Decisional Regeneration

[TCGreek]

I thought about that after I wrote it.
So I went back to find the thread. Here is the name:

Faith, before or after regeneration. (In the General Baptist section)
It is post 34.

Here is the last paragraph in answer to my questioning of is regeneration the same as being saved.

The idea that a regenerate, or born again person, is not "saved" seem utterly strange and odd to me. Would the Lord cause a person to be born again and that person not possess the salvation of the Lord? In order to see the Kingdom of God we must be born again. It is the born again person who believes on the Lord Jesus Christ, lives holy, abstains from sin, and loves the brethren.

1. RB and I are saying the same thing but not the same way.

2. We both agree that regeneration precedes faith.

 

[TCGreek]

Understood, but you DO take 'credit' for using it, right?

I take no credit for believing. The Lord doesn't give me that option. I see no Scripture to that effect.

 

[Allan]

1. RB and I are saying the same thing but not the same way.

2. We both agree that regeneration precedes faith.

Can a born again person who has not excerized faith, abstain from sin? That was in the later part of the portion you emphasized.

It is the born again person who believes on the Lord Jesus Christ, lives holy, abstains from sin, and loves the brethren

But he will be able to speak for himself. That is why I specifically asked him his view on the matter. It is still probable that I did not nor do not still grasp his position however, and will reserve that for him to say.

 

[TCGreek]

Can a born again person who has not excerized faith, abstain from sin? That was in the later part of the portion you emphasized.



But he will be able to speak for himself. That is why I specifically asked him his view on the matter. It is still probable that I did not nor do not still grasp his position however, and will reserve that for him to say.

I think he is saying that from being born again, a person is able to believe, then to be holy and so on.

 

[TCGreek]

Can a born again person who has not excerized faith, abstain from sin? That was in the later part of the portion you emphasized.



But he will be able to speak for himself. That is why I specifically asked him his view on the matter. It is still probable that I did not nor do not still grasp his position however, and will reserve that for him to say.

Because RB agrees to the 1689 London Baptist Confession, he believes that regeneration precedes faith, which is treated under "Of Effectual Calling."

 

[TCGreek]

see post #33

 

[Allan]

I take no credit for believing.

Oh but you do. You have stated it yourself only 6 posts earlier. You agreed that God will NOT save you until YOU believe. As I'm sure you are aware the verb tense is always active and not passive regarding those believing thus making the subject the doer of the action and thereby establishing your part.

The Lord doesn't give me that option. I see no Scripture to that effect.

Then you neglect much of scripture. Whosoever's is not code for 'those I make believe in me' and thus making the belief actaully passive.

Take the tension in scripture for what it is and accept them as they are. It is tension because it does not line up with your view but is still biblical regardless. In your zeal to keep God Soveriegn do not make the mistake of neglecting those tensions GOD Himself place therein.

Editted because it did not sound like I intended Sorry TCGreek

 

[Allan]

Because RB agrees to the 1689 London Baptist Confession, he believes that regeneration precedes faith, which is treated under "Of Effectual Calling."

Ok, I think I'm following you a little better now. Thanks

 

[TCGreek]

Oh but you do. You have stated it yourself only 6 posts earlier. You agreed that God will NOT save you until YOU believe. As I'm sure you are aware the verb tense is always active and not passive regarding those believing thus making the subject the doer of the action and thereby establishing your part.

1. And I stand by that.

Then you neglect much of scripture. Whosoever's is not code for 'those I make believe in me' and thus making the belief actaully passive.

2. Yes, I think it should be "those who I[God] make believe in me" if we understand the true nature of fallen man in respect to salvation. God enables fallen man to believe.

Take the tension in scripture for what it is and accept it. It is tension because it does not line up with your view but is still biblical regardless. In your zeal to keep God Soveriegn do not make the mistake of neglecting those tensions GOD Himself place therein.

3. Recognizing and celebrating the tensions of Scripture has become a motto for me on BB. But I take no credit for my salvation, not even believing.

 

[Allan]

2. Yes, I think it should be "those who I[God] make believe in me" if we understand the true nature of fallen man in respect to salvation. God enables fallen man to believe.

So, which is it? God enables or He makes? I agree with enables

3. Recognizing and celebrating the tensions of Scripture has become a motto for me on BB. But I take no credit for my salvation, not even believing.

Ok, then basically you accert that God believed through you instead of it actually being you - j/k. Brother, in all seriousness - either you are the one who believed or you are not the one who beleived. Believing adds nothing to salvation but accepts that which God has promised to do. Yet without the believing being done by you, it will not be you that is saved because the salvation of God which He bestows is dependent upon "whosoever believes". Not with emphasis on the whosoever as though they are the cause of their salvation but on the 'believes' showing God as the initiator and conveyer of that which they must 'believe'.

 

[TCGreek]

So, which is it? God enables or He makes? I agree with enables

1. I will let you muse on that one

Ok, then basically you accert that God believed through you instead of it actually being you - j/k. Brother, in all seriousness - either you are the one who believed or you are not the one who beleived. Believing adds nothing to salvation but accepts that which God has promised to do. Yet without the believing being done by you, it will not be you that is saved because the salvation of God which He bestows is dependent upon "whosoever believes". Not with emphasis on the whosoever as though they are the cause of their salvation but on the 'believes' showing God as the initiator and conveyer of that which they must 'believe'.

2. God did not need saving, so how could He believe through me. He enabled me through His sovereign grace to believe in His Son for my salvation, yet I cannot take credit for this believing.

3. Now, that is a tension I'm happy to live with. Why a sinner like me need credit, I don't know?

4. Neither do those "whoever" passages say that man must take credit for believing.

 

[Allan]

1. I will let you muse on that one

:laugh: :laugh:

2. God did not need saving, so how could He believe through me.

That was why I added the [j/k] which means - Just kidding.

He enabled me through His sovereign grace to believe in His Son for my salvation, yet I cannot take credit for this believing.

4. Neither do those "whoever" passages say that man must take credit for believing.

No one stated you NEED credit but to deny the truth of scripture places you in a position no different.

4. I find no where in scripture states man beleif must come from anywhere but him. Howevever, with respect to your statement nor does it state that man is without credit regarding belief unto salvation. Beleif is not a work that man does for salvation but it IS 'our' part to salvation - Rom 4:3-5

 

[TCGreek]

1. I'm sorry I missed your humor.

No one stated you NEED credit but to deny the truth of scripture places you in a position no different.

2. This is a quote from one of your earlier posts: "Understood, but you DO take 'credit' for using it, right?"

4. I find no where in scripture states man beleif must come from anywhere but him. Howevever, with respect to your statement nor does it state that man is without credit regarding belief unto salvation. Beleif is not a work that man does for salvation but it IS 'our' part to salvation - Rom 4:3-5

3. If it not a work, why must we take credit for it? What is meant by "Our part to salvation"?

4. According to the Rom 4, it is only our work we should take credit for? If faith is not work, then why do we deserve credit.

5. It seems like you are affirming what you deny.

 

[Allan]

1. I'm sorry I missed your humor.

most do.

2. This is a quote from one of your earlier posts: "Understood, but you DO take 'credit' for using it, right?"

Credit here is about the fact 'you' believed. If you did not believe then who did?

3. If it not a work, why must we take credit for it? What is meant by "Our part to salvation"?

The same reason the bible gives 'credit' to Abraham for his belief which was counted unto him for righteousness as stated in vs 3 of Romans 4 and vs 16-24.

Our part To salvation - You can not be saved unless you believe

4. According to the Rom 4, it is only our work we should take credit for? If faith is not work, then why do we deserve credit.

No that is not accurately stated. Please tell me who is recieving credit (or being accounted as due to believing) in vss 1-8.?? Or in vs 16-24 of Romans 4 for believing God?

Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace. (vs 16)

5. It seems like you are affirming what you deny.

No, I am denying what you affirm. :tongue3:

 

[Allan]

One last thing:

I'm not saying we save ourselves or that we determine when we will be saved.

We are to respond to the truth of salvation revealed by God in belief (being fully persuaded that God is able to do all that He says He will do), though this does not negate the potential of others responding in unbelief.

We do not come to God, learn of God, be save by God on our whim, or determination. But as God the Holy Spirit moves with conviction upon upon us we have no choice but TO respond in belief or unbelief.

Do not harden you heart, save yourselves, whosoever will, choose you this day, and Paul pleading "to be reconciled" and so on and on. God was not lax concerning how His word was written therefore when God states these things via the Holy Spirit it stands in stark contrast to the view we are made believe in Him by Him (we have no choice).

When the Spirit of God moved upon Godly Men to state these phrases which indicate if not accert a choice stands firm in the Grace of God then we must conclude that God was either inept at writting His word or we might actually be off somewhere. If we are bound or made to believe and no option is possible (as TC accerts) then why state things like "do not harden your heart", or "whosoever will may come", or "choose this day" or "be ye reconciled". If there is no choice then why does God go to such lengths to convey not to stay in unbelief. IF there is no choice there is no need for such language because you will either believe or not based on Gods making you believe not on God pleading with you.

 

[Allan]

On my way home from work I was thinking about our discussion last night TCG.

Why does God 'account' (or credit) Abraham's faith or his belief in God (and our's to for that matter) unto him as righeousness?

For what does the Scripture say? "ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS CREDITED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS."
New American Standard Bible © 1995 Lockman Foundation

For some reason THEY have capitalized it the way you see it, not me.

Why does God give man faith, so He can make man believe Him and then turn around and credit his belief as righteousness for him?

I can understand why Calvinists have such a hard time understanding the Doctrine of Sanctification, if God is the one compelling and making - why then does man still sin. It becomes quite a paradox.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

Your zeal does not offend me for it is my zeal which has spurred me to write to begin with against the truths of scripture so vehemently denied.

So in light of your responce I will ask you only one question dear brother:

Did you have to believe in order to be saved?


BTW - No one except you has at anytime insinuated that man ADDS anything to Grace. But it is by Grace THROUGH Faith that we are saved, my friend.

EDITTED IN -->> From your own testimony and or words:

I do not take this portion to flaunt you as saying saved yourself, but as noted even you affirm 'you believed' and 'you turned'. Gods saving us is done wholely and completely by God to and for those who will believe. God saves man. But the part played by man regarding salvation is not in the act of saving nor of the power which saves but believing the the who has stated that HE and He alone will save them.

Allen,

I know you do not mean to misrepresent me or others, but when ever have I declared that man is saved apart from repentance and faith. I have contended and very openly and plainly confessed the same.

While you quote my words, you took them from their context and made them to say what they do not, and emphasized what I did not, albeit unintentially. All I ask that you accuratly represent me and my testimony.

I was born again, and then believed. The emphasize which you placed on "I" is wholly abhorant to my testimony. The emphasis is HE, the Lord, who caused His light to shine out of my darkness, then I looked, and saw, and believed. I would use the illustration of Jesus healing a blind man. He did not see before he was healed, neither did I believe before I was born again.

 

[Allan]

Allen,

I know you do not mean to misrepresent me or others, but when ever have I declared that man is saved apart from repentance and faith. I have contended and very openly and plainly confessed the same.

While you quote my words, you took them from their context and made them to say what they do not, and emphasized what I did not, albeit unintentially. All I ask that you accuratly represent me and my testimony.

I was born again, and then believed. The emphasize which you placed on "I" is wholly abhorant to my testimony. The emphasis is HE, the Lord, who caused His light to shine out of my darkness, then I looked, and saw, and believed. I would use the illustration of Jesus healing a blind man. He did not see before he was healed, neither did I believe before I was born again.

Understood. I was not trying to over emphasize the "I" in your testimony but revealing your "I" is just as much apart of your testimony (and just as de-emphasized) as any Non-Cal, and God is just as a part of our testimony as yours (who is just as emphasized).

But now you have raised another question which strikes to another vital organ. You state that you are born again/saved and therefore you will naturally believe in Christ since it is your new Nature.

But that flies in direct contradiction to scripture that says believe and you WILL BE saved.

Not once does scripture ever state or insinuate once saved you will believe but exactly and explicitly the opposite - Believe and you will be saved.

 

[Brother Bob]

Excuse me for butting in RB:

I was born again, and then believed. The emphasize which you placed on "I" is wholly abhorant to my testimony. The emphasis is HE, the Lord, who caused His light to shine out of my darkness, then I looked, and saw, and believed. I would use the illustration of Jesus healing a blind man. He did not see before he was healed, neither did I believe before I was born again.
__________________

So you were saved with non-belief. That is contrary to scripture:

Act 16:31And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

On my way home from work I was thinking about our discussion last night TCG.

Why does God 'account' (or credit) Abraham's faith or his belief in God (and our's to for that matter) unto him as righeousness?


For some reason THEY have capitalized it the way you see it, not me.

Why does God give man faith, so He can make man believe Him and then turn around and credit his belief as righteousness for him?

I can understand why Calvinists have such a hard time understanding the Doctrine of Sanctification, if God is the one compelling and making - why then does man still sin. It becomes quite a paradox.

Why do you think Calvinists have a hard time understanding the doctrine of sanctification?