Featured Questions and their Answers

You rang?

Look, before you declare victory how about offering something other than opinion, and addressing the basic truths being shown you. I know for many these issues are going to be difficult, because it demands an acknowledgement that you are wrong about something, and for some people, even worse...so is their Theology System.

Good advice.

Now how about showing Regeneration in the Old Testament. Something other than just "Old Testament Saints were regenerated!"

Show me where Enoch is said to go to Heaven, and show men why Elijah being caught up to heaven (the sky) nullifies the New Testament teaching men did not go into the Holiest of All which is defined as Heaven. Then explain why all Old Testament Saints are said to go to Sheol.

Then explain Elijah writing a letter...after his "ascension:"


2 Chronicles 21:12 King James Version (KJV)

12 And there came a writing to him from Elijah the prophet, saying, Thus saith the Lord God of David thy father, Because thou hast not walked in the ways of Jehoshaphat thy father, nor in the ways of Asa king of Judah,

That is exactly right, because that is the teaching of Christ and the Apostles.

Which is quite different from being freely justified through the Redemption which is in Christ Jesus.

Different because even though Abraham was declared righteous, he did not have the imputed righteousness of Christ.

He was declared righteous, not for believing on Jesus Christ (Who had not yet appeared), but because God promised him a son and that through him all nations of the earth would be blessed. He did not understand the difference between seeds and the Seed, Jesus Christ.

But if you bury your head in popular modern theologies you will never learn of that distinction, just as you will never learn of the distinction between being justified on a temporal basis and being justified on an eternal basis through Christ. When Abraham died...

...he still needed to be redeemed by the Sacrifice of Christ.

The animals he offered up didn't do that.

Let's look at what you think supports regeneration in the Old Testament:


Genesis 15
King James Version (KJV)

15 After these things the word of the Lord came unto Abram in a vision, saying, Fear not, Abram: I am thy shield, and thy exceeding great reward.

2 And Abram said, Lord God, what wilt thou give me, seeing I go childless, and the steward of my house is this Eliezer of Damascus?

3 And Abram said, Behold, to me thou hast given no seed: and, lo, one born in my house is mine heir.

4 And, behold, the word of the Lord came unto him, saying, This shall not be thine heir; but he that shall come forth out of thine own bowels shall be thine heir.

5 And he brought him forth abroad, and said, Look now toward heaven, and tell the stars, if thou be able to number them: and he said unto him, So shall thy seed be.

6 And he believed in the Lord; and he counted it to him for righteousness.

Do you see he is declared righteous because he believes the promises here? You and I can see the Gospel here because we have the benefit of the Mystery of the Gospel being revealed to us as well as the New Testament commentary that makes it clear. Abraham did not. So again, What you are saying is that he was saved when he did not believe the Gospel of Christ, because it was not revealed to him. And that is correct, he was saved, but, he was not eternally redeemed.


Continued...

 

Yes we agree that we as born again believers have the privilege of the infilling, just as the Old Testament Saints had, but, they did not have the Eternal Indwelling of God. Saul is exhibit A. There is a difference between being filled (which is the empowering of God for the purpose of ministry) and being eternally indwelt. I don't think I have ever attended a Baptist Church that did not have that distinctive, but, I usually attend Independent or Southern Baptist churches. I guess it may be different among Baptists who are more Reformed or Protestant.


God bless.

 

Going back to your proof-texts:


Romans 4 King James Version (KJV)

3 For what saith the scripture? Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness.


And we are told what it is he believed by which he was counted as righteous:


16 Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed; not to that only which is of the law, but to that also which is of the faith of Abraham; who is the father of us all,

17 (As it is written, I have made thee a father of many nations,) before him whom he believed, even God, who quickeneth the dead, and calleth those things which be not as though they were.

18 Who against hope believed in hope, that he might become the father of many nations, according to that which was spoken, So shall thy seed be.

19 And being not weak in faith, he considered not his own body now dead, when he was about an hundred years old, neither yet the deadness of Sarah's womb:


It wasn't the Gospel of Christ he believed in. That is popular pulpit mythology. Just as equating this justification with being justified through the Righteousness of Christ. No matter how you look at it, Abraham was justified through faith in these promises, not through faith in Jesus Christ. Faith in Christ as the Risen Savior was not available in his day, and it was not available in the Age of Law:


Galatians 3:23-25 King James Version (KJV)

23 But before faith came, we were kept under the law, shut up unto the faith which should afterwards be revealed.

24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.

25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.


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,

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.


Continued...

 

James 2:23 King James Version (KJV)

23 And the scripture was fulfilled which saith, Abraham believed God, and it was imputed unto him for righteousness: and he was called the Friend of God.

Again, nothing that supports regeneration in the Old Testament.

You erroneously believe that men cannot be saved apart from being regenerated but there is an entire Old Testament History that denies your view. Men were considered righteous in the Old Testament, and were justified, but, that did not nullify the fact that they were still in need of Redemption which Christ would, when He came...bestow upon believers. Instantaneously for those in this Age, and retroactively for the Old Testament Saints.

That is what this...

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.


The spirits of the dead from among the believing were made perfect (complete) when Christ died on the Cross in their stead...for their sin. They are distinguished here from the Church of Christ.

There was no Church until the Spirit was given on the Day of Pentecost, when the Spirit promised by God was sent. The Church is comprised of those who are baptized in Christ, which is synonymous with being baptized with the Holy Ghost. It is the moment we are made new creatures.

Not in this Age, I would agree.

Not in this Age, I would agree.

How about Lot. A drunkard that offered his daughters to be raped. How about David, an adulterer and a murderer. How about Abraham...a liar.

But the fact is, God is not interested in the righteous. The reason? Because there are none, lol:


Matthew 9:13 King James Version (KJV)

13 But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy, and not sacrifice: for I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.

Abraham was. The disciples were.

Yet they were not eternally indwelt, were not in Christ, and were not believing on Christ the Savior, but on Jesus the Christ (and there is a difference). The disciples were not even believing after His Resurrection:


Mark 16:9-14 King James Version (KJV)

9 Now when Jesus was risen early the first day of the week, he appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom he had cast seven devils.

10 And she went and told them that had been with him, as they mourned and wept.

11 And they, when they had heard that he was alive, and had been seen of her, believed not.

12 After that he appeared in another form unto two of them, as they walked, and went into the country.

13 And they went and told it unto the residue: neither believed they them.

14 Afterward he appeared unto the eleven as they sat at meat, and upbraided them with their unbelief and hardness of heart, because they believed not them which had seen him after he was risen.


The reason?


John 20:9 King James Version (KJV)

9 For as yet they knew not the scripture, that he must rise again from the dead.


It would not be until they were baptized with the Holy Ghost that they would receive the revelation of the Mystery of the Gospel.

And when they did...they went out and preached Christ crucified and risen.


Continued...

 

Agreed. However, they were not eternally redeemed, nor had their sins been atoned for:


Hebrews 9:12-15 King James Version (KJV)

12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.

15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

Sorry, no:


John 7:38-39 King James Version (KJV)

38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.

39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)


You are ignoring the Word of Christ, which made it clear that eternal life would be through the indwelling of the Spirit of God, which clearly had not taken place at this point, and the Word of God states it would not take place until after Christ was glorified (which ultimately refers to His return to Heaven which correlates with His teaching in John 14).

You are equating the filling with the indwelling, and the latter was only promise in the Old Testament.

SG...God has always lived in the Eternal.

Doesn't change the fact that Adam is no longer in the Garden and there was a point in time when Christ came unto His Own, died in the stead of the sinner, and brought about eternal redemption for both the Old Testament Saint as well as for those who would believe on Him in this Age.


Continued...

 

This is a difficult area.

One thing for sure - those of the flesh are at enmity with God.

Romans 8
7 Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be.
8 So then they that are in the flesh cannot please God.

Hebrews 11:5 By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God.

Enoch even preceded the Old Covenant.

So I personally believe that there was a pre-New Covenant rebirth differing from the New Covenant rebirth of which I cannot speak to its epitome of detail.

The Old Covenant believers looked forward to the coming Messiah (Isaiah 53) and what He would/will do.

The New Covenant - He has come, He finished the work, He sits at the right hand of God - the Book of Hebrews.

 

He also told everyone they must believe on Him...

...but nobody was.

Not yet.

Just because Christ taught something must be accomplished doesn't mean it could be at that time. Take the disciples, for example, could they "abide" in Christ at the time of the teaching? The answer is no, they could not, because what is in view regards Israel as a Nation. The vine that was not the True Vine was The Covenant of Law, and by extension Israel, meaning, relationship with God was through the Covenant God had made with them, and in John 15 Christ makes it clear...

'...I am the means of relationship with God."

Not abiding amounts to rejecting Christ, His Sacrifice, His Covenant, and the ministry of the Spirit of God (Hebrews 10:26-29). The disciples would not be able to abide in Christ until first they understood what that meant and secondly there was a clear choice between the two, the True Vine, and the vine that was not the true vine.

And we consider the progression of revelation and consider what Kingdom Nicodemus was privy to: that would be the Kingdom promised by God, which even the unregenerate disciples of Christ inquire about here...


Acts 1:4-7 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.


Think about it: they are just told they are going to, in a few days, receive the promise of the Father He had taught them about (which is of course the Comforter), and their hearts are on a physical kingdom.

What Christ taught was true, no man who is not born again will enter into the Kingdom, because as Matthew 25 teaches all unbelievers are destroyed physically when Christ returns, and only those who are born again will see and enter into that Kingdom.

The same is true of the Kingdom of God's Sovereign rule, of course, but, Christ ministered under the Law within the framework of the revelation men had been provided with. He was not revealing the Mystery of the Gospel, (though He did reveal the mysteries of the Kingdom)...the Holy Spirit would do that when He came.

Nothing in there that negates the many teachings that restrict regeneration to a New Covenant element. It was promise in the Old Testament, and reality when GOd began to reconcile men unto Himself. This was accomplished by Christ. Christ has a point in time when He appeared unto men (though the Son is Eternal).

And He is not speaking about literally seeing the Kingdom of GOd's Sovereign rule, He is speaking about the physical Kingdom. He deals with Nicodemus according to Nicodemus understanding as well as his misunderstanding. When He say one must be born again, Nicodemus imposes an erroneous meaning to it, similar to me telling someone "That man is lyin'" in a context of someone not telling the truth and someone responding, "No he isn't...he's standing up!"

Correct, and no-one had entered into the Kingdom of God at that point.

You do realize John the Baptist was not "in the Kingdom," right"


Matthew 11:11 King James Version (KJV)

11 Verily I say unto you, Among them that are born of women there hath not risen a greater than John the Baptist: notwithstanding he that is least in the kingdom of heaven is greater than he.


Luke 7:28 King James Version (KJV)

28 For I say unto you, Among those that are born of women there is not a greater prophet than John the Baptist: but he that is least in the kingdom of God is greater than he.

We can understand the application to the Kingdom which is the Sovereign rule of God here, but, that Kingdom was not at that time being made known. That is why they (Christ and the Disciples) preached the Gospel of the Kingdom instead of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Christ ministered under the Law and within the framework of the revelation provided to men in that day.


Continued...

 

Just one thing Darrel.

Here is a place I have been...
Try if you can to step aside from local church doctrine that is elevated to the point of division.

Not necessarily to come out and be separate but to decide if you can fellowship there.

Baptist churches are like Heinz soup - 57 varieties (or more).
To me they (who follow the Baptist Distinctives) portray the closest representation of Jesus Church on earth till He come.

Scripture is of course the final authority and not the pronouncement(s) of even Baptist churches.

Seems you know that.

 

It's very simple: God had promised the New Birth and resurrection to Israel. It's Old Testament basic Prophecy:


Ezekiel 36:24-27 King James Version (KJV)

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.

This is the promise of the new birth. Emphasis on...promise.


Ezekiel 37:9-12 King James Version (KJV)

9 Then said he unto me, Prophesy unto the wind, prophesy, son of man, and say to the wind, Thus saith the Lord God; Come from the four winds, O breath, and breathe upon these slain, that they may live.

10 So I prophesied as he commanded me, and the breath came into them, and they lived, and stood up upon their feet, an exceeding great army.

11 Then he said unto me, Son of man, these bones are the whole house of Israel: behold, they say, Our bones are dried, and our hope is lost: we are cut off for our parts.

12 Therefore prophesy and say unto them, Thus saith the Lord God; Behold, O my people, I will open your graves, and cause you to come up out of your graves, and bring you into the land of Israel.


This is the promise of life, a life that they did not have. It is the resurrection we receive when we are...born again.

Back to Nicodemus: When Christ states "Except a man be born from above..." Nicodemus imposes the wrong meaning (though "again" isn't in conflict with the concept) because he is thinking (like the disciples in Acts 1:6) in physical terms. Probably the "scholars" of that day spiritualized this prophecy and counted it as symbolic (hence depriving themselves of its meaning and truth), so this generates the rebuke of Christ. "You are a master of Israel...and you don't understand?"

And Christ goes on to clarify that the physical is not in view.

It always amazes me that people use the error of Nicodemus to support their view. He was wrong, and knew not the Scripture.

Correct: he should have known.

But he didn't. Because he was thinking in physical terms which was probably the result of popular modern theology.

We have that same problem today.

Not because regeneration was taking place. If it were...he would have known.

What he should have immediately thought of was the Prophecy in which God does a spiritual and supernatural work in Israel.

And no-one knew about it.

Good luck with that, SG.

There is a reason why The Master, The Teacher of Israel is in John 3...it illustrates the fact that no man understood that which God had promised. For them it meant that a literal son of David would arise, throw down their enemies, and from thence forward a son of this man would always rule over an Israel restored to her glory.

John 1:11-13 makes it clear regeneration, being born of God, began when Christ came. You cannot impose it into Scripture prior to that event, and you have not the first Old Testament reference to draw upon to support it:


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.


Continued...

 

That anyone was glorified prior to the Resurrection of Christ is the doctrine of cults.

Christ was not glorified on the Mount, neither were Moses and Elijah.

Keep in mind that Christ is the Son of God, and that when the Son took on human flesh He veiled His glory which was His from Eternity. That the disciples received a glimpse of this eternal glory is not to be confused with the Doctrine of Glorification, which refers to men (beginning with Christ) being resurrected in bodies suited for eternal existence.

His flesh was not yet glorified.

Doesn't say he was taken up:


Genesis 5:24 King James Version (KJV)

24 And Enoch walked with God: and he was not; for God took him.


Hebrews states...


Hebrews 11:5 King James Version (KJV)

5 By faith Enoch was translated that he should not see death; and was not found, because God had translated him: for before his translation he had this testimony, that he pleased God.

Because everything else we have in Scripture teaches that men are appointed unto death, it is more likely that what is in view here is that Enoch did not experience the pangs of death but was instantly translated into Sheol. Something most people do not consider is that while Scripture teaches men did not go to Heaven prior to the Cross...that doesn't mean God did not dwell or visit those who were in the Bosom of Abraham. In the six uses of metatithēmi there is usually a connotation of change, and sometimes a change from one place to another, or a change from one view to another, or a change from one loyalty to another. So the verse simply states that Enoch underwent a change that he should not see, or experience death, and if we keep things consistent the most likely change in view is from the physical world to Abraham's Bosom.

But what we don't see is Enoch being caught up, taken up, or in any fashion is it implied that he went to HEaven in contradiction to the rest of the teachings of Scripture.


Continued...

 

There was a general understanding among men that God would right the wrong that occurred in the Garden, that separated men from God.

Abraham longed to see the day when the promises of God would be fulfilled, but he did not know the Name Jesus Christ and was not specifically looking forward to the day that God would take on human flesh and dwell among men that He might bestow the power to become the sons of God:


1 Timothy 3:16 King James Version (KJV)

16 And without controversy great is the mystery of godliness: God was manifest in the flesh, justified in the Spirit, seen of angels, preached unto the Gentiles, believed on in the world, received up into glory.


The Gospel was a mystery to al men in all Ages prior to the current Age of Grace.

The word mystery speaks of hidden knowledge, so we don't nullify the Word of God by making the Mystery of the Gospel...something that was known.

Consider:

STRONGS NT 3466: μυστήριον
μυστήριον, μυστηρίου, τό (μύστης (one initiated; from μυέω, which see)), in classical Greek a hidden thing, secret, mystery: μυστήριον σου μή κατειπης τῷ φιλῶ, Menander; plural generally mysteries, religious secrets, confided only to the initiated and not to be communicated by them to ordinary mortals; (cf. K. F. Hermann, Gottesdienstl. Alterthümer der Griechen, § 32). In the Scriptures:
1. a hidden or secret thing, not obvious to the understanding: 1 Corinthians 13:2; 1 Corinthians 14:2; (of the secret rites of the Gentiles, Wis. 14:15, 23).
2. a hidden purpose or counsel; secret will: of men, τοῦ βασιλέως, Tobit 12:7,

It was, but what has that to do with whether men were born again or not?

Because you equate his justification with Eternal Redemption through Christ...you nullify the Atonement. I know you don't mean to do that...but you do. As do most.

It was Abraham's of course. In view is Abraham being considered righteous based on what he did: he believed, he had faith, and he performed works which validated the former.

But, Abraham still died in need of redemption. Remember your argument, "Abraham rejoiced to see my day...?" Do you not understand that this speaks of a...future day which had not yet come?

It was not the imputed righteousness of Christ, my friend. Keep in mind that there was a point in time when Christ came to redeem men:


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,

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


Abraham's day was not the fullness of time. David's day was not the fullness of time.

Christ's Day was the fullness of time.

No, it was a temporal justification that is attributed to belief, faith, and, you may want to sit down for this one...

...works.

Unless we want to throw James 2 out of the Bible. Last time I checked that was inspired Scripture, provided us by the Spirit of God.

And that is what the problem with the Catholic/Protestant debate is...they are both wrong, because they, like you, equate Abraham being justified with Eternal Redemption and because they cannot see the temporal nature of the declaration of righteousness based on what men did and the imputation of the Righteousness based on what Christ did...

...they lessen the magnitude of the Cross.


Continued...

 

You really can't sea he was NOT taken up either because its not clear as to what took place

However the key is in the word "translate"

μετατίθημι metatíthēmi, met-at-ith'-ay-mee; from G3326 and G5087; to transfer, i.e. (literally) transport, (by implication) exchange, (reflexively) change sides, or (figuratively) pervert:—carry over, change, remove, translate, turn.

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G3346&t=KJV

 

I'm with Steaver...you seriously think this refers to regeneration?

Their having one heart means they were in agreement, nothing more.

Perhaps you see it, lol. Have you also seen the Virgin Mary in a potato chip?




God bless.

 

In the next statement you make a derisive comment about brother Steaver when you completely miss the teaching Christ provides here.

Let me just point one thing out:


John 3:9-14 King James Version (KJV)

9 Nicodemus answered and said unto him, How can these things be?

10 Jesus answered and said unto him, Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?

11 Verily, verily, I say unto thee, We speak that we do know, and testify that we have seen; and ye receive not our witness.

12 If I have told you earthly things, and ye believe not, how shall ye believe, if I tell you of heavenly things?

13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.

14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:


Verse 14 answers Nicodemus' question.

What Nicodemus didn't know was the Scripture concerning Christ, such as Isaiah 53.

The Lord basically says "If I have expounded upon those things known to men and you don't believe...why would you believe heavenly truth?"

Steaver has asked no such question, and his teaching by far surpasses the understanding of Nicodemus...because he is conveying heavenly truths Nicodemus was not privy to, nor was Nicodemus one who would receive those truths even when taught.

Nicodemus asks in the context of "How does this work," whereas Steaver knows precisely how it works and he has gone to a great deal of effort to teach you how it works.

And you repay what has been a very kind and gentle effort on his part with rudeness and insults.

Now who does that remind you of?

What is that even supposed to mean?

This is hilarious. You leave off v.14, which is the answer to Nicodemus' question...and accuse Steaver of failing to grasp context?

You should probably leave off using words like context and hermeneutic until you actually know what they mean and how to employ them in Christian Doctrinal Debate.

My friend, Christ is not comparing Himself to Nicodemus.

And I would ask, if Nicodemus lacks wisdom and is carnal (which I agree with)...why do you (and your Protestant brethren) use him to support regeneration in the Old Testament?

Nicodemus is just as carnal and lacking of wisdom as the disciples of Christ...until Pentecost.


Continued...

 

How is that even relevant? I don't think too many people debate Who had the authority in this discussion.

Christ...admits these things? lol

Your Catholic brethren would probably agree with you, but, I myself like to take the Word of Christ for what it is.

Of course, if you can name someone who ascended to Heaven, or came from Heaven, I'd like to see the Scripture reference.


John 3:13-14 King James Version (KJV)

13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.


That's good enough for me. I can't reject this so I can agree with those who teach Enoch and Elijah ascended to Heaven. Especially when it is taught that Christ is the one Who opened the way into Heaven for men.


14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:


Just throwing this in again to help you with a key statement so that in the future you will know how it is that men can be born again.


Continued...

 

Proverbs 30 King James Version (KJV)

1 The words of Agur the son of Jakeh, even the prophecy: the man spake unto Ithiel, even unto Ithiel and Ucal,

2 Surely I am more brutish than any man, and have not the understanding of a man.

3 I neither learned wisdom, nor have the knowledge of the holy.


Look, Public Forum is not the place for you to be confessing.




4 Who hath ascended up into heaven, or descended? who hath gathered the wind in his fists? who hath bound the waters in a garment? who hath established all the ends of the earth? what is his name, and what is his son's name, if thou canst tell?

And what is Christ's answer to the Psalmist?


John 3:13-14 King James Version (KJV)

13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.

There is no "born again from above" in John 3 or in any other passage. It's either born again, or born from above.

Both refer to being born of God, which is synonymous with being born of the Spirit...Who is God.

As to your insinuation concerning the salvation of your antagonists, I hardly think one so lacking in understanding of such basic truths should making such implications.


Continued...

 

This doesn't really explain your position as to whether men were born again prior to Pentecost or not. If you don't mind, please state your position.


God bless.

 

Let this sink in: you are stating that men were born again without placing faith in the Risen Savior, and without having their sins atoned for.

Not to mention the obvious: we know incontrovertibly that they did not have the Spirit of God within them:


John 14:15-18 King James Version (KJV)

15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.

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.


John 16:7 King James Version (KJV)

7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.


John 7:38-39 King James Version (KJV)

38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.

39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)


Just basic to Christian Doctrine, my friend.


God bless.

 

I noticed, lol.

I think in large part it is because many Protestants are so excruciatingly ignorant of Prophecy, which is no wonder...seeing they employ a very Catholic method of interpretation.

If you spiritualize away Prophecy and become accustomed to analogizing anything that doesn't conform to your personal theology, then you will inevitably fail to place the working parts together and end up with a Trojan Horse.

But, we still have to love them, right?


God bless.

 

lol

This is ridiculous. You have given nothing that can be considered support for your position and you declare Steaver reprobate?

My hope, friend, is the day will come when we can both look back and laugh at this.

Ignore is a defense mechanism of the defeated and ignoreant.

Not sure why you think anyone-anyone-would be all that concerned about contributions to a discussion such as these. And you realize that one "responding" is responding to something said to them? So if you do not want a response...don't say anything. Best not to start something you can't finish. And as Christians we should be able to finish a discussion about probably the single most important issue before us, seeing that entrance to the Kingdom of God relies on Regeneration.

You have repeatedly stated men were born again in the Old Testament but offered not the first Old Testament reference to support your view. And what do we consider those who simply repeat the teachings of their leadership?


God bless.