Faith Precedes Regeneration - Note What Spurgeon Said

[KenH]

Creating evil as in calamity and death and disaster of course that's true.

What you are doing is taking Isaiah 45:7 where God states that He creates evil and effectively adding words to it so that you would make it read "I create only certain kinds of evil", because you erroneously believe that you are "protecting" God in some way.

 

[KenH]

Thanks for the reference for his works though.

 

[AustinC]

Nobody said he was. But there is a belief that God is directly causing all that happens in a meticulous way. I just don't think that the choice is between those two things. It's not God sitting passively by or determining every molecule, one or the other.

Have you read Daniel 10, Daniel 11, and Daniel 12? Look at the meticulous appointment of God. This is written to us so that we understand God's Sovereignty over every molecule so that nothing that happens is a rogue action.

 

[Brightfame52]

I agree. My concern here is when I see some people taken to task for bringing works into the salvation process simply because they claim they actually did what the substance of those gifts entailed. If someone says they came to Christ or believed the gospel or got saved just say "Amen", don't accuse them of legalism or self-salvation. And if a preacher like Spurgeon tells people to repent and believe don't tell him he ain't allowed to do that because it's all a gift. That's not necessary!



Maybe my language wasn't clear here. I'm saying the origin doesn't matter in context of the necessity that those things are actually done by the person and that the question HERE is not about the origin. The origin doesn't change my point that the individual must do those things. The origin matters a great deal if my claim was that they do not originate as gifts, which was never my claim.

But your emphasis is on man doing more so than on what God has done. BTW Spurgeoun may have said some good things, however if he believed and preached that faith preceded regeneration he was dead wrong.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

But your emphasis is on man doing more so than on what God has done. BTW Spurgeoun may have said some good things, however if he believed and preached that faith preceded regeneration he was dead wrong.

He didn't.

 

[DaveXR650]

Have you read Daniel 10, Daniel 11, and Daniel 12? Look at the meticulous appointment of God. This is written to us so that we understand God's Sovereignty over every molecule so that nothing that happens is a rogue action.

Let me explain this again. I am not making the claim that God doesn't have a will and plans that he will execute exactly as He wishes in all areas that he wishes. But the claim is being made that this is being done for every single molecule everywhere at all times and in a direct, causative way. That I reject. The reason I reject it is that would include things that if accomplished in a direct causative way - by necessity, make God appear to do things that would be against his nature as shown in other scriptures. I fully understand the argument for instance that God may determine that I live until a certain day. I might say that I'll eat carefully and be healthy and live long. I understand that God may have in his sovereignty taken into account my diet, my genetic makeup, my health habits and so on and still accomplish his will on the day of His choosing, no matter what I do. I even would agree that since there are plenty of people everywhere who seem to want to kill people that God could even use one of them to do me in. What I will not accept is the notion that if such a person kills me that God determined that that person would do that - and this is very important - without going through the gyrations that Cheung derides. Might God use such a person for that purpose. Of course. But God tempts no one to do evil and he will not go against His own nature.

The problem I'm having here is with the direct causation of sin being attributed to God when it goes against everything taught about God's nature as found in scripture. It used to be that a determinist would use all kinds of scenarios and metaphysical gyrations like I did above to pull this off - but with guys like Cheung, they just go ahead and go against the WCF. Well, they are on their own.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

What you are doing is taking Isaiah 45:7 where God states that He creates evil and effectively adding words to it so that you would make it read "I create only certain kinds of evil", because you erroneously believe that you are "protecting" God in some way.

James 1:13. '...For God is not tempted by evil, nor does He Himself tempt anyone.'
1 John 2:16. 'For all that is in the world - the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes and the pride of life - is not of the Father, but is of the world.'
Psalms 145:17. 'The LORD is righteous in all His ways, gracious in all His works.'

It is wrong, and probably very unwise to accuse God of causing evil. That He allows evil for His own high ends (e.g.Genesis 50:20; Acts of the Apostles 4:27-28) is true, and that He allows earthquakes, famines etc. because of human sin (e.g. Genesis 3:17-19) is also true, but the latter is His righteous judgment that sinful mankind shall not live in a perfect world.

You can beat your brains out wondering about the origin of evil, but it is something that God has not revealed to us (Deuteronomy 29:29).

 

[DaveXR650]

But your emphasis is on man doing more so than on what God has done.

How do you come up with that? I said man has to repent and believe the gospel, which is the same thing Peter said when asked, and I agreed that it is all made possible by the work of the Holy Spirit.

 

[DaveXR650]

You can beat your brains out wondering about the origin of evil, but it is something that God has not revealed to us (Deuteronomy 29:29).

You're right on that. I never thought much about it until I saw what Cheung had written about God causing sin directly. And then some of the guys on here picking it up. Does anyone know who he is ?

 

[AustinC]

Let me explain this again. I am not making the claim that God doesn't have a will and plans that he will execute exactly as He wishes in all areas that he wishes. But the claim is being made that this is being done for every single molecule everywhere at all times and in a direct, causative way. That I reject. The reason I reject it is that would include things that if accomplished in a direct causative way - by necessity, make God appear to do things that would be against his nature as shown in other scriptures. I fully understand the argument for instance that God may determine that I live until a certain day. I might say that I'll eat carefully and be healthy and live long. I understand that God may have in his sovereignty taken into account my diet, my genetic makeup, my health habits and so on and still accomplish his will on the day of His choosing, no matter what I do. I even would agree that since there are plenty of people everywhere who seem to want to kill people that God could even use one of them to do me in. What I will not accept is the notion that if such a person kills me that God determined that that person would do that - and this is very important - without going through the gyrations that Cheung derides. Might God use such a person for that purpose. Of course. But God tempts no one to do evil and he will not go against His own nature.

The problem I'm having here is with the direct causation of sin being attributed to God when it goes against everything taught about God's nature as found in scripture. It used to be that a determinist would use all kinds of scenarios and metaphysical gyrations like I did above to pull this off - but with guys like Cheung, they just go ahead and go against the WCF. Well, they are on their own.

Having read your post, it is clear that you are struggling with a Sovereign God who lives above the law and is entirely holy. Since, as a finite human, you cannot conceive of a holy God ordaining the corruption that exists, you opt for a God that is not fully Sovereign. (I know you will object to this statement, but the words of your quoted post reveal this.) You opt for a God who is fully aware, yet only an observer and not participating. Ken rightfully points this out as being a form of Deism on your part.
I will readily admit the problem of sin and a fully Sovereign God is hard to grasp as finite humans who desire to hold God to standards we feel are unfair.
I agree that God does not, himself, act against His character. But, the Bible clearly shows you that God ordains the corruption of man to accomplish what He wills at the appointed time. This is either true for everything or God is at least partially functioning in a deistic manner. How do you reconcile the problem with your argument?

 

[Alan Gross]

If you want to know what Spurgeon really believed about preaching and regeneration, read Spurgeon vs Hyper-Calvinism by Iain Murray (Banner of Truth, 1995. ISBN 0-85151-692-0) where his beliefs are set out in detail with numerous quotations and samples of his preaching.

 

[Alan Gross]

if one would actually look, they would see it is not very difficult

we are dead BECAUSE OF SIN - "the wage of sin is death"

which means, we can not be made alive until the sin issue is resolved.

The payment and forgiveness of sin, or answer to the sin problem is redemption. which leads to justification (A judicial term which means declaired righteous or innocent)

so justification MUST precede regeneration. Otherwise, you have a person who is dead because of sin, made alive IN SIN.

"no", right, ...yes. I mean, "yes".

 

[KenH]

It is wrong, and probably very unwise to accuse God of causing evil.

So did you take a knife or a razor(ala Thomas Jefferson) and cut out Isaiah 45:7 because you are clearly uncomfortable with what it says?

Isaiah 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

(emphasis mine)

 

[Alan Gross]

The payment and forgiveness of sin, or answer to the sin problem is redemption. which leads to justification (A judicial term which means declaired righteous or innocent)

I have to put this in, as a reference:

from: http://www.ntslibrary.com/PDF Books II/Simmons - A Systematic Study of Bible Doctrine.pdf

III. THE MEANS Of JUSTIFICATION

Faith in the blood of Christ is the means of justification.
See Acts 13:89; Rom. 3:24,250; 5.1,9; Cal. 2:16.

It is well to note from these passages
that the faith by which we are justified is not faith
in the love, grace, and mercy of God;

but faith in that which the love, mercy,
and grace of God have provided, that is, the blood of Christ.

This fact throws further light upon the foregoing discussion.

It is by faith that justification is applied
and made experimental.

It is thus that we come into the enjoyment
of the benefits of Christ's atoning death.

Faith, as we have noted previously,
has no merit in and of itself.

Faith is not a full hand bestowing,
but an empty hand receiving.

Exercising faith is inward obedience.

It is because of this fact that the Scripture
alludes to "the obedience of faith" (Rom. 16:26),

obedience to the gospel
(Rom. 10:16: 11 Thess. 1:8; 1 Pet. 4:17),

"obeying the truth" (1 Pet. 1: 22),

and obeying "from the heart that form of doctrine
(Rom. 6:7).

But this is not meritorious obedience.

It is as fully without merit as is the act of a beggar
in eating food that has been given him.

Justification is by faith for the following reasons:

1. That it might be by grace. Rom. 4:16.

2. That boasting might be excluded. Rom. 3:27.

3. Because by faith we are identified with Christ
in the same manner that we were identified with Adam
by the natural birth. Acts 13:39-

-should read, "in Him" instead of "by Him";
1 Cor. 1:30; Eph. 2:5,6; 15:22; Col. 3:3; 1 John 4:17.

"Union with Adam and with Christ
is the ground of imputation.

But the parallelism is incomplete.

While the sin of Adam is imputed to us because it is ours,
the righteousness of Christ is imputed to us
simply because of our union with him,
not at all because of our personal righteousness.

In the one case, character is taken into account;
in the other, it is not.

In sin, our demerits are included;
in justification our merits are excluded"
(H. B. Smith, Presbyterian Review, July, 1881).

4. Because faith "worketh by love" (Gal. 5:6)
and is the medium by which Christ dwells in our heart
& (Eph. 3: 17-19; Gal. 2:20)
and by which we are progressively changed
into the image of Christ in our lives
(Rom. 1:17; 2 Cor. 3:18);

and thus we are prevented from
"turning the grace of God
into lasciviousness" (Jude 4).

"Now God has so constituted the soul that the affections,
and likewise the conscience, are affected and controlled by faith;

and the purity of the one and the integrity of the other,
and the activity of both, depend upon what a man believes;

this being true, no mind can avoid
the conviction that the principle of FAITH,
which Christ has laid at the foundation of the Christian system is,
from the nature of things, the only principle
through the operation of which man's moral powers
can be brought into happy, harmonious, and perfect activity"
(J. B. Walker, Philosophy of the Plan of Salvation, P. 177).

There is no conflict between James
and Paul on the matter of justification by faith.

Paul used the Greek word "dikaioo"
to mean "to declare, pronounce, one to be just, righteous,

or such as he ought to be,"

while James used the same word to mean
"to show, exhibit, evince, one to be righteous
or such as he ought to be."

Paul says that Abraham was justified,
in the sense that he uses the term, before circumcision
(Rom. 4:9,10);

while James says that Abraham was justified,
in the sense he uses the term, when he offered Isaac.

Reference to Gen. 17 reveals that Abraham
was circumcised a year before the birth of Isaac,
which is recorded in Gen. 21.

Isaac was approximately twenty-five years old
at the time Abraham offered him.

Thus is seen that Paul and James
were not talking about the same thing.

For other cases where the Greek word
is used in the same sense in which James uses it,
see Matt. 11:9 and I Tim. 3:16.

Moreover note that James affirmed with Paul
that "Abraham believed God,
and it was reckoned unto him for righteousness"(Jas. 2:23).

 

[KenH]

Does anyone know who he is ?

This is on the Amazon page for his books:

"Vincent Cheung is a Christian preacher and writer. His publications include studies in theology, apologetics, ministry, as well as a number of sermon collections and biblical commentaries.

All his writings can be downloaded for free at: www.vincentcheung.com.

 

[Alan Gross]

So did you take a knife or a razor(ala Thomas Jefferson) and cut out Isaiah 45:7 because you are clearly uncomfortable with what it says?

Isaiah 45:7 I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

(emphasis mine)

God "created evil", in the sense that, "God created the spiritual realm being that, then, rebeailed again God and BECAME EVIL, at that time."

God created Luscifer, then, Luscifer sinned and "created evil".

 

[KenH]

by which we are progressively changed
into the image of Christ in our lives

"As with all the items that this chapter discusses, sanctification is a work of God; however, it is SYNERGISTIC in nature, meaning that it is also in a sense a work of man, and involves his conscious decision and effort in the process. As Paul writes:

Therefore, my dear friends, as you have always obeyed – not only in my presence, but now much more in my absence – continue to work out your salvation with fear and trembling, for it is God who works in you to will and to act according to his good purpose. (Philippians 2:12-13)

The Christian is to actively take his part in sanctification, and deliberately pursue a life of obedience to God "in fear and trembling." Nevertheless, the passage explains that even the working out of our salvation is in fact a work of God: "It is God who works in you to will and to act according to his good purpose." Our choices and actions remain under God's control after regeneration. Therefore, although a person is conscious of his efforts and struggles in sanctification, in the end God receives the honor, and the Christian still has no basis to boast of his achievements." (emphasis mine)

- Vincent Cheung, Systematic Theology

 

[KenH]

God "created evil", in the sense that, "God created the spiritual realm being that, then, rebeailed again God and BECAME EVIL, at that time."

God created Luscifer, then, Luscifer sinned and "created evil".

I totally disagree with you on this subject. But, hey, it's your system of belief that you have to go to sleep with each night. If you don't acknowledge God as being absolutely totally sovereign, at least I've made an effort to point out to you, based on the Bible, that He is.

 

[DaveXR650]

Having read your post, it is clear that you are struggling with a Sovereign God who lives above the law and is entirely holy. Since, as a finite human, you cannot conceive of a holy God ordaining the corruption that exists, you opt for a God that is not fully Sovereign. (I know you will object to this statement, but the words of your quoted post reveal this.) You opt for a God who is fully aware, yet only an observer and not participating. Ken rightfully points this out as being a form of Deism on your part.
I will readily admit the problem of sin and a fully Sovereign God is hard to grasp as finite humans who desire to hold God to standards we feel are unfair.
I agree that God does not, himself, act against His character. But, the Bible clearly shows you that God ordains the corruption of man to accomplish what He wills at the appointed time. This is either true for everything or God is at least partially functioning in a deistic manner. How do you reconcile the problem with your argument?

This area is kind of new to me. I feel it is so much of a theoretical nature that I've pretty much left it alone. My view has been that since man fell that because of our nature we always move toward evil. God restrains it collectively by various means and individually. I do believe that specific evil events occur when God uses the evil bent, which is already there, for specific purposes, but am I understanding you guys to be saying that God Himself is actually and personally causing directly these evil things to be done? In other words, it is possible that God would determine that an individual would commit an evil action that was something that was beyond the person acting according to his own sinful nature - something that God takes full credit for causing?

 

[DaveXR650]

God "created evil", in the sense that, "God created the spiritual realm being that, then, rebeailed again God and BECAME EVIL, at that time."

God created Luscifer, then, Luscifer sinned and "created evil".

Alan, I think this is one of the gyrations Cheung is talking about. This I don't think is what they mean.