Featured What Does Repent Mean?

Repentance needs a context. The context in scripture with regard to salvation is sin. I have made a case for that. At this point (no offense intended) you have not made a case only a claim. I am asking you to make a clear case for your position that the context of repentance is something other than sin with regard to salvation.

 

Rev.
Although I understand that for some the teaching of repentance is focused upon sin, I am not certain that is the only focus when it comes to salvation.

I would consider that the focus of repentance as it relates to salvation is also upon the aspect of change from unbelief to belief.

The Holy Spirit brings awareness to the whole world of sin, righteousness of judgment. In that awareness one may be brought by the Gospel into an awareness of and belief in Christ. That person then is "repented" in the true sense without regard to enumerating sins committed and confessing them, but the deep understanding that without Christ there is no hope.

None of the above diminishes the aspect that the believer does not confess their sins (1 John) but that such confession is not bringing salvation, rather the result of salvation.

The scene of the cross is a great example. The thief already believed in the hope of eternity hanging next to him, even when rebuking the other thief's mockery. Such belief impressed him to confess and express in the hope. The repentance then is found in salvation not upon the sin, but upon the belief.

 

The context for repentance is that the individual is lost, a sinner, a criminal before God. The thief on the cross was a criminal. Jesus did not deal with his sin. He was a criminal and knew it. Before salvation we all are. It is our rebellious attitude toward God that needs a change. That's what happened on that cross if you note the difference in the attitude toward the two thieves. One became submissive; the other continued in his rebellion. The one repented; the other continued in his rebellion.

As Jon C pointed out earlier Repentance is the flip side of faith. They both go together and you can't have one without the other.
Repentance is a change of mind with respect to one's attitude toward God.
At one time the individual lived in rebellion toward God. Then he repented. He changed his attitude.
Now he lives in submission to Christ as Lord. Why? He has repented; changed his mind, his attitude toward God.
That is not only repentance but it is faith. That is what happens when a person puts his faith in Christ as Lord. He changes his mind about the world. The object of his faith becomes Christ. Whatever was the object of his faith was before (the world, another religion, fame, wealth, etc.) is gone. Now the object of his faith is Christ and his atoning work. For that reason there is a great change in his life. Faith and repentance go together. You cannot have one without the other.

 

OK great I understand that is your position. What I am asking for is your biblical support. Thus far what you have provided was a definition of repent devoid of context. Please show me your scriptural support that the biblical context of repent is nothing more than unbelief devoid of any turn from sin.

 

Hello James
there was a different thinking or a change in who they were to regard Jesus as for sure.
It does not have to be an either or situation does it? cannot it be both?
I think you are over thinking many things you post on...just an observation.
The messiah was to "bear the sins of many" Isa 53....so when it comes to this sermon
6 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?

38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

The Lordship of Christ and remission of sins have been understood by most people on this passage.

 

Further I would ask how can the change their mind about what He did for them while ignoring why He did it?

 

Vines definition is more comprehensive and biblically accurate.
RM and I do not agree on many things, but he is spot on on this topic.

 

Paul's testimony before Agrippa
Act 26:20 But shewed first unto them of Damascus, and at Jerusalem, and throughout all the coasts of Judaea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent and turn to God, and do works meet for repentance.
--Repent and turn to God.
--Continue to do the works that come from repenting.

Paul' first letter to the Thessalonians
1 Thessalonians 1:9 For they themselves shew of us what manner of entering in we had unto you, and how ye turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God;
--The result of their faith was turning to God from idols to serve the living God. It is the same definition as repentance.
It is that spiritual transition from a life of sin and rebellion to submission to God.

 

I agree with every word said here. While this is true it does not negate repentance of sin in the salvation process.

You cannot look at the work of the cross, the shed blood of Jesus and say will take Christ and still keep my sin. In our minds sin has to be dealt with leading up to salvation. There is no way around that.

Further if repentance of sin is a work so must repentance of unbelief.

 

Well said RM...

 

See, DHK, here is one of the "sticking point" between us.

You desire to have faith as human generated ownership that must be "put" in some manner in Christ. I would show that faith is not a sure footing for it relies greatly upon hope.

Admittedly, some use trust and faith as interchangeable, but there is certain aspects of trust and faith that show marked difference.

Faith may fail, trust does not. The greater number of disciples failed to endure to the end and left, but the 12 trusted and remained expressing no other place to find truth.

Trust is commitment and reliance. Faith is (as it would be applicable in your use) merely something of hope.

A believer can trust the Lord, and reliably commit because they have been given understanding by the Holy Spirit that God has placed them into His care, and His character expressed through love never fails. It is trust that relegates faith to a hope, for trust relies upon both the evidence of the past history and that which is assured based on the knowledge and experience which brings that heightened instinctive awareness of discernment. Example is Peter's expression in which Christ states is that little rock.

One does not "put" faith into Christ to receive, rather they have already received and they have the ability then to trust and express hope (faith).

Faith is a part of belief, but not the whole. So when one "puts their faith" in Christ, there is that which is also left out.

 

This is the crux of the whole matter. One must define what they mean when saying "repent of their sin," or "repentance of sins." This is what has been a thorn in presentation of the gospel.
First, "sins" cannot be plural. That is unbiblical.
Second, if by "sin" you simply mean "sinful lifestyle" then you should say so to avoid confusion. Don't assume those in your hearing audience will understand your "Bible-speak."
Third, in more accurate language it is our rebellion against God, our rebellious attitude toward him that we are actually repenting of. Since repentance it is a change of mind what is the unbeliever changing his mind about? One sin? Many sins? Does he count them? No. It is his rebellious attitude toward God. Before God he is a criminal just as guilty as the thief on the cross--a criminal before God. God has stamped upon him "GUILTY!" There is a price that needs to be paid.

 

Here is what I believe is a Biblical definition of faith.

Romans 4:20 He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God;
21 And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform.
--Faith is being fully persuaded that what God has promised God is able to perform.
Abraham was strong in faith, and that is what Abraham believed, and the way he believed.

 

It has not been a thorn in my side and anyone I have ever shared the gospel with has understood it as I do.

That is a symantical argument that has not real weight on much of anything. You are welcome to be right on that if you wish.

Another symantical issue the average person would never see.

Tomato, tomaato its all the same, repent of sin or repent of rebellion no difference. It seems we agree minus the unnecessary semantics.

 

"Jesus said to his disciples: "Things that cause people to stumble are bound to come, but woe to anyone through who they come. It would be better for them to be thrown into the sea with a millstone tied around their neck than to cause one of these little ones to stumble. So watch yourselves. "If your brother or sister sins against you, rebuke them; and if they repent, forgive them. Even if they sin against you seven times in a day and seven times come back to you saying 'I repent,' you must forgive them."" (Luke 17:1-4, NIV)

 

The "strong in faith" is actually by context of the living of Abraham to be taken as "strong in faithfulness."

It was not some enlarged faith in Abraham, but the faithfulness of Abraham that is exampled in this passage.

The same principle is used in such passages as Paul speaking of the "enlargement" of faith (2 Thess. 1), again the faith itself isn't enlarged, but the faithfulness is exampled (enlarged) for believers in every place to be encouraged and copy.

Again, DHK, I am not arguing that "faith" is not a part of what God grants to the believer so that they may believe, but faith is only a part of that awakening of the Holy Spirit work. So when one of the flesh would "put their faith" it is actually the expression of what God has already accomplished.

That is the sticking area.

 

Indeed it is. You take the reformed position and I do not.
Faith is faith. It is not something that is mystical. It is not something that is tangible that is given to man. Nowhere in Scripture do we find God giving faith to unsaved man. However, we find God commanding man to "believe" many times throughout the Bible. Why would God believe on behalf of man (i.e., give him the faith to believe). It doesn't make any sense at all.
What is important is the object of man's faith. That is what is important. If the object of his faith is Christ and his atoning work on the cross then he can be saved.

 

ITL...do you remember on page one on this thread you said ...you have been on here for 5 yrs and never saw anyone say such things....here you go.....
When we posted it, you called us antagonists....now see for yourself.

 

"
“When Christ calls a man, he bids him come and die.”

It triggered a memory.


A few years ago, during a mission trip to Romania, one of the pastors there told us what it was like to be a Christian (he called them "repenters") under Communism.


He said when someone would come to them, expressing a desire to confess Christ as Lord, they did something which shocked me: They tried to talk him out of it.


He explained: They asked the new believer "do you understand what may happen once it becomes known you have become a repenter? Do you understand that you could lose your job, your family, you could be thrown in jail, you could be beaten up. Or the Communists might kill you. Now, do you still want to publicly confess Christ?"


The pastor said, "if he's still willing, then we are pretty sure his conversion experience was real."


There was no cheap grace in Romania under Communism."

Source Unknown


I think the day is coming in America when the idea of cheap grace will fade away. Already, even today, we are getting glimpses of what it's costing some believers.