Regeneration and the Renewing of the Holy Spirit

[Darrell C]

"But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death" (Jas.1:14-15).

Death is possible for the born again believer as well. But it is physical death in view.

But, according to James, we are...



James 1:18

King James Version (KJV)

18Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.


Clearly talking to believers, "beloved brethren." Is mankind a "firstfruits of his creatures," or, are believers firstfruits of his creatures?


I will pick back up here, as I wish to leapfrog off of this thought:


As suggested above, James is speaking to believers, and the context is clearly temporal, which will clear up the confusion some find themselves in when dealing with justification as taught by James.

James: man is justified by his works before man;

Paul: man is justified by faith before God.


That this refers to temporal death, even though we know that sin leads also to spiritual death, can be seen in the text by most. To illustrate that believers are at times put to death due to sin, we can immediately recall Ananias and Sapphira, whose "salvation" may be questioned by some.

We can also look at this:


1 Corinthians 11

King James Version (KJV)


29For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.

30For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.


"...and many sleep" Die, that is. There are consequences for the believer due to sin, but one consequence is not eternal separation from God. But, physical death can result if we sin, and here, concerning the Lord's Supper, it is a consequence for those that partake unworthily.


Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

There can be no doubt that the reference is to "spiritual" death when we look at the following passage:

"Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life...the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones" (2 Cor.3:6-8).

here Paul is saying that the Ten Commandments bring forth spiritual death and that happens when a person breaks the commandments. Paul is contrasting the commandements with the new testament and that brings "spiritual" life--"the Spirit giveth life."

Believe it or not, I actually addressed this the other night when you said it in the other thread, but lost the response because I did not copy it before posting.

So I am glad you restated this, as it gives me opportunity to not only addres it again, but to show what I feel a direct attempt to proof-text by omitting part of the passage and, sorry, to completely miss the impact and import of what Paul tells us here.

"Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life...the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones" (2 Cor.3:6-8).

here Paul is saying that the Ten Commandments bring forth spiritual death and that happens when a person breaks the commandments.

Nothing could be further from the truth. The keeping of the commandments dealt with physical life...period. This is evident, and we see the first commandment with promise:


Exodus 20

King James Version (KJV)

12Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.


The purpose of the Law, according to New Testament revelation is to show man his sin, and to lead him to Christ. Keeping the LAw does not bring eternal life, and this is also stated in the New Testament:



Romans 3:20
King James Version (KJV)

20Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.




Galatians 2:16

King James Version (KJV)

16Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.


To make sure he is not understood, Paul goes on to say...

Galatians 2:20-21
King James Version (KJV)

20I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.

21I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.


Can one have life...but not righteousness? No, the two are part of that condition that arises only from the new birth.

I will continue this, as this is a great passage.

Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

Paul is contrasting the commandements with the new testament and that brings "spiritual" life--"the Spirit giveth life."

Is he? Lets see your statement in full again:

There can be no doubt that the reference is to "spiritual" death when we look at the following passage:

"Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life...the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones" (2 Cor.3:6-8).

here Paul is saying that the Ten Commandments bring forth spiritual death and that happens when a person breaks the commandments. Paul is contrasting the commandements with the new testament and that brings "spiritual" life--"the Spirit giveth life."

Now lets look at the quotation you provide as scriptural basis:

"Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life...the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones" (2 Cor.3:6-8).

And now...let us look at the passage in full, with that which was not included in the quote:



2 Corinthians 3:6-8
King James Version (KJV)

6Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

7But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:

8How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious?


Once again your statement:

here Paul is saying that the Ten Commandments bring forth spiritual death and that happens when a person breaks the commandments. Paul is contrasting the commandements with the new testament and that brings "spiritual" life--"the Spirit giveth life."

Nowhere does it say "the Ten Commandments bring forth death," but rather, the contrast is between the First Covenant and...the New Covenant.

It is more properly said, "The First Covenant brought death," and this is because...no man could fulfill the Law (the letter). But at the same time, we are sure that this is not a reference to spiritual death, because God certainly justified men that obeyed Him.

Within the New Covenant we have these promise concerning the Holy Spirit:



Ezekiel 36:27
King James Version (KJV)

27And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.


John 16
King James Version (KJV)

7Nevertheless 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.

8And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:


The Law served this purpose in the life of man, but nowhere do we see that the Law, and here, the First Covenant, gave eternal or spiritual life to man by keeping it. In fact, we are told over and over that Israel did not keep the covenant, and were judged of God.

The New Covenant, like every Covenant except for the Covenant of Law, does not require the participation of man, but is wholly the work of God, ratified by the blood of Christ.


2 Corinthians 3:6-8
King James Version (KJV)

6Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of the letter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.

7But if the ministration of death, written and engraven in stones, was glorious, so that the children of Israel could not stedfastly behold the face of Moses for the glory of his countenance; which glory was to be done away:

8How shall not the ministration of the spirit be rather glorious?


Again, note that the contrast is between the ministry of the First Covenant and the New.

These are a few of the most important verses that I believe we as believers have a need to understand. Paul is saying "God has made us able ministers of the New Covenant...not of the written law.

It is clear that the ministry of the letter could not give life. It could show man his sin, and his need for salvation, but it could not give life.

There can be no doubt that the reference is to "spiritual" death when we look at the following passage:

Again, please provide scripture that would confirm either spiritual life or spiritual death was a result of not keeping the Ten Commandments.

Since the "life" spoken of is "spiritual" in nature then the "death is also spiritual in nature.

No. Paul's point is the exact opposite: all that the law could do was lead to death. It could not give life of a spiritual nature. This is desired by those who find themselves in direct violation of scripture when they make Christ's death in vain by seeking justify themselves by works, and specifically the works of the Law.

And this proves that a person does not die spiritually until he sins.

Far from it.

That means that no one is born dead spiritually because a person must first be alive spiritually before he can die spiritually.

After so many verses that state that man is dead, meaning he has no life, I cannot see how this can be held onto. It is amazing, really.

The verses which you make reference to are speaking about people who have sinned and as a result are separated from God.

Which verses? Which is why I have broken this up, in hopes that more direct responses will be forthcoming.

Hope you are enjoying this as much as I am, Jerry.

God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

if it is a repetition of a verse then that means it is the same kind of birth that s repeated.

A birth of the Spirit is NOT a repetiton of a birth from the mother's womb.

A birth of the Spirit must be a repetition of another birth of the Spirit.

Here we see that Paul applies that "repetition of a birth" to himself:

"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 Spirit" (Titus 3:5).

Paul uses the pronoun 'us" so he is applying the "repetition of a birth" to himself. And since the regeneration of which he speaks is in regard to a spiritual birth then common sense dictates that the previous birth was also a birth of the Spirit.

Titus 3
3For we ourselves also were sometimes foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, and hating one another.

4But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,

5Not 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;

6Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;




Again, to reiterate that Paul did not exclude himself from all men in their need for regeneration, we see in v. 3 he describes his fallen condition, in v.4 he states that salvation took place "after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared," and in v. 6 this salvation was shed upon man...after Christ's death.


Another look at regeneration:


Regeneration is:

3824. paliggenesia pal-ing-ghen-es-ee'-ah from 3825 and 1078; (spiritual) rebirth (the state or the act), i.e. (figuratively) spiritual renovation; specially, Messianic restoration:--regeneration.


Made up of two words...


3825. palin pal'-in probably from the same as 3823 (through the idea of oscillatory repetition); (adverbially) anew, i.e. (of place) back, (of time) once more, or (conjunctionally) furthermore or on the other hand:--again.


As pointed out before, this word is in every place translated again.

And...


1078. genesis ghen'-es-is from the same as 1074; nativity; figuratively, nature:--generation, nature(-ral).


See here for the three uses of this word.


Here...


James 3:6
King James Version (KJV)

6And the tongue is a fire, a world of iniquity: so is the tongue among our members, that it defileth the whole body, and setteth on fire the course of nature; and it is set on fire of hell.


...the idea seems to me to be that of "the natural course of man," though I would not be dogmatic. Just throwing that in because I thought it was interesting.

if it is a repetition of a verse then that means it is the same kind of birth that s repeated.

Everywhere that the new birth is described, it has the connotation of being new. Of being born again. This is contrasted with the physical birth, as Nicodemus had been born physically, but was still in need of being born of God.

A birth of the Spirit is NOT a repetiton of a birth from the mother's womb.

Agreed. However, there is no place in scripture to suggest that man has had a spiritual birth prior to salvation, which is Paul's primary thrust concerning what we receive, which work is accomplished by the Spirit of God.

Quite the opposite, we have many verses that speak clearly the difference between the two, the natural man unable to even comprehend spiritual things. This would not be true if man had already been either born of God, born from above, or born again.



John 3:6
King James Version (KJV)

6That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

A birth of the Spirit must be a repetition of another birth of the Spirit.

No, it man restored to the condition which was lost in Adam, not the individual restored to a condition that he lost through personal sin.

Again, where is the scripture that speaks of man being born of the Spirit prior to Christ's coming, and what do we do with all those who died before Christ came?

Here we see that Paul applies that "repetition of a birth" to himself:

"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 Spirit" (Titus 3:5).

Paul uses the pronoun 'us" so he is applying the "repetition of a birth" to himself. And since the regeneration of which he speaks is in regard to a spiritual birth then common sense dictates that the previous birth was also a birth of the Spirit.

Again, Paul ascribes "salvation" to himself, and the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit as the work of God, both of which are of course applied to the individuals saved, but placement in time shows this to be after the Cross and Pentecost.

Okay, I am done for now. Look forward to detailed, point by point responses.

God bless.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Darrell c,

I quoted the following verse to demonstrate that it is a person's own sins which result in him dying spiritually:

"But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death" (Jas.1:14-15).

To this you say:

Death is possible for the born again believer as well. But it is physical death in view.

In this verse it is not physical death that is in view because the Greek word translated "bringeth forth" is in the "present" tense.

That this refers to temporal death, even though we know that sin leads also to spiritual death, can be seen in the text by most.

Since the Greek word translated "bringeth forth" is in the "present" tense then the reference is obviously in regard to "spiritual" death and not temporal death.

And you admit that sin leads to spiritual death. So we can understand that when a person sins then that sin results in spiritual death. But a person must be alive spiritually before he can die spiritually.

That can only mean that a person does not emerge from the womb spiritually dead because it would be impossible for him to die spiritually as a result of his own sin unless he is alive spiritually at that time.

The keeping of the commandments dealt with physical life...period.

If keeping the commandments cannot bring eternal life then why did Paul write the following?:

"I found that the very commandment that was intended to bring life actually brought death" (Ro.7:10).

Of course the reference here is not in regard to physical life because Paul said that the commandment brought "death" and at the time he wrote those words he was not dead physically.

If the commandments were never intended to bring eternal life then why did Paul say that they did? If "law" was never a way whereby a man could theoretically obtain righteousness then why would Paul say that "Christ is the end of law for righteousness to every one that believes"?:

"For Christ is the end of law for righteousness to every one that believes" (Ro.10:4; DBY).

Paul also speaks of the believing remnant out of national Israel and says that their election is of grace and therefore "it is no more of works":

"Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace. And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace" (Ro.11:5-6).

If no one could theoretically be saved by "works" then why would Paul say that "it is no longer of works"?

 

[Darrell C]

Darrell c,

I quoted the following verse to demonstrate that it is a person's own sins which result in him dying spiritually:

"But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death" (Jas.1:14-15).

To this you say:

In this verse it is not physical death that is in view because the Greek word translated "bringeth forth" is in the "present" tense.

Since the Greek word translated "bringeth forth" is in the "present" tense then the reference is obviously in regard to "spiritual" death and not temporal death.

And you admit that sin leads to spiritual death. So we can understand that when a person sins then that sin results in spiritual death. But a person must be alive spiritually before he can die spiritually.

That can only mean that a person does not emerge from the womb spiritually dead because it would be impossible for him to die spiritually as a result of his own sin unless he is alive spiritually at that time.

If keeping the commandments cannot bring eternal life then why did Paul write the following?:

"I found that the very commandment that was intended to bring life actually brought death" (Ro.7:10).

Of course the reference here is not in regard to physical life because Paul said that the commandment brought "death" and at the time he wrote those words he was not dead physically.

If the commandments were never intended to bring eternal life then why did Paul say that they did? If "law" was never a way whereby a man could theoretically obtain righteousness then why would Paul say that "Christ is the end of law for righteousness to every one that believes"?:

"For Christ is the end of law for righteousness to every one that believes" (Ro.10:4; DBY).

Paul also speaks of the believing remnant out of national Israel and says that their election is of grace and therefore "it is no more of works":

"Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace. And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace" (Ro.11:5-6).

If no one could theoretically be saved by "works" then why would Paul say that "it is no longer of works"?

Okay, I am reminded why I have been gone so long from here.

It has been fun, Jerry, but I would suggest that if one's doctrine is sound, they will not fail to give an answer for all that has been posed in the last couple of days.

The strength of your argument has been repeatedly shown to fail when the whole counsel of God's word has been consulted.

When our doctrine forces us to evade questions, cherry-pick and answer those we feel we can answer...it should have an impression upon us.

This particular thrust of defense has been answered several times. If you don't mind, how about going back and answering some of the responses that have dealt with this with a multiplicity of passages, as well as those which address the misunderstood application of certain passages.

While I love to debate doctrine, it becomes wearisome to repeatedly answer a presented point, only to have it asked again.

And again.

And again.


Are you actually reading the posts? Can you show me where the Law will give man eternal life, and then explain why scripture says that due to man's earthly condition, that is, that he is born in unredeemed flesh, made it impossible for him to gain eternal life?

Can you tell me why those that were given the Law sought after their own righteousness, rather than the righteousness of God?

Many are the points presented by several here that sound the death knell for doctrines such as these, and the only reason to remain adamant to this point is an unwillingness to be honest about those points, and a desire to prove one's doctrine, rather than exegete scripture.

Until the many points brought up are addressed, I will leave you to this round-a-bout of doctrinal pong. But I do hope you will respond, as this is why I take the time to discuss such issues, that we might take an honest look at what scripture teaches, and that applies to me as well.

God bless.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Okay, I am reminded why I have been gone so long from here.

It has been fun, Jerry, but I would suggest that if one's doctrine is sound, they will not fail to give an answer for all that has been posed in the last couple of days.

The strength of your argument has been repeatedly shown to fail when the whole counsel of God's word has been consulted.

When our doctrine forces us to evade questions, cherry-pick and answer those we feel we can answer...it should have an impression upon us.

Why should I go into more detail when I have already demonstrated the falseness of your basic beliefs which are the foundation of all of your arguments. I said:

I quoted the following verse to demonstrate that it is a person's own sins which result in him dying spiritually:

"But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death" (Jas.1:14-15).

To this you say:

Death is possible for the born again believer as well. But it is physical death in view.

Then I prove that you are wrong:

In this verse it is not physical death that is in view because the Greek word translated "bringeth forth" is in the "present" tense.

You also said:

That this refers to temporal death, even though we know that sin leads also to spiritual death, can be seen in the text by most.

To this I said:

Since the Greek word translated "bringeth forth" is in the "present" tense then the reference is obviously in regard to "spiritual" death and not temporal death.

And you admit that sin leads to spiritual death. So we can understand that when a person sins then that sin results in spiritual death. But a person must be alive spiritually before he can die spiritually.

That can only mean that a person does not emerge from the womb spiritually dead because it would be impossible for him to die spiritually as a result of his own sin unless he is alive spiritually at that time.

Then you said:

The keeping of the commandments dealt with physical life...period.

If keeping the commandments cannot bring eternal life then why did Paul write the following?:

"I found that the very commandment that was intended to bring life actually brought death" (Ro.7:10).

Of course the reference here is not in regard to physical life because Paul said that the commandment brought "death" and at the time he wrote those words he was not dead physically.

All of this gets covers your basic ideas on this matter and in every single instance I demonstrated that your ideas are wrong.

I can understand why you do not care to continue to discuss these things. After all, what could you possibly say?

Can you show me where the Law will give man eternal life...

Please consider what the Lord Jesus said in His exchage with a lawyer:

"And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou? And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself. And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live" (Lk.10:25-28).

If the law couldn[t bring eternal life to a man then the Lord Jesus would NEVER have said:

"This do, and thou shalt live."

In the second chapter of Romans Paul reveals that a man can theoretically obtain eternal life by his "deeds" or by his "works":

"But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God; Who will render to every man according to his deeds: To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life: But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile" (Ro.2:5-9).


Those who continue in well doing will be given eternal life. Paul also says that it is the doers of the law who shall be justified:

"For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified" (Ro.2:13).

If it was theoretically impossible for those under the law to be justified before God by law-keeping then it certainly would make no sense for Paul to say that "the doers of the law shall be justified." If it is not theoretically possible for anyone to obtain eternal life by keeping the commandements then the Lord Jesus certainly would not have told anyone that they could inherit eternal life by keeping the law. But He did!

Earlier you recognized that a man can indeed theoretically obtain eternal life by keeping the law but when you learned what that meant you suddenly backtracked.

 

[Darrell C]

Why should I go into more detail when I have already demonstrated the falseness of your basic beliefs which are the foundation of all of your arguments.

I didn't ask for you to go into more detail, lol, I asked you to address my responses. You do a little better here, actually quoting what I have said, and that makes it a little better, but...it would be hard for you to go into more detail when you are so limited in available scripture...rofl.

You repeat the same arguments, asking for another response, over and over.

I said:

I quoted the following verse to demonstrate that it is a person's own sins which result in him dying spiritually:

"But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death" (Jas.1:14-15).

To this you say:

Death is possible for the born again believer as well. But it is physical death in view.

That is not all I said. If you learn to quote properly, you could keep everything together, but I guess even the context of the discussion is not important.

Read James. It is primarilly a temporal context, nothing is going to change that.

So here is what I said in full, in context, addressing your statement, which you again...repeat.

You stated:

Originally Posted by Jerry Shugart
"But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed. Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death" (Jas.1:14-15).

And my response:

Death is possible for the born again believer as well. But it is physical death in view.

But, according to James, we are...



James 1:18

King James Version (KJV)

18Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.


Clearly talking to believers, "beloved brethren." Is mankind a "firstfruits of his creatures," or, are believers firstfruits of his creatures?


I will pick back up here, as I wish to leapfrog off of this thought:


As suggested above, James is speaking to believers, and the context is clearly temporal, which will clear up the confusion some find themselves in when dealing with justification as taught by James.

James: man is justified by his works before man;

Paul: man is justified by faith before God.


That this refers to temporal death, even though we know that sin leads also to spiritual death, can be seen in the text by most. To illustrate that believers are at times put to death due to sin, we can immediately recall Ananias and Sapphira, whose "salvation" may be questioned by some.

We can also look at this:


1 Corinthians 11

King James Version (KJV)


29For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.

30For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.


"...and many sleep" Die, that is. There are consequences for the believer due to sin, but one consequence is not eternal separation from God. But, physical death can result if we sin, and here, concerning the Lord's Supper, it is a consequence for those that partake unworthily.


This is your opportunity to address this again.

Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

Then I prove that you are wrong:

In this verse it is not physical death that is in view because the Greek word translated "bringeth forth" is in the "present" tense.

How exactly does this "prove me wrong?" Death due to sin will be until there is no more sin.

You also said:

That this refers to temporal death, even though we know that sin leads also to spiritual death, can be seen in the text by most.

The full response:


That this refers to temporal death, even though we know that sin leads also to spiritual death, can be seen in the text by most. To illustrate that believers are at times put to death due to sin, we can immediately recall Ananias and Sapphira, whose "salvation" may be questioned by some.



1 Corinthians 11

King James Version (KJV)


29For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.

30For this cause many are weak and sickly among you, and many sleep.


"...and many sleep" Die, that is. There are consequences for the believer due to sin, but one consequence is not eternal separation from God. But, physical death can result if we sin, and here, concerning the Lord's Supper, it is a consequence for those that partake unworthily.


I stand on these responses because James is clearly talking about...physical death.

To this I said:

Since the Greek word translated "bringeth forth" is in the "present" tense then the reference is obviously in regard to "spiritual" death and not temporal death.

Incredible, really.

Okay, so when we see this same word here...


James 1:18

King James Version (KJV)

18Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.


...we can say that this is something that will take place in the future? Or is currently occuring at this moment?


Now, where exactly is this lust going to take place? In the spirit? Or in the flesh?


The context is temporal.

And you admit that sin leads to spiritual death.

Of course. The problem is, I have provided many scriptures that show that man is in a condition of death, and is in need of life. The problem though, is that it seems that distinguishing from spiritual death, spiritual life, physical death, and physical life is something not comprehended.

One shoe fits all, and if it doesn't fit...get a shoe-horn.

Adam's sin led to spiritual death for mankind. Man is now in need, at birth, of life.

So we can understand that when a person sins then that sin results in spiritual death.

Okay, show me the scripture. James does not say spiritual death, and the context is clearly temporal, so...where is the scripture?

Okay, one verse I have posted before, that I am sure has not been responded to or commented on:


John 6

53Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.

This is an instance where we are forced to distinguish between physical life and spiritual life. The context leaves no room for this speaking of physical life, because the men teh Lord speaks to are clearly physically alive. At this point, Christ has not died, and the best they can do at this time is have faith even as all saints before the Cross did.

But it is still evident that they are in need of life.

Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

But a person must be alive spiritually before he can die spiritually.

And your scripture to verify this? You are trespassing into my beliefs, here, be more careful...lol.

That can only mean that a person does not emerge from the womb spiritually dead because it would be impossible for him to die spiritually as a result of his own sin unless he is alive spiritually at that time.

It is better viewed as man cannot escape the condition of spiritual death except he be made alive in Christ.

Where is your scripture?

Here is a previously posted response to this:



Ephesians 2

1And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins;



Okay, so these believers were made alive, and nowhere in scripture is there even a hint that prior to faith in Christ men were either born of God, or spiritually alive.


Paul makes it clear that they were dead, a condition that Christ witnessed of the Jews He spoke to.


4But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,

5Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved)


By trying to make regeneration a "repetition of spiritual birth" instead of keeping the same teaching we have throughout the New Testament of being born of God contrasted to physical birth, you seek to strengthen the argument.

And it fails.

Nowhere do we see men born of God outside of faith in Christ, nowhere do we see scripture that hints to man being spiritually alive after birth.

What do you do with this:

Ephesians 4

17This I say therefore, and testify in the Lord, that ye henceforth walk not as other Gentiles walk, in the vanity of their mind,

18Having the understanding darkened, being alienated from the life of God through the ignorance that is in them, because of the blindness of their heart:


Was it only Gentiles that were "alienated from the life of God?"

Perhaps those good Judaizers were spiritually alive maybe? Oh, that's right, they received the strongest condemnation from the Lord. So that is probably doubtful, right?


Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

Then you said:

The keeping of the commandments dealt with physical life...period.

If keeping the commandments cannot bring eternal life then why did Paul write the following?:

Responded to that here (post # 62):


Nothing could be further from the truth. The keeping of the commandments dealt with physical life...period. This is evident, and we see the first commandment with promise:


Exodus 20

King James Version (KJV)

12Honour thy father and thy mother: that thy days may be long upon the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.


The purpose of the Law, according to New Testament revelation is to show man his sin, and to lead him to Christ. Keeping the Law does not bring eternal life, and this is also stated in the New Testament:



Romans 3:20
King James Version (KJV)

20Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.




Galatians 2:16

King James Version (KJV)

16Knowing that a man is not justified by the works of the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ, even we have believed in Jesus Christ, that we might be justified by the faith of Christ, and not by the works of the law: for by the works of the law shall no flesh be justified.


To make sure he is not understood, Paul goes on to say...

Galatians 2:20-21
King James Version (KJV)

20I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me.

21I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.


Can one have life...but not righteousness? No, the two are part of that condition that arises only from the new birth.

(hey, I am starting to like this kind of debating...just repost everything that has already been said! lol)

Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

"I found that the very commandment that was intended to bring life actually brought death" (Ro.7:10).

Of course the reference here is not in regard to physical life because Paul said that the commandment brought "death" and at the time he wrote those words he was not dead physically.

Romans 7

7What shall we say then? Is the law sin? God forbid. Nay, I had not known sin, but by the law: for I had not known lust, except the law had said, Thou shalt not covet.

I know I have addressed this somewhere, but, here goes again:

Paul states that the law...showed him his sin. He would not have recognized it if it had not been shown him.



8But sin, taking occasion by the commandment, wrought in me all manner of concupiscence. For without the law sin was dead.


Again, without knowledge of the law...there is no knowledge of sin.

What wrought in Paul all manner of concupiscence? Is there a persona that stalked Paul that wrought this in him, or can we see here a plain statement that sin was a part of Paul's nature?

Paul seems to make "the commandment" the starting place for sin at work in him, even as most people who are told not to do something...usually want to do that very thing, as Paul will attest later in this chapter.

9For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died.

This I suggest is Paul's view of his own understanding of the law. Being a Pharisee did not keep him from hatred and murder.

He "died" in recognition of his own sinfulness. The law convicted him, finding him guilty.


10And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.

The keeping of the law could bring eternal life, unfortunately, no man was able to do that.

This is why it was necessary for Christ to come.



11For sin, taking occasion by the commandment, deceived me, and by it slew me.

Paul believed, before salvation, that he kept the law. His very actions were in direct contradiction to that which the law taught.



12Wherefore the law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.


But not man, who is not able to perform the law, for he will inevitably offend in at least one point.


13Was then that which is good made death unto me? God forbid. But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good; that sin by the commandment might become exceeding sinful.


And this really is all that needs to be considered when looking at verse 10:

10And the commandment, which was ordained to life, I found to be unto death.

But sin, that it might appear sin, working death in me by that which is good;

Sin worked death in Paul. The law did not cause death, merely show Paul his sin. It was not until Paul understood the law that he understood how exceedingly sinful he was.

14For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin.


And Paul does not call himself spiritual here, but recognizes his utter inability to meet the righteous requirement of God.



Continued...

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Darrell C,

I said;

But a person must be alive spiritually before he can die spiritually.

To this you said:

And your scripture to verify this? You are trespassing into my beliefs, here, be more careful...lol.

Sometimes you must use your common sense. How can a person "die" in any way if he is not first alive? Here Paul makes it plain that he was "alive" before he died:

"For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died" (Ro.7:9).

It is really impossible to discuss these things with someone who throws his reason to the wind. The primary meaning given in the dictionary for the word "die" is "to cease to live" (The American College Dictionary).

How can anyone die unless he is first alive? You yourself even admitted that sin leads to spiritual death:

... we know that sin leads also to spiritual death...

When I said that a person must be alive spiritually before he can die spiritually you say prove it. Again, Paul spoke of being alive prior to dying and the very meaning of the word "die" means ro cease to live.

It is useless to even attempt to argue with someone who thinks that a person can die spirtually even though he is already dead spiritually. But that is evidently what you think because when I said "a person must be alive spiritually before he can die spiritually" you said:

And your scripture to verify this?

I really have no time for those who refuse to use their reason, and you prove that you are willing to stand reason on its head.

 

[Darrell C]

All of this gets covers your basic ideas on this matter and in every single instance I demonstrated that your ideas are wrong.

Hardly. You have responded to about 1/10 of what has been stated, avoiding some of the very important issues altogether, such as the New Covenant, for one.

I have layed out in full detail my "basic ideas" and feel I have answered every point. If there is one that I have not, let me know, I will respond.

I can understand why you do not care to continue to discuss these things. After all, what could you possibly say?

Well, I feel I have an advantage there, as I have not even come close to exhausting what scripture has to say about the fact that man is separated from God relationally, that he is incapable of keeping the law, and that his very nature keeps him from any course of action...except sin.

So no worries. Tru to drum up some new ideas, and we will take it from there.:thumbsup:

Please consider what the Lord Jesus said in His exchage with a lawyer:

"And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him, saying, Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life? He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest thou? And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind; and thy neighbour as thyself. And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do, and thou shalt live" (Lk.10:25-28).

If the law couldn[t bring eternal life to a man then the Lord Jesus would NEVER have said:

"This do, and thou shalt live."

This is a no brainer: if the man could have done that, he would have obtained eternal life. Unfortunately, he could not.

This is not the only time this is asked of the Lord:


Luke 18

18And a certain ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?

19And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.

20Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Honour thy father and thy mother.

21And he said, All these have I kept from my youth up.

22Now when Jesus heard these things, he said unto him, Yet lackest thou one thing: sell all that thou hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, follow me.

23And when he heard this, he was very sorrowful: for he was very rich.

24And when Jesus saw that he was very sorrowful, he said, How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!

Here it is plain that keeping the law could be "unto life," but man is not capable.

This is a direct response dealing with this individual on an individual basis. Shall we also say that these commandments listed supercede or negate Christ's affirmation of the greatest of commandments? No.

Shall we say that if we keep the above commandments, and sell all we own and then follow Christ, we will have eternal life? No.

The passage in Matthew 19 is identical.

And the most known inquiry for how to obtain eternal life is found here.



The argument presented here is that since Christ states that if a man keeps the law, he will obtain eternal life, to present the idea that both man can keep the law without offending in one point, as well as to negate the many passages dealing with the fact that man cannot.

We are given more detail in Luke 18, and it can be seen that the man misses the mark.

It is the same thing in ch. 10. with the only difference being that Christ merely states a truth: do this and you shall live. And consider: when the Lord tells this man to "go and do likewise," is that not a direct statement to the fact that the man...did not?


Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

In the second chapter of Romans Paul reveals that a man can theoretically obtain eternal life by his "deeds" or by his "works":

"But after thy hardness and impenitent heart treasurest up unto thyself wrath against the day of wrath and revelation of the righteous judgment of God; Who will render to every man according to his deeds: To them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life: But unto them that are contentious, and do not obey the truth, but obey unrighteousness, indignation and wrath, Tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile" (Ro.2:5-9).

Again with "theoretical."

Where does it state that the law gave life.

That the law could not take away sins is a biblical fact. Now, put two and two together, and you will see that 1-man has sin, and 2- the law could not take away that sin.

But you have people keeping the law unto eternal life, something that nowhere is even hinted at in scripture. Could it give eternal life? Yes.

Can man keep the law? No.

Could the law take away sin? No.


Hebrews 10

1For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.

2For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.

3But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year.

4For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.

Those who continue in well doing will be given eternal life. Paul also says that it is the doers of the law who shall be justified:

Did you happen to notice that includes those that not only have not heard the law, but also have not heard of Christ.


12For as many as have sinned without law shall also perish without law: and as many as have sinned in the law shall be judged by the law;


Does that mean that we can question this:



John 14:6

King James Version (KJV)

6Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me.


Because that is exactly what is being said when this verse is used to promote works-based salvation.



Continued...

 

[Darrell C]

"For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified" (Ro.2:13).

If it was theoretically impossible for those under the law to be justified before God by law-keeping then it certainly would make no sense for Paul to say that "the doers of the law shall be justified."

He also includes Gentiles who are without law. I don't think you understand the implications of what you present here. No, I know you don't know.

But just as Paul proclaims that he did not understand the law, and when he did, he was found guilty, even so here he rebukes those who "think they keep the law."


A few verses to look for in ch. 2:

17Behold, thou art called a Jew, and restest in the law, and makest thy boast of God,


19And art confident that thou thyself art a guide of the blind, a light of them which are in darkness,


20An instructor of the foolish, a teacher of babes, which hast the form of knowledge and of the truth in the law.

21Thou therefore which teachest another, teachest thou not thyself? thou that preachest a man should not steal, dost thou steal?

22Thou that sayest a man should not commit adultery, dost thou commit adultery? thou that abhorrest idols, dost thou commit sacrilege?

23Thou that makest thy boast of the law, through breaking the law dishonourest thou God?


The question is...do we really understand the law? Do we really understand the word of God?

Do we really live as the law instructs?

Are we righteous because of that? Justified? The friend of God?

If it is not theoretically possible for anyone to obtain eternal life by keeping the commandements then the Lord Jesus certainly would not have told anyone that they could inherit eternal life by keeping the law. But He did!

It was theoretically possible for Israel to keep the covenant.

The Lord states a truth, and you hang your doctrine upon this?

Okay.

Earlier you recognized that a man can indeed theoretically obtain eternal life by keeping the law but when you learned what that meant you suddenly backtracked.

Did I now?

I maintain exactly what I have stated, that the law can not grant man eternal life. It cannot give him spiritual life.

You have no scripture, only a desire to maintain a doctrine that is contrary to some very basic bible truths.

Lets look at this one again:


Hebrews 10

1For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect.

2For then would they not have ceased to be offered? because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins.

3But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year.

4For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.


Care to explain how it is that the law, if it cannot take away sins...can give eternal life?

It is an impossibility.

This is why scripture must be balanced...all of it.

God bless.

 

[Darrell C]

Darrell C,

I said;

But a person must be alive spiritually before he can die spiritually.

To this you said:

Sometimes you must use your common sense. How can a person "die" in any way if he is not first alive? Here Paul makes it plain that he was "alive" before he died:

"For I was alive without the law once: but when the commandment came, sin revived, and I died" (Ro.7:9).

It is really impossible to discuss these things with someone who throws his reason to the wind. The primary meaning given in the dictionary for the word "die" is "to cease to live" (The American College Dictionary).

How can anyone die unless he is first alive? You yourself even admitted that sin leads to spiritual death:

When I said that a person must be alive spiritually before he can die spiritually you say prove it. Again, Paul spoke of being alive prior to dying and the very meaning of the word "die" means ro cease to live.

It is useless to even attempt to argue with someone who thinks that a person can die spirtually even though he is already dead spiritually. But that is evidently what you think because when I said "a person must be alive spiritually before he can die spiritually" you said:

I really have no time for those who refuse to use their reason, and you prove that you are willing to stand reason on its head.

As I have said before...man is in need of life.

You think it unreasonable that a man can die when he is dead, which shows a complete lack of familiarity with that which scripture declares.

A man can be dead and die in a couple different ways:

He is dead (bereft of life and in need of being born of God) when he is alive. He dies physically, and he goes to hades. Then this dead man is tossed into the lake of fire.

And...can you show me where I said this?

Sometimes you must use your common sense. How can a person "die" in any way if he is not first alive? Here Paul makes it plain that he was "alive" before he died:

This is a bit unkind, and I apologize if I did on fact say this, so, let me know which post this is from.

You should really learn to quote properly. It will be for your betterment, believe me, and it will cut down on the confusion.

And I am done for the night,

God bless.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

You think it unreasonable that a man can die when he is dead, which shows a complete lack of familiarity with that which scripture declares.

A man can be dead and die in a couple different ways:

He is dead (bereft of life and in need of being born of God) when he is alive. He dies physically, and he goes to hades. Then this dead man is tossed into the lake of fire.

I never said that a person alive "physically" cannot die "spiritually."

What I said is that a person cannot die 'spiritually" unless he is first alive "spiritually."

The same principle applies to "physical" life and death. A person cannot die "physically" unless he is first alive "physically."

In fact, the primary meaning of the word "die" is "to cease to live" (The American College Dictionary).

A person cannot "cease to live" unless he is already alive.

You still refuse to believe this simple principle so I will say again that I will not waste my time with someone who is willing to throw his reason to the wind in order to cling to the false teaching of "Original Sin."

So until you recognize the fact that a person must be alive "spiritually" before he can die "spiritually" then I have nothing else to say to you.

 

[The Biblicist]

So until you recognize the fact that a person must be alive "spiritually" before he can die "spiritually" then I have nothing else to say to you.

You are demanding that he give up the optional view of original sin and accept your view BEFORE you will discuss the issue! How stupid is that?

There are two ways to overthrow your definition of "re-generation." The first and obvious one is the contrast made clear by Christ in John 3:3-7 where Christ deals with only two births - born of the flesh and born of the Spirit and to be "re-born merely refers to the second "born of the Spirit" in contrast to the first "born of the flesh. So "re-birth" different in kind from the former birth or second birth in contrast to first birth.

The second way is the doctrine of original sin. The human nature was spiritually alive to God in the Pre-fallen Adam but spiritually died in the fall and thus what Adam "passed" to his posterity who were partakers of his nature is "death" spiritual death and so to be "re-generated" is to renew, restore the image of God lost in the fall.

Both are true and your view is completely and totally false.

 

[Jerry Shugart]

You are demanding that he give up the optional view of original sin and accept your view BEFORE you will discuss the issue! How stupid is that?

i am merely saying that if he will not recognize the logical conclusions in regard to life and dying then I will not discuss this with him any longer.

Are you willing to argue that one does not have to be alive spiritually in order to die spiritually?

There are two ways to overthrow your definition of "re-generation." The first and obvious one is the contrast made clear by Christ in John 3:3-7 where Christ deals with only two births - born of the flesh and born of the Spirit and to be "re-born merely refers to the second "born of the Spirit" in contrast to the first "born of the flesh. So "re-birth" different in kind from the former birth or second birth in contrast to first birth.

the only reason he dealt with two verses is because nicodemus thought that when the Lord spoke of being born again he falsely assumed that He was saying that a person must be born of flesh again.

So there is nothing in that exchange between the two men that even hints that the Lord Jesus was saying that when he referred to being born AGAIN that the first birth was of the flesh.

The second way is the doctrine of original sin. The human nature was spiritually alive to God in the Pre-fallen Adam but spiritually died in the fall and thus what Adam "passed" to his posterity who were partakers of his nature is "death" spiritual death and so to be "re-generated" is to renew, restore the image of God lost in the fall.

Paul uses the pronoun "us" so therefore the regeneration applied directly to him as well as to all who were saved. And I have already shown that the word means a "repetition" or "restoration" of a birth. Since the birth we received to be saved is of the Spirit then the first birth must also be of the Spirit.

According to your inability to reason the first birth was of the flesh and then the repetion of that birth was of the Spirit. That makes absolutely no sense!