Featured The Problem of Regeneration Preceding Faith

Before I get into what I wanted to discuss, I want to say that I side with the Calvinist on all 5 points so there is no confusion. The topic I am wanting to address is the order by which salvation comes about. For a typical Calvinist approach we believe that men and woman are totally depraved meaning that they will not come to Christ in and of themselves therefore need the Holy Spirit to bring about a miracle to cause them to desire to come to Christ in the right state of heart.

This miracle that is causes faith to happen in a soul is generally agreed to be called regeneration.

From a non-Calvinist perspective you get people shaking their heads saying "no.. no.. no.. no one is saved before they are saved.." (I am not trying to limit anyone's views here or cause offense). As a Calvinist I have to hear their disagreement and take it seriously because there may be some validity in what they are saying.

My definition of Regeneration (rebirth/born again) is this, that one is made completely new. In this definition one has had their sins washed away as part of their newness. So you can see why the non-Calvinist isn't happy. A Calvinist must change the definition of regeneration to- made the soul responsive, alive, or quickened. These are biblical terms and words seen, however in the grand scheme of things it seems that the bible does not separate these terms from the sins being forgiven. If one is regenerated prior to faith happening (and you can't logically take the time element out although it is typically seen by a Calvinist as instantaneous chain of events) you have one born again without justification.

Where I am at at trying to piece this together:

I agree with Calvinist and have not surrendered a pedal off of the tulip. Going back to Scripture, Jesus speaks often of people who have a different set of eyes and ears, "He who has ears to hear let him hear" or "for seeing they do not see and hearing they do not hear". Calvinist recognize the effectual call, which in a sense means that their is a call to salvation empowered by the Spirit to bring life (regeneration) to a dead soul so that faith and justification come quickly. In my view, its nearly identical, however I do not put the emphasis on regeneration or rebirth in making one understand, but rather point to the effectual call. The effectual call is the key to "Irresistable Grace" rather than regeneration. The Spirit performs an act on a dead soul starting the salvation process and the overarching process after one latches on to Jesus is regeneration. In this view, regeneration describes what happens to a "believer" as he is led by the Spirit at God's exact time and place to trust Christ (faith and repentance being 2 sides to the same coin) and upon his trust is a simultaneous rebirth and removal of sin.

In summary I see salvation as a complete work of the Holy Spirit in a human soul, but regeneration as the result of the process because of how regeneration is defined.

Thoughts?

 

I understand that. I'm not sure if I am being clear in my explanation above or but one way or another you are not following what I'm saying.

 

I am aware of the general thrust of the reformed view. What I am suggesting is the view that Millard Erickson proposes in his systematic theology book.

 

I think there is no doubt that from Ephesisans 1 through Ephesians 2 Paul reveals that God was the ultimate cause of our destiny and thus our salvation. In this we agree 100%

Let me offer 2 options in interpreting the passage you brought up. Now, I am not saying you can interpret it in 2 different ways, but rather that to me there are 2 possible interpretations that make sense theologically.

1. You clearly explained your point and that is one probable way of understanding Paul here. It is possible that he intended us to see that God's method of saving us was first brought about by giving us life to lead us to saving faith. I see what you are saying here so I want to make that clear.

2. The second possible option would defend my argument in this thread. That is that Paul isn't narrowing this verse down to the order of salvation (other than his statements showing that salvation is God's work in a dead soul). What I mean is that he is talking about the process of regeneration as a whole. To paraphrase how I see it, "While you were dead in your sin, God showed up and brought you to life." He doesnt answer how that process occurs and of course in this thread that is exactly what we are arguing...how it occurs. Do you follow my thinking?

 

I hear what you are saying, but unfortunately to keep the thread on track I will not respond to your dilemma. I disagree with your logic, but that is ok. I suggest starting a thread on how to deal with the Holy Spirit and regeneration in the Old Testament and we can more clearly debate it without hijacking this thread. I think it is a very good question to raise.