Is believing/faith a work ?

That's a good question. One of the videos that Kyredneck suggested was of John MacArthur and R.C. Sproul. Sproul especially goes into the centrality of the will in this. A regenerate or born again person has had a direct action of the Holy Spirit on him and his will and inclinations are changed in a totally passive way. Then he will come to Christ in faith, repent of sin, believe and so on. A lot of Calvinists say that regeneration includes justification but that would contradict clear scriptures linking it to faith. That's why you have Jesus explaining to Nicodemus that you must be born again and then immediately moving to the concept that you must believe in order to have everlasting life.

 

Regeneration is the spiritual change wrought in the heart of man by the Holy Spirit in which his/her inherently sinful nature is changed so that he/she can respond to God in Faith, and live in accordance with His Will (Matt. 19:28; John 3:3,5,7; Titus 3:5). It extends to the whole nature of man, altering his governing disposition, illuminating his mind, freeing his will, and renewing his nature. From "Regeneration" by J.I. Packer from the Monergism web site.

Notice how he says the "nature is changed so that he/she can respond to God in Faith". Then you are justified.

 

Some on here certainly, but they are pretty thin on the ground in Reformed circles in the UK.

 

At first I was offended by this but I do tend to ramble so I'm assuming you are serious. The answer is "NO". But not because regeneration IS justification or that justification is included in regeneration. The answer is "no" because justification occurs upon a person having faith and a person who is born again or regenerated will without fail seek Christ and come to faith. I know I still rambled so if you're busy:

NO

 

Interesting.

Personally I cannot separate being "justified" from "regeneration" in this post Pentecost church age. Faith precedes both.

 

"If there’s one phrase that captures the essence of reformed theology, it is the little phrase, regeneration precedes faith." - R. C. Sproul

St. Luke demonstrates the fallaciousness of the Reformed's Ordo Salutis. Cornelius is declared a righteous man (Acts 10:22). According to Reformed theology, this is an impossibility.

 

Cornelius was "Upright, God fearing, just" according to our different translations. But there is no hint that he was declared righteousness in the sense of justification. He wouldn't have needed Peter to come at all. That whole chapter is to show Peter and those of us who read it later that salvation is for Gentiles and not just Jews. It has nothing to do with demonstrating the fallaciousness of Reformed Ordo Salutis.

 

As a Calvinist on a theological debate forum I don't agree with you. As a practical matter, as a fellow believer, I have no problem with this and in actual life I think they all occur so close in time that it makes no difference. You certainly can argue that the first thing you perceive is that you want to come to Christ, no matter what the order was theologically.

 

- Cornelius is not regenerated when he prays to God.
- Cornelius had not even heard the Gospel.
- Cornelius was not a believer in Jesus Christ.
- Cornelius did not receive the Holy Ghost.
- Cornelius even tried to worship St. Peter.

Reformed theology states this man has absolutely no capacity to respond to God because he has not been regenerated. Yet Scripture states Cornelius was a righteous and God-fearing man who sought God (Acts 10:22). According to the Reformed's Ordo Salutis, this is impossible.

Acts 10:22: The men replied, “We have come from Cornelius the centurion. He is a righteous and God-fearing man, who is respected by all the Jewish people. A holy angel told him to ask you to come to his house so that he could hear what you have to say.”

 

I agree.
It is of the Spirit ( John 6:29-47, John 6:65, Acts of the Apostles 16:14, Philippians 1:29, Titus 3:4-7 ).

 

Campion. I'm not understanding what point you are trying to make above. If you insist that Cornelius was righteous in a sense of being justified then are those 5 statements you start with not related to justification? I don't know your background so I don't know where you are coming from.

 

John Owen on Natural vs. Moral Ability
Campion. You might read Owen. I think you might be right in that some on the Calvinists especially in debates overstate some things. Owen did not teach that men in their natural state must always be filthy, vile, haters of God. He actually spends a lot of time explaining the advantages of a natural person listening and heeding the warnings of scripture and preaching and the value of doing good before God to the extent you are able.

 

" For we ourselves also were sometimes foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, and hating one another.
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;
6 which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;
7 that being justified by his grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life." ( Titus 3:3-7 ).

Our belief on Jesus Christ had nothing to do with God deciding to save us.
It was His mercy alone that was and is responsible ( Romans 9:6-24 ).

 

That's OK. No need to agree with me. But as I listed in post 125 above, I'm going to go with J.I. Packer on this rather than you.