The New Birth is a Pre-Pentecost Reality

[Robert William]

It says no such thing. It says "the things of the Spirit of God." It does not say "some" things, or "all" things. But if you read it in context, through 1 Co. 3:3 from 2:14, you will see that men of flesh can understand spiritual milk, but not meat.

So rather than moving on and referring to more and more references, why not address the two I have addressed, Matthew 23:13 and 1 Corinthians 2:14. Both, in context indicate that fallen unregenerate man can seek God and believe in Christ.

And again, Galatians 2:16-21 does not say nor suggest that fallen man cannot seek God or trust in Christ. In fact it says we believed in Christ before we were justified by Christ's faithfulness.

It says the natural man will NOT RECEIVE the things of God.

 

[Van]

What things, all or some? If the natural man will not receive some of the things of God, i.e. spiritual meat, that does not preclude receiving other things of God, i.e. spiritual milk.

 

[DHK]

It says the natural man will NOT RECEIVE the things of God.

1 Corinthians 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

This is such a misunderstood verse, a verse used out of context, and one of the most popular "proof-texts" used by the Calvinists to support their position.

The word "natural" simply means "of the flesh." It need not refer to the unsaved, and I don't believe that it refers directly to the unsaved in the context although the word does include all unsaved. But the context is not speaking of unsaved.
Neither is it making an all-inclusive statement "cannot," "is absolutely impossible,...etc." It doesn't say that. It makes a general statement, more like "in general does not receives not the things of the Spirit of God." Paul never says it is impossible.

What is the context?
Paul is speaking to "carnal Christians."
He begins by comparing how he came to them in the power of the Holy Spirit declaring the gospel to them, as opposed to the false teachers who came with excellency of speech and enticing words. Which would they choose?
In a comparison and explanation of how revelation and wisdom is received through the first nine verses he ends with this verse:

1 Corinthians 2:10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.
--Paul has received the deep things of God through revelation, by the Spirit of God. The Spirit has taught him these things.

1 Corinthians 2:11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.
--God knows the hearts of the believer by the Spirit of God. We have a relationship with God through the Spirit. That relationship can be broken through carnality. The unsaved have no such relationship at all.

1 Corinthians 2:12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
He is speaking to believers, and emphasizes that believers do not have the spirit of the world, a worldly spirit. They are given the Spirit of God that they might know spiritual things, those things, blessings, that are freely given to us of God.

1 Corinthians 2:13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.
--Which things we also speak. Paul had already spoken of these things, but the Corinthians had not yet received them. He isn't speaking of salvation. He is speaking of the deeper truths of God--comparing spiritual with spiritual.

1 Corinthians 2:14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.
--Now what does the natural man not receive?
He doesn't receive the deeper truths of God. That is the subject here. It is not the gospel. The natural man does receive the gospel. The deeper truths of God are foolishness unto him. And they were still foolishness unto the Corinthians who kept on refusing them because they were carnal, natural, of the flesh.

1 Corinthians 2:15 But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man.
16 For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.
--Paul could judge all things; the Corinthians were not in a position to judge at all. Why? Paul walked close to the Lord and could honestly say that he had the mind of Christ. The Corinthians in their carnality could not say that.

But it doesn't stop there. There were no divisions in the original.
1 Corinthians 3:1 And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ.
--Calling them brethren, in the same breath he calls them carnal.
He says they are carnal and babes in Christ. They had not grown spiritual and that is why they are carnal. The carnal mind receives not the things which are spiritual--the deeper truths of God, not the gospel. Keep things in context. These were saved individuals.

1 Corinthians 3:2 I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able.
--They had taken the milk, the gospel, baptism, and some basic truths after that. But then it stopped. They had not grown. Paul now wanted to feed them the meat of God's Word, but couldn't. They were immature carnal Christians. They could not receive the spiritual things of God's Word, the deeper truths of God's Word.

Why?
1 Corinthians 3:3 For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?
--Paul again emphasizes they are carnal. He lists the sins they are involved in. They couldn't walk close with God as long as they were involved in a sinful lifestyle, but Paul never questions their salvation. They were saved. But they were carnal Christians, and therefore "natural" and "received not the spiritual things..."
Not that it was impossible for them to do so, but that they had to get right with God first.
All natural men are able to receive the gospel. Paul isn't talking about the gospel.

 

[The Biblicist]

DHK is correct in his contextual analysis of 1 Corinthians 2:14. However, what he does not point out is that the regenerated man has still the fallen nature that Paul consistently identifies as "the flesh" where the "law of sin" dwells. This is the unregenerated nature of the redeemed man (Rom. 7:14-25). Although, the regenerate man is not "IN the flesh" (Rom. 8:8-9) "the flesh" is in the regenerate man, as he has two dual conflicting natures.

Neither the regenerate man nor the unregenerate man understand the things of God by means of "the flesh". It comes by divine revelation through the Spirit of God.

Hence, 1 Corinthians 2:14 is applicable to the unregenerate man because he is in his entirety "IN the flesh" and that is the condition of "the flesh" whether descriptive of the unregenerate man or descriptive of the fallen nature of the regenerate man. Since the TOTALITY of the unregenerate man is "THE FLESH" he cannot discern spiritual things because he has no indwelling Spirit of God like the regenerated man has IN ADDITION to his fallen nature.

 

[The Biblicist]

Good Grief

Very appropriate expression for the mess of confusion which follows - aptly described.

Of course it was faith in God, faith that God would keep His promises.

First, you are confused about the promise of God. The promise of God was not merely a son through his own loins - Isaac. The promise of God was that the Messiah/the Christ would come through his family line (Gal. 3:6-8) and it was the GOSPEL promise God gave Abraham (Gal. 3:8). That covenant promise was made "IN CHRIST" (Gal. 3:17).

Abraham believed in the gospel of Jesus Christ as preached by all the prophets - Acts 10:43 - all of which YOU DENY. You deny it because you have no concept of what the gospel is. For example you say:

"Was the object of Abraham's faith Christ? Nope, Christ was a mystery." - Van

No, the Bible does not say "Christ" was a mystery but the "mystery" had to do with the TIMING when he would come (1 Pet. 1:10-11) and the details of how he would accomplish redemption.

The Bible explicitly states that ALL THE PROPHETS preached Christ and so "Christ" was not a mystery!

"TO HIM give ALL THE PROPHETS WITNESS that whosover believeth IN HIS NAME shall receive remission of sins" - Acts 10:43

You deny that!

Jesus explicity said that Abraham SAW Christ's day and "rejoiced" (Jn. 8) - That is a declaration of faith in Christ by Abraham but you deny that!

The writer of Hebrews says the SAME gospel preached unto US was preached unto them (Heb. 4:2). You deny that!

Romans 4:16-22 is given to define the character of saving faith not its object, whereas Romans 4:23-25 is given to define the object of saving faith shared by Abraham as to "all who are of faith." You deny that!

You are displaying not merely pure ignorance but you are openly repudiating the clear and explicit teaching of Scripture.

Have you ever read Isaiah 53 for heaven's sake? Remember when the Eunuch asked Philip "WHO is this prophet speaking about?" Philip began with the very same text and preached Jesus. Paul says explicitly that Isaiah knew he was preaching about the coming Christ (Rom. 10:16). All Israel was waiting for the coming Christ BEFORE Christ came - for pete's sake they had to know about him in order to anticipate his coming - wake up and smell the roses.

 

[DHK]

DHK is correct in his contextual analysis of 1 Corinthians 2:14. However, what he does not point out is that the regenerated man has still the fallen nature that Paul consistently identifies as "the flesh" where the "law of sin" dwells. This is the unregenerated nature of the redeemed man (Rom. 7:14-25). Although, the regenerate man is not "IN the flesh" (Rom. 8:8-9) "the flesh" is in the regenerate man, as he has two dual conflicting natures.

Neither the regenerate man nor the unregenerate man understand the things of God by means of "the flesh". It comes by divine revelation through the Spirit of God.

Hence, 1 Corinthians 2:14 is applicable to the unregenerate man because he is in his entirety "IN the flesh" and that is the condition of "the flesh" whether descriptive of the unregenerate man or descriptive of the fallen nature of the regenerate man. Since the TOTALITY of the unregenerate man is "THE FLESH" he cannot discern spiritual things because he has no indwelling Spirit of God like the regenerated man has IN ADDITION to his fallen nature.

What I continually ask my self is, on the basis of the interpretation (or misinterpretation) of one verse of Scripture, how do so many people I have met come to Christ with very similar testimonies.
Certainly experience isn't what our theology is based on.
But our theology can't contradict what a great mass of orthodox experience is telling us either.

For example: I sat down, started reading the Bible (perhaps gospel of John), soon became convicted of my sins, turned to Christ and trusted him. [very simplified version].
--If he cannot understand spiritual things how is this testimony true, or do we just write off many such people as unsaved.
--I have received many tracts, free of charge, from a tract publisher and distributor. In their promotional material they give many testimonies from people all over the world who have been saved just by picking up a tract and reading it. Where does the "spiritual understanding" come from? Do we write such testimonies off just because our theology is opposed to it?

 

[The Biblicist]

What I continually ask my self is, on the basis of the interpretation (or misinterpretation) of one verse of Scripture, how do so many people I have met come to Christ with very similar testimonies.
Certainly experience isn't what our theology is based on.
But our theology can't contradict what a great mass of orthodox experience is telling us either.

For example: I sat down, started reading the Bible (perhaps gospel of John), soon became convicted of my sins, turned to Christ and trusted him. [very simplified version].
--If he cannot understand spiritual things how is this testimony true, or do we just write off many such people as unsaved.
--I have received many tracts, free of charge, from a tract publisher and distributor. In their promotional material they give many testimonies from people all over the world who have been saved just by picking up a tract and reading it. Where does the "spiritual understanding" come from? Do we write such testimonies off just because our theology is opposed to it?

I was sitting as a 13 year old boy in the back row of the church building minding my own business not seeking God but only seeking the quickest exit from church and that was by seating myself at the back by the door. Inside of me without my permission or control, my sinfulness was being exposed and it did not feel good. My conscience arose and smote me so hard I felt like a bowl of jello inside - a total mess. The fear of God swept over my soul and I knew for the first time in my young life that "I" was the sinner the preaching was talking about and no human being needed to convince of that because like a stick of dynamite all my self-righteousness was blown away within an instant sitting in that back seat. When God got through with me, I was trusting in Christ to save me. I had heard the gospel many times before but it meant nothing to me. I knew the bible better than any other child in Sunday School because my dad paid me 25 cents for every verse I could memorize. A quarter in my day bought twinkies, the largest candy bar (3 muskateers) and a 16 ounce Royal Crown Cola. So I memorized like crazy.

Salvation is not following a recipe, but it is an experience that actually changes you internally. It is a new creation and behold all things become new. I left that pew a changed person. Nobody needed to convince me to believe in Christ for salvation. Nobody needed to say a prayer with me. Nobody needed to asking me sign a profession card. Nobody asked me to walk an isle to receive Jesus as I had already done that before I even left the seat. In fact, I did not come forward until the evening and make a profession of faith. Before that moment I came to church because I was forced to, after that experience I now want to. Before that I was paid to memorize scripture but now I love to. That was my salvation experience becuase it actually SAVED me from what I was to what I am.

 

[DHK]

I was sitting as a 13 year old boy in the back row of the church building minding my own business not seeking God but only seeking the quickest exit from church and that was by seating myself at the back by the door. Inside of me without my permission or control, my sinfulness was being exposed and it did not feel good. My conscience arose and smote me so hard I felt like a bowl of jello inside - a total mess. The fear of God swept over my soul and I knew for the first time in my young life that "I" was the sinner the preaching was talking about and no human being needed to convince of that because like a stick of dynamite all my self-righteousness was blown away within an instant sitting in that back seat. When God got through with me, I was trusting in Christ to save me. I had heard the gospel many times before but it meant nothing to me. I knew the bible better than any other child in Sunday School because my dad paid me 25 cents for every verse I could memorize. A quarter in my day bought twinkies, the largest candy bar (3 muskateers) and a 16 ounce Royal Crown Cola. So I memorized like crazy.

Yes, but you speak like one who has been raised in a "Christian" culture--have been exposed to the Word all of your life. One of the people I am referring to was a Hindu, never heard of the gospel, picked up a Bible and started to read and was saved. I am speaking of people on the mission field who don't know much about Christ if anything.
It is there, that the natural man must have some ability to understand the things of God--at least the gospel.

 

[The Biblicist]

Yes, but you speak like one who has been raised in a "Christian" culture--have been exposed to the Word all of your life. One of the people I am referring to was a Hindu, never heard of the gospel, picked up a Bible and started to read and was saved. I am speaking of people on the mission field who don't know much about Christ if anything.
It is there, that the natural man must have some ability to understand the things of God--at least the gospel.

The problem is not one of understanding what is said. They can understand the words and the relationship of words with each other that forms thoughts. That is not the problem. The problem is a FRAME OF REFERENCE. They have no experiential SPIRITUAL frame of reference.

For example, take a puzzle. Must people will start with the corner peices and then seek the straight edged peices to form a border when putting together a puzzle. Why? Because the corner pieces and straight edged pieces provide a FRAME OF REFERENCE to make sense of all the other peices.

When a child in any culture is born, his mind is first introduced to corner pieces of the culture in which he lives. He begins with the corner peices and slowly builds a mental outline drawn from his culture, family, friends, religion so that he has a complete border as a frame of reference to fit everything else he confronts in life. When he comes to something that will not fit his frame of reference he either rejects it because it makes no sense within that mental framework OR he begins to force it to fit (the beginning of inconsistences) and then uses it to build a complete other frame of reference thus changing his original frame to fit the new frame of reference. Paul is saying "the flesh" provides no frame of reference for spiritual things, as spiritual things require a SPIRITUAL frame of reference to make sense.

Lost people have no SPIRITUAL frame of reference at all. They have no corner pieces, no straight edges. All they have is the pieces they are confronted with. Left to the flesh they will arrange those pieces within their fleshly frame of reference or reinvent a new frame (new religion) by making everything fit within the forced fit of those pieces.

The new birth provides the corner peices without which no true SPIRITUAL framework (the faith once delivered) can be built. Once a person has the corner pieces by new birth, and then the framework (the faith once delivered) then all other truth will fit with time and experience in knowing how to fit the other pieces with that framework.

The lost man - the flesh - has no SPIRITUAL FRAME of reference and although he can recognize the shape and color of the puzzle piece it makes no sense with his FRAME OF REFERENCE - the flesh. The new birth provides the essential corner pieces or SPIRITUAL LIFE for a SPIRITUAL frame of reference. That spiritual experience is what made "spiritual things" make sense as it provided me corner pieces for a new frame of reference.

My interest in religion and spiritual things was a matter of general curiosity prior to that experience which had no impact on my life. After that internal experience I had corner peices to build a SPIRITUAL frame of reference. Prior to that, my exposure to the bible was just exposure to puzzle pieces that I tried to arrange with my natural frame of reference.

A person makes a profession BECAUSE they have experienced something to profess. They do not make a profession IN ORDER TO experience something. There is a heart transaction PRIOR TO profession with the mouth or else there is nothing to profess.

 

[The Biblicist]

Rom. 9:7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.

1. He did not say one is an unbeliever and the other is a believer but he is referring to the SOURCE of their birth - "children OF THE FLESH" versus "children OF GOD"


2. The "children of the flesh" refers to NATURAL or PHYSICAL born children of Abraham but we are explicitly told these are not the children of promise, nor the "children of God". What other alternative is possible to "children of the flesh" if natural birth was the ONLY possible birth prior to Pentecost???


3. How could Paul even make a distinction between "children of the flesh" and "children of God" if the only possible kind of birth prior to Pentecost was physical birth??? The only other alternative is to suggest no children of promise (children of God) existed prior to the cross, but then, what is the point of contrast here then as the focus is before the cross????


Gal. 4:28-29 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.
But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now.


1. If all prior to Pentecost were "born after the flesh" and none were born "after the Spirit" then what is the basis for making a comparison by the words "as then" and "so it is now" if now is not as then in regard to "born after the flesh"? If there were no other alternative to being "born after the flesh" prior to Pentecost then he has made no point at all between "as then" and "so it is now"???????

2. However, Romans 9:7-8 demands there were "children of God" prior to the cross who were not "born of the flesh." Hence, what were they "born of" to be "CHILDREN of God" if they were not "BORN OF the flesh"??? What other option is there to being "BORN OF flesh" if not "BORN OF Spirit"??????

3. John 3:3; Ezek. 44:7 also demand there were those born of God prior to Pentecost or circumcised IN HEART, which is a synonym of the new birth even in the New Testament (Col. 2:11-12).

4. If one removes the illipses "born after the Spirit" then one also denies there is an meaningful contrast being made "born after the flesh" "THEN" with "NOW"!

5. If the children of the flesh are not the children of promise either then or now then what other alternative is there then or now to be children of promise other than by new birth??????

6. Again, Paul is referring to the SOURCE of birth "born" whether than "belief" or "unbelief". He is not referring to faith or lack of faith but the NATURE of birth between "children of God" versus natural born human beings who are not "children of God." What other possible alternative is there to being "born after the flesh" in order to be "children of God" THEN or NOW if not "born of the Spirit"!

Again, here is the OP and yet none have dealt with the specifics provided in this OP. I invite your attention back to the OP and its stated specifics

 

[Darrell C]

Rom. 9:7 Neither, because they are the seed of Abraham, are they all children: but, In Isaac shall thy seed be called.
8 That is, They which are the children of the flesh, these are not the children of God: but the children of the promise are counted for the seed.

1. He did not say one is an unbeliever and the other is a believer but he is referring to the SOURCE of their birth - "children OF THE FLESH" versus "children OF GOD"

Agreed, and the "source" here is...Isaac.

Which is referring to the lineage in the flesh and is not a contrast between being born of the Spirit and being born of the flesh.

Note that in view are the "children of promise:" the primary mistake those who believe men were born again before Pentecost make is they impose fulfillment of the promise prior to it's being bestowed.

While the Spirit of God certainly ministered to, in, and through men prior to Pentecost, what we can say for certain is that the Ministry of the Spirit of God in the capacity of Comforter can be seen to begin at Pentecost, at which time the eternal indwelling of God began. It is a certainty that not one of the disciples were Baptized with the Holy Ghost until after Christ ascended:


Acts 1:4-8

King James Version (KJV)

4 And, 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.

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

6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?

7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.

8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.


It is also a certainty that being born again requires faith in Christ, which while many (including the disciples of Christ Himself who ministered under the power of the Holy Spirit) believed in Christ in His earthly Ministry, did not understand Christ as Savior. Peter stood in direct opposition to the Gospel as seen here:


Matthew 16:21-23

King James Version (KJV)

21 From that time forth began Jesus to shew unto his disciples, how that he must go unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again the third day.

22 Then Peter took him, and began to rebuke him, saying, Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall not be unto thee.

23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.


We see Peter's fleshly mid at work when Peter takes up the sword in the Garden...in an attempt to thwart the very thing that Christ came to do.

If that is not enough, we see Peter, when the Lord is taken, deny that he even knew Christ.

Born again believer?

Not even close.

Again, the promise cannot be imposed into an Old Testament economy.


John 1:11-13

King James Version (KJV)

11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.

12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.


John will again refer to the New Birth and how it is accomplished:


1 John 5:1-5

King James Version (KJV)

1 Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him.

2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God, and keep his commandments.

3 For this is the love of God, that we keep his commandments: and his commandments are not grievous.

4 For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith.

5 Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that Jesus is the Son of God?


Prior to Pentecost no man had entered into the New Covenant. No man was Baptized with the Holy Spirit. It was not until the Spirit of God began taking up permanent residence in believers, who specifically believe on Christ, that the promise and promises of God were fulfilled. One member mentioned that the Old Testament Saints were not perfected until after their deaths, and we see that here:


Hebrews 12:22-23

King James Version (KJV)

22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,

23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,


Again we consider the children of promise through Isaac and those born of the flesh, the premise of this entire treatment of the New Birth and it's imposition into an Old Testament Economy:


Hebrews 11:13

King James Version (KJV)

13 These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.


Hebrews 11:39-40

King James Version (KJV)

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

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



Now let's look at the Lord's statement again:


Acts 1:4-5

King James Version (KJV)

4 And, 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.

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


Where is the teaching He refers to found?


John 14:16-17

King James Version (KJV)

16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;

17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.


Shall we, as did King David...plead with God not to take away His Spirit from us? Do we not understand that the indwelling of God in salvation in Christ is eternal?

The promise of the Spirit of God is just that, a promise...until it is bestoed and becomes a reality:


Ezekiel 36:22-27

King James Version (KJV)

22 Therefore say unto the house of Israel, thus saith the Lord God; I do not this for your sakes, O house of Israel, but for mine holy name's sake, which ye have profaned among the heathen, whither ye went.

23 And I will sanctify my great name, which was profaned among the heathen, which ye have profaned in the midst of them; and the heathen shall know that I am the Lord, saith the Lord God, when I shall be sanctified in you before their eyes.

24 For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land.

25 Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.

26 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.

27 And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.


Christ reiterates this promise and John 14 and 16 inform us greatly about this coming fulfillment, which took place after the Cross and after Pentecost. One cannot be considered born again apart from the indwelling of God, and we can certainly make a distinction between the promised ministry of the Holy Spirit after Christ's Ascension and before. Shall we view the disciples' temporal expectation...


Acts 1:6

King James Version (KJV)

6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?


...as indicative of born again believers who understand Christ's death, burial, and resurrection?

Not at all.

The promise of the Spirit in the New Covenant fulfillment came when the New Covenant was established. Gentile Inclusion was a mystery prior to New Testament teaching following Pentecost, but that is precisely what took place when Christ began building His Church. Not one Old Testament Saint can be said to have received the promise or promises, for they were not made perfect (complete), which could only occur after Christ had paid the penalty for sin for those that would believe specifically on Him for salvation, thus overcoming the world through Christ.


God bless.

 

[The Biblicist]

John 3:16 and John 3:36, and John 5:24 all use the very same PRESENT TENSE for obtaining ETERNAL LIFE at the point of faith. What kind of life is it if it is not SPIRITUAL LIFE - they already have physical life? None say if one believes they "SHALL" have eternal life but "HATH" everlasting life - present tense simultaneous action with believing which is also present tense.

Hence, more proof of new birth PRIOR to Pentecost.

No one has yet addressed the above post. Look at these texts:

Jn. 3:15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Jn. 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

Jn. 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.


The participles translated "believeth" are PRESENT TENSE and so are the words translated "have" and "hath" are PRESENT TENSE showing identical action with each other. HE IS NOT USING FUTURE TENSE VERBS!


He is not addressing PHYSICALLY dead people to believe on him. Hence, the "everlasting LIFE" has to be SPIRITUAL LIFE - regenerative life.

In John 5:24 He uses the PERFECT tense verb "passed" showing that at the point of faith there is a completed action "from death to life" that occurred. That cannot be referring to PHYSICAL death to PHYSICAL life but only can refer to SPIRITUAL death to SPIRITUAL life.

The New Testament PRIOR to Pentecost provides many specific cases of people believing on him. He tells his own disciples that their names have already been written in the book OF LIFE (not physical life) in heaven. They had been made SPIRITUALLY ALIVE when they believed.

 

[The Biblicist]

Agreed, and the "source" here is...Isaac.

Only in the sense that Isaac's physical birth is a type of the new birth and in addition as a matter of actual fact, Isaac is the first physical seed of Abraham that experienced new birth conversion to God unlike Ishmael, or else Isaac is no different than Ishmael as Ishmael was the SOURCE in regard to the first PHYSICAL seed of Abraham.

Second, Paul explicitly states that "EVEN AS ISAAC" we are the children of Promise. So where is the basis of comparison if it is not new birth? We certainly were not physically born in like manner to Isaac. Nor are we the PHYSICAL lineage of Abraham and Paul is talking to GENTILES (Galations). Indeed, Paul goes on to say it is a comparison of NEW BIRTH as the very next verse contrasts those "born after the flesh" EVEN NOW AS WAS THEN with those born after the Spirit.

Moreover, you have the PRESENT TENSE promise of eternal life NOW in simeltaneous grammatical action with believing in John 3:15-16, 36; 5:24 which can only refer to SPIRITUAL LIFE prior to Pentecost.

Which is referring to the lineage in the flesh and is not a contrast between being born of the Spirit and being born of the flesh.

You are directly contradicting Paul as he says that such were "children of the flesh" and NOT "children of God" or "children of the promise." Hence, a physical lineage did not produce "children of God" or "children of the promise" and yet Isaac is such.

Note that in view are the "children of promise:" the primary mistake those who believe men were born again before Pentecost make is they impose fulfillment of the promise prior to it's being bestowed.

No, your primary mistake is to fail to note the promise was given BEFORE they were born (Rom. 9:11) and thus fulfilled after birth at the point Isaac was individually converted to Christ or don't you believe Peter's words in Acts 10:43:

TO HIM give ALL THE PROPHETS WITNESS that whosoever believeth in his name shall receive remission of sins" - Acts 10:43

Abraham did receive the BLESSEDNESS of remission of sins (Rom. 4:6-11) as BEFORE he was circumcised (v. 11), thus that promise was received long before Pentecost. Likewise with Isaac, and all the other Old Testament Saints.

You don't believe the writer of Hebrews who says the SAME gospel was preached unto them as well as unto us - Heb. 4:2.

While the Spirit of God certainly ministered to, in, and through men prior to Pentecost, what we can say for certain is that the Ministry of the Spirit of God in the capacity of Comforter can be seen to begin at Pentecost, at which time the eternal indwelling of God began. It is a certainty that not one of the disciples were Baptized with the Holy Ghost until after Christ ascended:

You are failing to distinguish institutional indwelling which occurred at Pentecost as describe in 1 Cor. 3;16 with individual indwelling that has occurred sin the Garden of Eden as described in 1 Cor. 6:19.

 

[The Biblicist]

Now to deal with your scripture passages. You are making a classical mistake of most Protestant interpreters make because of their mistaken view of the baptism in the Spriit. They confuse texts that refer to the new institutional "house of God" with texts that refer to the individual house of God AND they confuse salvation texts that refer to Israel as a NATION with applications that refer to INDIVIDUAL salvation among Israelites then and now.

Acts 1:4-8

King James Version (KJV)

4 And, 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.

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


This is a promise restricted to WATER BAPTIZED BELEIVERS IN CHRIST only. Every single promise up to this point is to a plural "you" who have already been water baptized by John and are believers in Christ.

This is a promise restricted to a specific time - "not many days hence."

This is a promise restricted to a certain geographical location "Jerusalem" - "in one place" - Acts 2:1 (if this baptism was universal to all beleivers and there were many outside Jersualem - 500 hundred brethren - 1 Cor. 15 - then why is it necessary to wait in a specific geographical location?).

This is a promise well known in the Old Testament in regard to the completion of every new "house of God" as the immersion in the shikinah glory (Ex. 40:35; 2 Chron. 7:1-3) and now on the new "house of God" - an institutional accreditation.

 

[The Biblicist]

Born again believer?

Not even close.

Again, the promise cannot be imposed into an Old Testament economy.

Lets get to the real root of this argument. Darrel, do you believe "in the day" Adam ate that he died in some sense? Or do you believe death never occurred "in the day" he ate as God said it would and it only refers to a physical process of dying that began on that day and culimated in his physical death 930 years later? If you believe the latter, then may I ask you what causes the physical death process to begin in man?

I believe that SPIRITUAL DEATH is the cause and the origin of the process of physical death.

What am I getting at? Do you believe SPIRITUAL DEATH occurred at the point of sin in the garden? If you don't, then we have a long row to hoe with each other. If you do, then please define "spiritual death" for me.

I believe "spiritual death" is merely SPIRITUAL SEPARATION from God. I think I can prove that. If I am right, then what is the solution or remedy for spiritual SEPARATION from God? Is it not SPIRITUAL UNION with God? The Bible says that God IS life and God IS light and God IS holy and to be spiriutally separated from Life/light/holiness is spiritual death/darkness/unrighteousness. Is that not exactly what Paul says all mankind inherited by the one act of one man - Adam in Romans 5:12-19?

My point, is the condition of man has been the same from the fall of Adam and there is no other solution to that condition than the reverse of that condition - spiritual separation can only be undone by spiritual union. Think about it.

 

[The Biblicist]

John 1:11-13

King James Version (KJV)

11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.

12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.


John will again refer to the New Birth and how it is accomplished:

In other words you are claiming that Jesus is rebuking Nicodeums for being ignorant of something he could not possibly of known (Jn. 3:11) because it could not even occur until Pentecost?????

Moreover, notice NO FUTURE TENSE verbs in John 1:12-13 or Jn. 3:3-8. Present and Aorist tense verbs. Hence, Jesus is just plain lying to people when he tells them for three years before Pentecost that anyone PRESENT TENSE believing in him HATH (present tense) everlasting life? Was he speaking to physically dead people who needed physical life? Or was he speaking to spiritually dead people who needed spiritual life when he said, "hath everlasting life...passed from DEATH unto LIFE"????

 

[Darrell C]

Originally Posted by Darrell C View Post
Agreed, and the "source" here is...Isaac.

Only in the sense that Isaac's physical birth is a type of the new birth

Isaac's birth was a physical birth and there is never a mention of his being born again. That is imposed.

In view are children of the flesh (the result of human effort) and children of promise, those born after the flesh, those born after the Spirit.

Those born after the flesh can be ascribed to Abraham, basically, because he went along with the devising of Sarai. Those born after the Spirit are those who were born according to God's will, that is, through Sarai (as He promised), which promise was doubted but fulfilled.

and in addition as a matter of actual fact, Isaac is the first physical seed of Abraham that experienced new birth conversion to God unlike Ishmael, or else Isaac is no different than Ishmael as Ishmael was the SOURCE in regard to the first PHYSICAL seed of Abraham.

The births of both Isaac and Ishmael are both physical. It is the Seed through Whom the promise was to be fulfilled, not Isaac, not Jacob, nor any descendant other than Christ:


Galatians 3:15-18

King James Version (KJV)

15 Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's covenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto.

16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.

18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.


You are imposing a spiritual promise into...physical birth and lineage.

Now consider:


Galatians 4:4-6

King James Version (KJV)

4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,

5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.

6 And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.


Here we see that those under Law, which Paul has already made clear are in view in chapter 4...had to be redeemed from the Law. That was accomplished by Christ coming. So we cannot impose redemption from the Law prior to that. He is writing to Gentiles, as you point out, but Paul includes all who were under Law as being redeemed from the Law (through Christ the Seed), receiving the adoption of sons (which is a result of being redeemed from the Law), and because they are now sons...

...God sent forth the Spirit of His Son.

Which, if we notice carefully what Christ stated...


John 14:16-18

King James Version (KJV)

16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;

17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.


...we see that the Spirit of God and the Spirit of Christ are, as Paul makes clear in Romans 9...One.

What you are ignoring is that the Covenants in view are two, not three. Those who are in view in chapter 4 are either under Law or under the New Covenant.

And you simply cannot impose the promises of the New Covenant prior to the establishment of the New Covenant, which is precisely what you are doing.

Second, Paul explicitly states that "EVEN AS ISAAC" we are the children of Promise.

And the promise refers to the promise of God and has nothing to do with lineage.

Think about it: what you are doing is making lineage the reason for the New Birth, which many times it is written that this is not the case. Being a child of Abraham is not physical, but requires faith.

Now, let's look a little closer at what you are trying to establish as a reference to a contrast between the natural or physical man and the born again Saint of the Old Testament:



Galatians 4:21-26

King James Version (KJV)


21 Tell me, ye that desire to be under the law, do ye not hear the law?

22 For it is written, that Abraham had two sons, the one by a bondmaid, the other by a freewoman.

23 But he who was of the bondwoman was born after the flesh; but he of the freewoman was by promise.

24 Which things are an allegory: for these are the two covenants; the one from the mount Sinai, which gendereth to bondage, which is Agar.

25 For this Agar is mount Sinai in Arabia, and answereth to Jerusalem which now is, and is in bondage with her children.

26 But Jerusalem which is above is free, which is the mother of us all.


Paul makes it clear here that unlike your attempt to make this about New Birth, what is in view is the contrast between the Covenant of Law and the New Covenant.

Not born again and unregenerate.

The Law did not include the New Birth...that was a promise of God when the New Covenant was established.

So where is the basis of comparison if it is not new birth?

The two Covenants, of course.

We certainly were not physically born in like manner to Isaac.

We most certainly were.

So was Christ:


Galatians 4

King James Version (KJV)


4 But when the fulness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law,


Again we see there is a point in time when the Promises were fulfilled, and that time is when Christ came. We can get into specifics about the promises and place those, not just due to Christ's coming, but due to His Work. For example, the sins of the Old Testament Saints were not forgiven in completion until Christ died in their place, taking their sins upon Himself. Christ did not "come to the disciples" until after His Ascension. The eternal indwelling of the Spirit of God did not take place until after He, the Comforter came.

Paul makes this very clear:


5 To redeem them that were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.

6 And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.


This is why I mentioned Peter's direct opposition to the Gospel. If anyone could have been born again under Christ's Ministry, the disciples, Judas excluded, would have. But they were not. Peter did not "abide" in Christ, but vehemently denied he even knew Who Christ was, with cursing.


Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

Nor are we the PHYSICAL lineage of Abraham and Paul is talking to GENTILES (Galations).

Which is why Paul mentions what, though spoken of in the Old Testament, and a promise of God, Paul makes clear was a mystery. That is, Gentile Inclusion:


Galatians 3:8-9

King James Version (KJV)

8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.

9 So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.


When Paul addresses the Galatians, he includes himself and they as one group:


Galatians 4:28

King James Version (KJV)

28 Now we, brethren, as Isaac was, are the children of promise.


Being children of promise has nothing to do with race or heritage, which is precisely what you are making it by making Isaac's birth a factor in New Birth.

Indeed, Paul goes on to say it is a comparison of NEW BIRTH as the very next verse contrasts those "born after the flesh" EVEN NOW AS WAS THEN with those born after the Spirit.

What flesh was it that produced Ishmael?

What Spirit promised the Seed through Sarai?

And again, in view are the Covenants...not regeneration. Those in view until Christ were still...

...under the Law.

From which Christ redeemed them.

Didn't happen before the Cross and Pentecost, my friend.

Moreover, you have the PRESENT TENSE promise of eternal life NOW in simeltaneous grammatical action with believing in John 3:15-16, 36; 5:24 which can only refer to SPIRITUAL LIFE prior to Pentecost.

We have the same present tense here...

Galatians 3:9

King James Version (KJV)

9 So then they which be of faith are blessed with faithful Abraham.


...but it does not negate the future application of the statement.

We see the same thing here:


John 20:22

King James Version (KJV)

22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:


...but those that try to negate Christ's words here...



Acts 1

King James Version (KJV)

4 And, 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.

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


...and say that here the disciples receive the Promised Spirit show that they are more interested in proof-texting a position than expounding Scripture.

No-one was born again before Pentecost, which is an operation of the Holy Spirit:


Titus 3:4-5

King James Version (KJV)

4 But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,

5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;


We cannot separate the indwelling of God from the remission of sins which is tied directly to the salvation experience under New Covenant conditions.


Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darrell C View Post
Which is referring to the lineage in the flesh and is not a contrast between being born of the Spirit and being born of the flesh.

You are directly contradicting Paul as he says that such were "children of the flesh" and NOT "children of God" or "children of the promise."

Again, we ascribe being born after the flesh to human effort, and being born after the Spirit to divine effort which cannot be divorced from...promise. Isaac was not the Seed, Christ was.

And again, Paul makes it clear, over and over what "we" were: under the Law and in need of...redemption.

And that begins with Christ, Who is the Seed promised, and He Who made it possible for us to become sons of God:


John 1:11-13

King James Version (KJV)

11 He came unto his own, and his own received him not.

12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:

13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

Hence, a physical lineage did not produce "children of God" or "children of the promise" and yet Isaac is such.

That doesn't mean we can impose what was promised...back then.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darrell C View Post
Note that in view are the "children of promise:" the primary mistake those who believe men were born again before Pentecost make is they impose fulfillment of the promise prior to it's being bestowed.

No, your primary mistake is to fail to note the promise was given BEFORE they were born (Rom. 9:11) and thus fulfilled after birth at the point Isaac was individually converted to Christ

Great. Show me the Scripture that shows Isaac understanding the Gospel of Christ.

For that matter, how me one person, during Christ's Ministry...that understood the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

It was a Mystery, my brother. Nobody understood the Mystery of the Gospel until the Comforter revealed it to them:


1 Corinthians 2:6-12

King James Version (KJV)

6 Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought:

7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:


The Gospel of Christ should not be confused with the Gospel of the Kingdom or the Gospel that those in the Wilderness received. The Gospel of Christ was not revealed, not even to the Disciples of Christ. That is, again, why I mentioned Peter's opposition to the Gospel. Christ told them He would go to Jerusalem to die, and Peter...rebukes the Lord. He takes up a sword because he is, like all Jews then, in expectation of a temporal Kingdom, oblivious to the Spiritual Rule and Reign of Christ.


8 Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

9 But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.

If the enemies of Christ had known that Christ's death would result in redemption from sin and the Law...they would have assigned the best security detail imaginable, that He not even stub His toe.

This quote is often erroneously ascribed to a depiction of the glory of Heaven, but in view is the Gospel of Christ.


10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.

11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.

12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.


Only the Spirit of God can enlighten the natural mind to understand the Spiritual things of God, and that is the specific Ministry of the Comforter which has a point in time when it begins, which is after Christ's ascension and the coming of the Spirit on the Day of Pentecost.

That the Gospel of Christ was a Mystery is made clear in a number of places, and because this is getting long I will just share a few:


Colossians 1:25-27

King James Version (KJV)

25 Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God;

26 Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints:

27 To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:


This has a context of Gentile Inclusion, but the promise made to Abraham spoke of all families of the earth, not just the descendants of Isaac.


Romans 16:25-26

King James Version (KJV)

25 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,

26 But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:


We see the New Birth and the Mystery coupled by Peter:


1 Peter 1

King James Version (KJV)


3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which according to his abundant mercy hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,

4 To an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away, reserved in heaven for you,

5 Who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation ready to be revealed in the last time.


10 Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you:

11 Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.

12 Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into.


21 Who by him do believe in God, that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God.

22 Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently:

23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.




Again, you cannot impose this under Old Testament Economy.

The New Birth was not revealed but through the Spirit of God sent down from Heaven, Who is the Comforter that came...after Christ returned to Heaven.


Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

or don't you believe Peter's words in Acts 10:43:

TO HIM give ALL THE PROPHETS WITNESS that whosoever believeth in his name shall receive remission of sins" - Acts 10:43

Now carefully look at Peter's statement above and see who they ministered to.

Which I why I quoted Hebrews: the Old Testament Saints were not made perfect (complete) in regards to redemption, but their spirits have been made complete through the Work of Christ.

Abraham did receive the BLESSEDNESS of remission of sins (Rom. 4:6-11) as BEFORE he was circumcised (v. 11), thus that promise was received long before Pentecost. Likewise with Isaac, and all the other Old Testament Saints.

Abraham died still needing his sin atoned for by Christ.

That is just a fact.

He received a good report, was accounted faithful, but he died in his sins which were not atoned for until Christ died in his place.

The promise was not received prior to...


Acts 1

King James Version (KJV)


4 And, 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.

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


We do not separate the promises of the New Covenant, some being received prior to the establishment, some not. The promises associated with the New Covenant have a beginning in time, and that is when the New Covenant was established.

Consider:


Matthew 26:28

King James Version (KJV)

28 For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.


Hebrews 12:22-24

King James Version (KJV)

22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,

23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,

24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.

You don't believe the writer of Hebrews who says the SAME gospel was preached unto them as well as unto us - Heb. 4:2.

Show me "the same."


Hebrews 4

King James Version (KJV)

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

2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.


And again, show me anyone under Christ's earthly ministry that He preached the Gospel of Christ to.

Just one.

The closest you will get is John the Baptist, who makes it clear he was without understanding here...


Matthew 11

King James Version (KJV)


2 Now when John had heard in the prison the works of Christ, he sent two of his disciples,

3 And said unto him, Art thou he that should come, or do we look for another?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Darrell C View Post
While the Spirit of God certainly ministered to, in, and through men prior to Pentecost, what we can say for certain is that the Ministry of the Spirit of God in the capacity of Comforter can be seen to begin at Pentecost, at which time the eternal indwelling of God began. It is a certainty that not one of the disciples were Baptized with the Holy Ghost until after Christ ascended:

You are failing to distinguish institutional indwelling which occurred at Pentecost as describe in 1 Cor. 3;16 with individual indwelling that has occurred sin the Garden of Eden as described in 1 Cor. 6:19.

Incorrect: it is the relationship with God that Adam lost that is restored in salvation in Christ. What is being confused in the filling of the Spirit of God, which has taken place since Adam, and the eternal indwelling of God which occurs in the New Birth, which is effected by the indwelling of God in the believer.

God said "I will put my Spirit within you and cause you to walk in my statutes and keep my judgments."

This is what reconciliation is about, my friend, and it is bestowed in regeneration, when God restores men to the relationship lost in the Garden.


God bless.