Interpretation of story of Cornelius

Since John The Baptist was regenerated in the womb, certainly there can be a long time period between regeneration and acceptance, or so I've been told by a number of people.

 

It is faith in the completed work of Jesus Christ at the Cross that accounts for the remission of sins and seals the faithful for eternity. The ability to have that faith is available to everyone. There is no question that Cornelius and his family were devout. Devout what? To whom was he praying? What does that mean, that Cornelius (and the soldier he sent) was devout? When did the Holy Spirit fall upon Cornelius? When did Cornelius and his family members who were capable of believing, believe? See Acts 10:44-45; Acts 11:1. For me, no matter how many ways you wash it, it still doesn't come out "calvinistic."

 

That's probably because the Bible doesn't say whether he was regenerate then. I personally think he was regenerated in 10:44 but I won't argue that point.

I probably would argue two points:

1. Cornelius is a special case, since God's intent was to demonstrate that "to the Gentiles also God has granted repentance that leads to life". One should be careful deriving doctrine from special cases.

2. You ask this question:

Calvinism does not teach that the lost cannot pray to God or give alms or whatever. These are expressions of faith of some sort. What we believe is that the lost cannot respond to the gospel message in faith, and that those other expressions of faith are of no value apart from the gospel. In fact, apart from faith in the gospel they are but "filthy rags".

Of course God is free to respond to these expressions in any way He chooses, including sending someone with the gospel message and pouring out His Holy Spirit on those who hear that message. But He is not bound to do so.

 

Like I said, God is free to honor those things or not. A few things to consider - Was Cornelius the only Jew of his time doing these things? Why didn't God send Peter to any of the others? Had Cornelius done what he was doing his whole life, but had God not sent Peter (or someone else) with the gospel message, what would those things have profited him?

Well, it's a lot like if a Calvinist pointed to Saul's conversion and said that all conversions are like that. Saul's conversion fits the Calvinistic model better - he wasn't left with much of a choice. But not all conversions are like Saul's, so we ought to be careful about drawing generalities from his conversion too. Hope that explains what I meant.

 

Well, I don't think it does.

Again, what we teach is that regeneration precedes faith in the gospel. Lots of people do lots of things out of faith that those things will earn God's favor. Apart from the gospel those things won't work. But I've already said this, and you've already responded, so ...

God bless.

 

Thank you excentric for saying in a few words that would have taken me a volume. That's why I was waiting to weigh in on this, because I was gonna need a lot of time. This teaching of pre-gospel regeneration is yet another proof of how merciful God is, contrary to what arminians claim, that God must be cruel if he is absolute sovereign. "God hath in every nation those that fear him". God's been saving, that is, regenerating, people of all nations all along, and we didn't know about them because he has "reserved to himself" a remnant in every age and land. Now bear in mind, even some of our fellow calvinists do not follow this teaching. Many, if not most, believe that while the Gospel does not cause regeneration, it does always accompany regeneration in an immediate sense. I believe in regeneration by the "direct operation" of the Spirit, totally without other means, and the Gospel brings to our knowledge and conscience the assurance that we have been born again, and thereby we can enjoy the spiritual blessings, both now and then, of the salvation which we have been predestined for.

 

BTW NNE'S salvation is exceptional, that is, different from anyone else's. Every person, without exception, from Adam to the Eschaton, that ever was saved, was saved the same way - by God's grace (God's choice). But people in different ages have come to the KNOWLEDGE of their salvation by different MEANS. Abraham believed God and it was counted (imputed) to him for righteousnes. Many others we're simply not told how they came to know that they were saved. But they were all saved by God's divine interposition into their fallen nature (grace).

 

bump.