Regeneration does precede Redemption

[The Archangel]

I'm a member of a Primitive Baptist church, and an ordained elder in that church. Notice that I said "a" Primitive Baptist church, because there is no Primitive Baptist order that can be referred to as "the" Primitive Baptist church.

Yes, I believe Christians and all of God's elect are born saved (in the eternal sense) and redeemed, and I base that on the fact that Jesus Christ came to save His people and He did exactly that, else the cross would not have happened, the empty tomb will simply be a myth, his resurrection said to have been witnessed by hundreds, his 40 day walk on this earth after his resurrection, his ascension to heaven, ALL will be myths, and His imminent return simply wishful thinking.

Hebrews 9:12 says "having obtained eternal redemption for us".

That language effectively shuts off anymore redemption, and anymore to be redeemed. It is my belief that the word "us" includes all of God's elect from the foundation of the world, to the end of this plane we call time, else the statement would have been "having made eternal redemption possible for us".

He did what He came to do, and He did it well, and His blood redeemed ALL whose names are written in the Lamb's Book of Life, and while someone may protest that there is a possibility that God can erase names in that book, I say that will never happen now or God will be like a US president who sent his boys and girls to war and then said, "ah, forgot about your blood. let's call it quits, alright ? Everybody, I'm sorry for the stupidity of America". (sorry, can't help that one.lol.)

In short, God will not demean the blood His only begotten and well beloved Son shed on that cross here in time, and in eternity past as the Lamb of God slain from the foundation of the world.

CAUTION, NOW !!

I did not say that God's elect are born REGENERATE !!
Redemption and regeneration are two different aspects of God's act on His child, just as regeneration and conversion are different.
EVERYBODY descended from Adam, and possessed of the same fallen nature, is born at enmity with God (Ephesians 2:13-16) until regenerated by the Spirit.

Pinoybaptist,

Thanks for the explanation. I have no problem with that. I agree with everything you've written. I am weird, as far as Calvinist converts are concerned. I am a Calvinist because of limited atonement, not in spite of it. Once I understood all that happened on the cross, well...I could no longer protest.

Thanks again for the explanation.

Some parts got about a foot, some, more.
here in Chantilly, where I work, we more likely had about more than a foot overnight.
Funny, you know.
We left Maryland for Buffalo NY a few years back because we were deadly scared of tornados, and a week after we got there a tornado touched down seven miles from where we lived.
Then it got too cold and too snowy for my wife so we moved back to Maryland.
Now we deal with just about as much snow as we did over there.

My wife is from the Buffalo area (closer to Jamestown). She thinks she's at home! For some odd reason Southern Maryland is more prone to tornadoes. I remember the 02/03??? one that was an F-4. I saw a satellite picture that showed the damage path. SCARY! Having lived in Kentucky, we would get our share of scary storms and tornado warnings. At least once a year we huddled in the basement for about an hour. Not fun.

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

[The Archangel]

I just took a second look at the title of the OP.
REGENERATION PRECEDES REDEMPTION.
I must say if this is what Piper is teaching, then I cannot agree.

Pinoybaptist,

Can you say, specifically, why you disagree with Piper on this. You've piqued my curiosity.

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

[Allan]

Pinoybaptist,

Thanks for the explanation. I have no problem with that. I agree with everything you've written. I am weird, as far as Calvinist converts are concerned. I am a Calvinist because of limited atonement, not in spite of it. Once I understood all that happened on the cross, well...I could no longer protest.

Thanks again for the explanation.

I don't think you understand his explanation brother.
First off, as far as I know, you don't agree with this.

Yes, I believe Christians and all of God's elect are born saved (in the eternal sense) and redeemed

You did notice, didn't you, that he seperates 'christians' and God's elect - right? This is because his (as far as I understand Pinoy and other PB's) holds that all of God's elect (not only Christians) not eternally saved by faith. In his view there are people who are eternally saved irregardless of faith in Christ.

Secondly, he states that we are 'born' already redeemed and eternally saved. I know you have stated on here a few times that you disagree with this premise of being born 'eternally saved'.

You have to understand the Primitive Baptist view hold to two versions or aspect of salvation. One is in the eternal sense where by all of Gods elect (which INCLUDES christians) are born eternally redeemed and saved and I believe is spoken of as 'Eternal Salvation'.
The second version of salvation is called either temporal or timely salvation in which 'some of' God's elect are called by God into a life of holiness and knowledge of the truth through regeneration (I don't remember all the details here about regeneration though). Why some and not as are given this timely salvation, I never really understood and so won't speculate on it.

I another thread there is debate between me and two (now three with Pinoy) stating faith is the result of our being already righteous 'in Christ'. This is supposed to be illistrated by Abraham as seen in this portion about it:

Abraham's faith is proof of his righteousness IN Christ, of his being a regenerate son of God

The issue is concerning Romans 4 whereby Abraham was declared righteous DUE TO faith, and they are contending no he was righteous prior to it.


But then again, maybe your views have changed recently

 

[Allan]

Pinoy, I'm not negitively trying to convey your view but trying to articulate the differences in them and other baptists, including those of the reformed and Calvinistic views. If I am incorrect in my statements please straighten it out.

 

[The Archangel]

I don't think you understand his explanation brother.
First off, as far as I know, you don't agree with this.


You did notice, didn't you, that he seperates 'christians' and God's elect - right? This is because his (as far as I understand Pinoy and other PB's) holds that all of God's elect (not only Christians) eternally saved by faith. In his view there are people who are eternally saved irregardless of faith in Christ.

Secondly, he states that we are 'born' already redeemed and eternally saved. I know you have stated on here a few times that you disagree with this premise of being born 'eternally saved'.

You have to understand the Primitive Baptist view hold to two versions or aspect of salvation. One is in the eternal sense where by all of Gods elect (which INCLUDES christians) are born eternally redeemed and saved and I believer is spoken of as 'Eternal Salvation'.
The second version of salvation is called either temporal or timely salvation in which 'some of' God's elect are called by God into a life of holiness and knowledge of the truth. Why some and not as are given this timely salvation, I never really understood and so won't speculate on it.

I another thread there is debate between me and two (now three with Pinoy) stating faith is the result of our being already righteous 'in Christ'. This is supposed to be illistrated by Abraham as seen in this portion about it:


The issue is concerning Romans 4 whereby Abraham was declared righteous DUE TO faith, and they are contending no he was righteous prior to it.


But then again, maybe your views have changed recently

ALLAN!

Thanks. You're correct. If the belief is as you stated, I don't agree. I think people may be considered "eternally saved" but only from God's point of view, not ours. Secondly, I would not agree that someone can be saved and not know it.

Yes, those would be significant differences and yes, I'd disagree.

Thank you for policing my brain.

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

[pinoybaptist]

Pinoybaptist,

Can you say, specifically, why you disagree with Piper on this. You've piqued my curiosity.

Blessings,

The Archangel

Again, let me say that I might be mistaken in thinking this is what Piper teaches because I know him to be a strong New Covenant Theology Calvinist. I may have misread your post.
I am disagreeing with the title at this point.
My disagreement is based on the fact that repentance, faith, obedience, and all those things that many base salvation on are actually proofs and fruits of a regenerate soul.
Therefore, if regeneration does precede redemption then redemption is based on good works, which it is not.

 

[Allan]

ALLAN!

Thanks. You're correct. If the belief is as you stated, I don't agree. I think people may be considered "eternally saved" but only from God's point of view, not ours. Secondly, I would not agree that someone can be saved and not know it.

Yes, those would be significant differences and yes, I'd disagree.

Thank you for policing my brain.

Blessings,

The Archangel

No Prob.. I only made mention of it because I remembered this post from before:

Originally Posted by The Archangel
I, for one, do not believe anyone is saved without believing. As a Calvinist, I would argue that belief is a result of God's work of redemption (Regeneration, etc.) not a cause of it. Regardless of which system of theology one holds, it is impossible to argue that persons are saved without actively believing in Christ.

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

[Allan]

Again, let me say that I might be mistaken in thinking this is what Piper teaches because I know him to be a strong New Covenant Theology Calvinist. I may have misread your post.
I am disagreeing with the title at this point.
My disagreement is based on the fact that repentance, faith, obedience, and all those things that many base salvation on are actually proofs and fruits of a regenerate soul.
Therefore, if regeneration does precede redemption then redemption is based on good works, which it is not.

One thing I am still having a bit of trouble understanding Pinoy, is the PB view of Timely salvation. Can you provide some reading material on that aspect for me to review and understand it better?

 

[pinoybaptist]

Pinoy, I'm not negitively trying to convey your view but trying to articulate the differences in them and other baptists, including those of the reformed and Calvinistic views. If I am incorrect in my statements please straighten it out.

Allan,
don't worry about it.
You are one of those I know can carry on a vigorous but respectful discussion.
God bless.

 

[pinoybaptist]

One thing I am still having a bit of trouble understanding Pinoy, is the PB view of Timely salvation. Can you provide some reading material on that aspect for me to review and understand it better?

sure.
let me look up the reading materials.
it may take a while for me to get back to you, though.
am at work, been sleeping at the office since the storm began Friday night. church was called off so I signed up for overtime.

 

[Allan]

sure.
let me look up the reading materials.
it may take a while for me to get back to you, though.
am at work, been sleeping at the office since the storm began Friday night. church was called off so I signed up for overtime.

No Prob :thumbs:

 

[pinoybaptist]

One thing I am still having a bit of trouble understanding Pinoy, is the PB view of Timely salvation. Can you provide some reading material on that aspect for me to review and understand it better?

Here is one in .pdf by Elder Michael Gowens.

here is a contrary one. however, I think he basically agrees with the premise of the doctrine, but disagrees with the term "conditional", and I agree with him. obedience to gospel teaching naturally results in blessings just as disobedience naturally results in cursings, here in time.

here is another contrary one. however, the real reason this gentleman does not agree that time salvation is a principle and concept which is Biblical, is because he holds to a doctrine which is itself unbiblical and that is the absolute predestination of all things.

I'll see if I have books that I can direct you to.

 

[pinoybaptist]

I think people may be considered "eternally saved" but only from God's point of view, not ours.

Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. Hebrews 9:12.

Can you please explain to me how this Scripture is only from God's point of view, and does not apply to all God's elect ?

 

[The Archangel]

Again, let me say that I might be mistaken in thinking this is what Piper teaches because I know him to be a strong New Covenant Theology Calvinist. I may have misread your post.
I am disagreeing with the title at this point.

No problem. I don't think you are misunderstanding Piper. In retrospect, I may have titled this thread differently

My disagreement is based on the fact that repentance, faith, obedience, and all those things that many base salvation on are actually proofs and fruits of a regenerate soul.
Therefore, if regeneration does precede redemption then redemption is based on good works, which it is not.

This I agree with: repentance, faith, obedience...are actually proofs and fruits of a regenerate soul. (emphasis yours)

This I do not agree with: Therefore, if regeneration does precede redemption then redemption is based on good works, which it is not.

I'm having a rough time understanding you, a deficiency on my part, I'm sure. Please explain the sentence I don't agree with more thoroughly.

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

[The Archangel]

Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. Hebrews 9:12.

Can you please explain to me how this Scripture is only from God's point of view, and does not apply to all God's elect ?

I don't think I was meaning to imply that. I'm still trying to grasp what it is you believe. I'm reading the stuff you posted to Allan.

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

[John of Japan]

"we become begotten sons of God by regeneration and adoption".1
Specifically excludes belief, since, belief is a result of regeneration.

"Translation. Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ, out from God has been born and as a result is His child"2


That person, John says, and he uses the perfect tense here, has been born of God and as a result is a child of God.3

" Thus faith is a sign of sonship."4

1. Jamieson, Robert ; Fausset, A. R. ; Fausset, A. R. ; Brown, David ; Brown, David: A Commentary, Critical and Explanatory, on the Old and New Testaments. Oak Harbor, WA : Logos Research Systems, Inc., 1997, S. 1 Jn 5:1

2. Wuest, Kenneth S.: Wuest's Word Studies from the Greek New Testament : For the English Reader. Grand Rapids : Eerdmans, 1997, c1984, S. 1 Jn 5:1

3 Ibid.

4 Akin, Daniel L.: 1, 2, 3 John. electronic ed. Nashville : Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2001, c2001 (Logos Library System; The New American Commentary 38), S. 189

Looks to me like you're stretching it in all three of these quotes. I don't see any of them as putting regeneration before salvation, especially Wuest. All you did was quote his translation, not that different from other translations!

But let it pass. I'm sure we can just agree to disagree here. :type:

 

[Winman]

Sure would have been simpler if John would have wrote

"Every one who is born of God believes"

Boy... those careless apostles. :laugh:

 

[pinoybaptist]

This I do not agree with: Therefore, if regeneration does precede redemption then redemption is based on good works, which it is not.

Agreed then that redemption is not based on good works.
I

I'm having a rough time understanding you, a deficiency on my part, I'm sure. Please explain the sentence I don't agree with more thoroughly.
Blessings,
The Archangel

I appreciate your kind words, but I think the deficiency is mine, not being born speaking the English language.
I can give a very brief, hopefully, answer as explanation, if you will bear with me.
I do not agree that regeneration precedes redemption because regeneration is a task of the Holy Spirit performed by Him on those who are the objects of redemption.
His task is ongoing and will be finished only when the last of God's elect is quickened, while Christ finished the work of redemption of His people at the cross nearly or more than two thousand years ago, the act having covered all for whom it is meant, which is the elect.
Just as eternal salvation is all of grace, and all of the Lord, so is eternal redemption all of grace and all of the Lord.
It precedes regeneration because only the redeemed are to be regenerated.
In the same sense, only the elect are to be regenerated.
The reason I said that if regeneration precedes redemption this makes redemption based on good works is because the natural result of having a new nature is the performance of good works.
Secondly, the work of soul redemption is over, it's done, and will not be repeated ever again here in time, or in eternity.

 

[Havensdad]

Sure would have been simpler if John would have wrote

"Every one who is born of God believes"

Boy... those careless apostles. :laugh:

He did. "Everyone who believes, has been born of God in the past" is the same thing. It absolutely excludes the possibility of belief, outside of regeneration.

 

[Havensdad]

Looks to me like you're stretching it in all three of these quotes. I don't see any of them as putting regeneration before salvation, especially Wuest. All you did was quote his translation, not that different from other translations!

But let it pass. I'm sure we can just agree to disagree here. :type:

"Faith is a SIGN of sonship", does not agree with what I have said?:tonofbricks: That is the opposite of sonship being the result of faith.