in many cases that is true. Children are brought up being told this, and seeing that...in the lives of their parents. Atheists have a very clear picture of Who God is, and what scripture teaches that God does in the lives of those that are His children, and when the Church does not meet that expectation, they deem the power of God...to be non-existant.

This alone has taught me that how I conduct myself before the world, particularly in relation to those that are my brethren, is a serious matter, that I do not cause God's name to be blasphemed by denying His power at work in my heart. I fail, at times, but the awareness that God has brought to my heart of this crucial matter convicts me, and I judge myself guilty.

Again, great article, wish I had time to look at it in detail, it could be the start of a great thread.

God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

That these same Gentiles, referred to as 'doers of the law', did so by nature because of the spiritual birth?

I just do not believe that men were born again before Pentecost.

Consider the disciples of Christ, who for three years sat under the teaching of Christ, being told directly of His death which was to come. We can look at John 6 for a description of the life which Christ would give, through His body, that is, His death.

We consider that the faithful of Hebrews 11 were not made perfect, they did not receive the promise, which I believe in the salvific sense refers to the change from the First Covenant (which could not take away sins) to the New, whereby "one offering He has perfected forever them that are sanctified, and they were sanctified...once." (Heb. 10:10-14)

I believe Paul's point to focus on the fact that men have no excuse, all are guilty, and he quotes Old Testament testimony to this fact.

The contrast between Jew and Gentile is to emphasize man's internal awareness, despite what they do with that knowledge, which, Paul points out, is not capable of keeping man from rejecting that knowledge and subsequently engage in idolatrous and abominable pratice.

But...



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.

...the Gospel, and all that this word speaks of...is.

I believe hearing the gospel is not, and never has been a necessity to obtain the free gift of eternal life.

The focus of faith makes a decided shift from a general belief in God to an express faith in the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Before Christ, they awaited redemption (primarily temporal) in Messiah.

After, we understand better our predicament concerning sin and the impending judgment for that sin, knowing now that Christ died for our sin, in our place, that we should not receive the condemnation which passed unto all men.

The faithful before Christ had no such focus for their faith, for this truth is not revealed until Christ is revealed, and as I see it, it is not until the indwelling of God began performing His ministry in the lives of men that man could in fact undertand his predicament and his dire need for Christ.

To sit under the preaching of the gospel is a most marvelous privilege that God has provided for our ongoing salvation throughout this life.

And I just do not see it that way. God gifts men with abilities to share with men the knowledge that they need.

We do not need to think that men, because God uses them, play a part in the actual event of salvation.

I look at it like this: we are the physical body of Christ on the earth today, and it is Christ in us that gives the ability to convey the Gospel to those that are in need of this message.

We do not limit the spread of the Gospel to men only, but we recognize that men have been saved through the reading of scripture, and at times in our history, despite so-called Church Organization, men have come to saving faith through the written word, but we ascribe the actual saving always...to God.

It is true that salvation can be seen to recognize several areas within man's salvation, such as temporal as oppsed to eternal, but we have to recognize that there is a point in time here in which a man is saved. As we go through the word of God we are forced to clarify context and subject matter so that we do not confuse temporal perfection, which is our progressive sanctification that is observed by men, such as we see in James' teaching concerning our righteous standing before men, and the eternal sanctification which is God's declaration of righteousness based upon the finished work of Christ.

We can see this same principle in the use of the word soul: it has different applications and unless we clarify their use and distinguish context, we will, as you have pointed out concerning sozo, misapply the word and come to a wrong conclusion as to the text in view.

I would point out that one member, when given a verse concerning sozo, was able to distinguish that it was in fact a temporal context, so I believe that many understand this, yet many will have a hard time seeing salvation as an ongoing process when it is dsicussed in the manner it has been so far.

We can rightly say we are: 1-saved; 2-being saved; 3-and will be saved. Though we can still rest in the promise of God that we are in fact saved at this point in the positional declaration of God through the imputed righteousness of Christ...alone.

The righteousness we gain as we are perfected in the temporal sense...now that is another matter altogether.


Continued...

 

[psalms109:31]

Hello Psalms, a good read, which, I think, shows that it is true, "there is nothing new under the sun."

The denial of atheists, I think, in most cases, can be ascribed directly to the knowledge of God which they receive which does not line up with how they would create God...one of man's biggest problems.

They assume a moral superiority over the God of the Bible which, at its heart, can be due to a very poor understanding of scripture, coupled with the internal nature of man that leads to rebellion against submission to the God of the Bible.

It is said, "The single greatest cause of atheism is...Christians."

I believe that in many cases that is true. Children are brought up being told this, and seeing that...in the lives of their parents. Atheists have a very clear picture of Who God is, and what scripture teaches that God does in the lives of those that are His children, and when the Church does not meet that expectation, they deem the power of God...to be non-existant.

This alone has taught me that how I conduct myself before the world, particularly in relation to those that are my brethren, is a serious matter, that I do not cause God's name to be blasphemed by denying His power at work in my heart. I fail, at times, but the awareness that God has brought to my heart of this crucial matter convicts me, and I judge myself guilty.

Again, great article, wish I had time to look at it in detail, it could be the start of a great thread.

God bless.

It was a start of a thread that went no where. If you want to know where a quote comes from click the arrow next to their moniker in a quote and it will show the source, here is the source.

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=1681043#post1681043

 

[kyredneck]

Originally Posted by kyredneck

for not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified: (for when Gentiles that have not the law do by nature the things of the law, these, not having the law, are the law unto themselves; in that they show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness therewith, and their thoughts one with another accusing or else excusing them); Ro 2:13-15

You think it conceivable that Gentiles that had not the law, had not heard the law, could have that law supernaturally written upon their hearts?

Absolutely...that is Paul's primary thrust in this passage: that man has an internal knowledge that there is, not gods, but God.......Paul relates this internal knowledge within man....

Your presupposition of external means regeneration blinds you to the glorious truth of this passage. The passage totally blows external means regeneration out of the water, and gospel means folks are at a loss to grasp it's true import, and subsequently force the meaning that you've just espoused into it. Your's is the prevailing misinterpretation. You've plenty of company on this one.

The context of the passage is concerning THE LAW, not a moral law, or some internal knowledge that is universal to all men, and these particular Gentiles are described as doers of the law, and that by nature, because the work of the law has been written in their hearts.

These Gentiles are the true Jews of v 29, they are the children of the heavenly Zion of Ps 87 & Gal 4, the children of the desolate of Isa 54:1 and Gal 4, the “other sheep I have, which are not of this fold” of Jn 10:16.

The truths revealed in chapter 2 culminate with the question of 3:1:

“What advantage then hath the Jew? or what is the profit of circumcision?”

 

[Darrell C]

You missed the point of the statement, ref Jn 1:13:

“who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.”

If one holds to gospel means regeneration then it requires the will of others to carry that gospel to them in order for them to be born from above.

We do not have to conclude that, I feel.

This passage again leads me to believe that it was at this time that man was"Given the power to become the sons of God," basically, at the time in which the Son of God manifested in the flesh, died according to the scriptures, rose again, and did that which He said He would do...return to Heaven and send the Comforter.

We see in Acts 1...



Acts 1:4-5

King James Version (KJV)

4And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me.

5For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.


...that the disciples had as of yet not received the Spirit, though some see this as happening previously through Christ's command to...receive the Spirit. I would think this would clarify that they had not.

We look at John's (the Baptist) statement:


Matthew 3:11

King James Version (KJV)

11I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance. but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:


Two baptisms in view: with fire (judgment, as clarified in the text); with the Holy Spirit. Throughout John 13-16 we see that Christ's death and the coming of the Holy Spirit, another comforter, was yet future. We see a glorious change in the ministration of God in the lives of men that very day, where those who in defeat had gone back to fishing were born again and began to go about preaching the Gospel, in a way in which they had not before...now understanding that Messiah had not come to establish a temporal Kingdom and restoration of Israel, but had come to establish the Church, and a Kingdom that did not come with observation, and...a restoration of man, in which man received that which the law could not do.

The passage gives a clear threefold denial of any participation on the part of man with the spiritual birth, it is totally of God. Man is totally passive in regeneration.

I absolutely agree. Salvation is wholly the work of God, and except He move the heart of man, man cannot be saved.

Look at the disciples. They, including Judas, were empowered by the Holy Spirit to preach the Gospel, cast out demons, heal the sick. But, when Christ went to the Cross, they were, according to scripture...scattered. They did not grasp the role which Christ would play. Not until, I believe, they were born again.

This does not deny the work of the Holy Spirit under the First Covenant, nor before that, we can see that God has always worked in the hearts of men.

But...under the New, we have the indwelling which is said to be eternal, and we need not worry that what happened to King Saul, will happen to us.


Continued...