Regeneration: Is it a prelude to OR the Act of Salvation ~Born Again~

[Allan]

1. "Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God."

2. "Born" translates the Greek perfect tense, meaning that a prior, completed action has taken place but whose results still stands.

a. Here's an example of how the perfect tense works: 1 Cor 15:4, "He was raised on the third day..."

b. "He was raised" is one word in the Greek and it is a perfect tense. Christ was raised, a prior, completed action, never to be repeated, signifying that He lives forever and never to die, which is all captured in the perfect tense.

3. So "Born of God" is prior to "whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ."

Another example is:
Mark 5:34 Daughter, thy faith hath made thee whole.

It could be said like this :
Every person who is [currently CONTINUING in] Belief that Jesus is the Christ has been Fathered [into birth] of God.
This verse reveals both actions stemming from a past point, therefore it is about a state of being and NOT about chronology brother. It is not about those who are just now believeing (since believing is in the Present Active Participle) showing they were already born of God but that it establishes those who are currently believing to be definitively in the Family of God.

It can be paraphrase this way as well :
Those who are Fathered (born) of God are known because of their continuing belief that Jesus is the Christ.

 

[Allan]

You are right, thank you for your graciousness with my carelessness.

I don't know about all that. :laugh:
But I still appreciate you comments. :thumbs:

 

[Allan]

TCGreek and Webdog, I appreciate your interactions as well.

 

[reformedbeliever]

Why put a time frame on being born again?..... oops... I used that word.

It is rather a chronological order rather than a time frame. Wouldn't you agree that to be born again is a work of God? Why limit God to time? He is not bound by time.... He is present at the culmination of all "time". This is a common mistake we humans make.

Now... lets make this clear. God's election of men is not because of His foresight. His election of men is because of His good pleasure. If you want to view election as because of God's foresight, then what God foresees men will do... no way around it. God's decrees will stand.

 

[Allan]

While it is true the perfect tense refers to an action with permanent results assuming being "born" refers chronologically to being born before believing Christ misunderstands the emphasis of the use of the perfect, particularly here where it is used with present force. And generally this is the use of the perfect tense. Not to establish a fixed time in the past but establish that in the past something occurred and now has continuous results. It simply focuses on the idea that it is not an ongoing or continuous event but a complete action in the past with current results. Hence, to attempt to claim when in the past it occurred in this verse is to misunderstand its use, particularly when the present tense "is" establishes its emphasis in "is born of God". Meaning of course, born of God in the past at some time and is now and will be. But at no point is it the perfect attempting to imply it preceded faith in this verse, that isn't the purpose of its use here.

On the other hand our faith, or believing, is often used in continuous tense without emphasis on a fixed past point and a one time action, or completed action.

"Whoever is one that is believing (no emphasis on the past since the author is referring to the here and now) that Jesus is the Christ, is born of God which happened sometime in the past".

You will be born again or born of God once. Regeneration occurs once. And while saving faith occurs once the expression of our saving faith is continuous. The idea here is not establishing a chronology between "whoever believes" and "born of God" but is establishing the reality that at some point he was born of God and is now born of God evidenced by their confession.

To provide a summation:

Whoever says they believe in Christ to you at this time was at some point in the past born of God, is now still born of God and will continue to be born of God.


Whoever has a chopped off hand and shows it to you now, at some point in the past had their hand chopped off, is now still with a chopped off hand and will continue to have a chopped off hand.

Does this mean their hand had to be chopped off before they stuck it in the turbine? No, but here the same Greek perfect would be used. Why? Because the emphasis on the "PRESENT RESULT" of a past action.

There are instances in the Greek when the emphasis is on the past action and its time but here is NOT one of them.

Actaully the 'Perfect Tense' is 'viewed' commonly in the past tense.
Though it might have a present tense 'force'(by this I assume you are meaning the continuence of action ascribed to beleif), it is actually refering both the birth and the belief as past actions continuing on (even presently).

 

[Allan]

Why put a time frame on being born again?..... oops... I used that word.

Your a stinker :laugh:

It is rather a chronological order rather than a time frame. Wouldn't you agree that to be born again is a work of God? Why limit God to time? He is not bound by time.... He is present at the culmination of all "time". This is a common mistake we humans make.

Exactly, so it isn't about regeneration BEFORE salvation, since both belief and born (again) by virtue of the tenses states they are established as past acts.
(whether a milli-second ago or 50 years) But establishes the Fact that you can not have one without the other.

Now... lets make this clear. God's election of men is not because of His foresight. His election of men is because of His good pleasure. If you want to view election as because of God's foresight, then what God foresees men will do... no way around it. God's decrees will stand.

This is not about 'election' but regeneration brother.

But I will ask this since you were kind in appearing here.
God elected (no question), and He elected based upon His purpose and Plan (no problem here either). If His election was not arbitrary however, (and I know you don't believe it was) then upon what did God elect you if it is not arbitrary?

IF you beleive there was a reason for electing you, even if YOU don't know what it is but God, then why so quick to dismiss what other believe the scriptures state AS PART OF why He chose us?

God doesn't 'foresee' anything. He knows all things, the 'fore' regarding knew is a construct establishing a time of when it occured for our benifit.

Now if you would care to, please engage the OP so this doesn't become a thread on 'Election' rather than Regeneration. Wait - am I really expecting this to stay on topic :laugh:

 

[Alex Quackenbush]

Actaully the 'Perfect Tense' is 'viewed' commonly in the past tense.
Though it might have a present tense 'force'(by this I assume you are meaning the continuence of action ascribed to belief), it is actually referring both the birth and the belief as past actions continuing on (even presently).

I don't disagree with what you are saying and don't believe it runs contrary to what I am saying. My point is that the present force is generally the majority use. That does not mean to imply it negates the view to the past, the perfect tense necessitates this but its force of use is present most often, particularly here. Now my view that it is most often used this way is debatable, but I don't think we are debating how often what force is used when but are discussing this use here. And here the present force is being used for the emphasis.

So let me be clear. I understand the general definition of the perfect tense. An completed action in the past with present or ongoing results. But the uses of the perfect has varying forces. One emphasizing the past action and the other emphasizing the present results of that past action and both of these categories have their own subtle but significant nuances. I realize you know this but I say this to make clear to you that I do as well.

 

[reformedbeliever]

Your a stinker :laugh:

Right now I smell like hickory smoke.

Exactly, so it isn't about regeneration BEFORE salvation, since both belief and born (again) by virtue of the tenses states they are established as past acts.
(whether a milli-second ago or 50 years) But establishes the Fact that you can not have one without the other.

To quote a professor of mine whom I love dearly; "I'm not so sure I can't agree with that."

God elected (no question), and He elected based upon His purpose and Plan (no problem here either). If His election was not arbitrary however, (and I know you don't believe it was) then upon what did God elect you if it is not arbitrary?

According to the kindness of His will, for His glory. Ephesians 1: also we have obtained an inheritance, having been predestined according to His purpose who works all things after the counsel of His will,
12. to the end that we who were the first to hope in Christ would be to the praise of His glory.

IF you beleive there was a reason for electing you, even if YOU don't know what it is but God, then why so quick to dismiss what other believe the scriptures state AS PART OF why He chose us?

I don't dismiss what the Scriptures say. It is all ultimately for HIs glory.

God doesn't 'foresee' anything. He knows all things, the 'fore' regarding knew is a construct establishing a time of when it occured for our benifit.

Agreed.

Now if you would care to, please engage the OP so this doesn't become a thread on 'Election' rather than Regeneration. Wait - am I really expecting this to stay on topic :laugh:

No.... you know it will not stay on topic... this is the Baptist Board. lol

Put up with me brother...... I don't post that much anymore. Besides, I gotta go put the side orders together for the cookout. I've got a lot of hungry people coming tonight. Grace and peace.

 

[TCGreek]

There are as many different types of Calvanism as there are Baptists .
That is why I wanted to see how people answered the 3 question I provided, as a means to know how each person(s) of those who hold to 'regeneration preceding salvation'.

1. That is historically true.

I understand. Yet that text of 1 John 5:1 lends no wieght to regeneration before salvation. Bu tI will deal with that later in our discussion because it is central in your view.

2. Ahhh!

However, what you have not done is prove 'born' equals regeneration OUTSIDE of salvation. Unless you believe the person is saved first then come to beleive.

3. If YOU understand regeneration that way, then yes.

Ok, then how can a person be 'born again' and NOT be in a rightor reconciled relationship with God, through which only the means of justification, sanctification, et. are apart?

4. An either/or fallacy.

3. And man who now no longer dead but alive in sin and not reconciled, nor having the Holy Spirit indwelling him will come to God?
4. How does this work if there is no power in those things God gives him (faith, new nature) to come TO God?
Since Paul says the new man can not champion over the old nature without the empowering of the Holy Spirit and THAT is not done without His indwelling. In light of this I must ask:
5. By what Power does the New Man operate, his own?

5. I had no idea you would get all that from what I said.

Only regarding your view of 'Called'.
I can go on in this but not yet either since you have not even answered the questions of the OP.
However I will state this: It must be inferred or presummed to assume Paul is equating such a complex process into one word rather than just the plain reading of the text - Those He did predestinate (to be conformed to the image of His Son) He called (as in Gospel call), Those whom He called... And since it is speaking of a particular set of people we can infer the non-believers in this because the context is refering only of believers.

6. You made more of Rom 8:28-30 than I imagine.

7. Paul is ready to leave Corinth because of what he considered a failed effort. However, in a vision the Lord says to him that he has His people in Corinth. Then we read in 1 Cor 1:26, "For consider your calling, brethren, that there were not many wise according to the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble."



I only ask that we begin at the OP's questions so we can better elaborate brother. I look forward to discussing this more, since I believe I still have mountains to learn regardless what I think I understand.[/QUOTE]

 

[TCGreek]

While it is true the perfect tense refers to an action with permanent results assuming being "born" refers chronologically to being born before believing Christ misunderstands the emphasis of the use of the perfect, particularly here where it is used with present force. And generally this is the use of the perfect tense. Not to establish a fixed time in the past but establish that in the past something occurred and now has continuous results. It simply focuses on the idea that it is not an ongoing or continuous event but a complete action in the past with current results. Hence, to attempt to claim when in the past it occurred in this verse is to misunderstand its use, particularly when the present tense "is" establishes its emphasis in "is born of God". Meaning of course, born of God in the past at some time and is now and will be. But at no point is it the perfect attempting to imply it preceded faith in this verse, that isn't the purpose of its use here.

On the other hand our faith, or believing, is often used in continuous tense without emphasis on a fixed past point and a one time action, or completed action.

"Whoever is one that is believing (no emphasis on the past since the author is referring to the here and now) that Jesus is the Christ, is born of God which happened sometime in the past".

You will be born again or born of God once. Regeneration occurs once. And while saving faith occurs once the expression of our saving faith is continuous. The idea here is not establishing a chronology between "whoever believes" and "born of God" but is establishing the reality that at some point he was born of God and is now born of God evidenced by their confession.

To provide a summation:

Whoever says they believe in Christ to you at this time was at some point in the past born of God, is now still born of God and will continue to be born of God.


Whoever has a chopped off hand and shows it to you now, at some point in the past had their hand chopped off, is now still with a chopped off hand and will continue to have a chopped off hand.

Does this mean their hand had to be chopped off before they stuck it in the turbine? No, but here the same Greek perfect would be used. Why? Because the emphasis on the "PRESENT RESULT" of a past action.

There are instances in the Greek when the emphasis is on the past action and its time but here is NOT one of them.

1. And what do you make of the use of the perfect tense in 1 Cor 15:4?

2. How can you divorce a prior, completed historical act from the perfect and only concentrate on its present realities?

 

[TCGreek]

Another example is:
Mark 5:34 Daughter, thy faith hath made thee whole.

It could be said like this :
Every person who is [currently CONTINUING in] Belief that Jesus is the Christ has been Fathered [into birth] of God.
This verse reveals both actions stemming from a past point, therefore it is about a state of being and NOT about chronology brother. It is not about those who are just now believeing (since believing is in the Present Active Participle) showing they were already born of God but that it establishes those who are currently believing to be definitively in the Family of God.

It can be paraphrase this way as well :
Those who are Fathered (born) of God are known because of their continuing belief that Jesus is the Christ.

What is the point of Mark 5:34?

 

[TCGreek]

I don't disagree with what you are saying and don't believe it runs contrary to what I am saying. My point is that the present force is generally the majority use. That does not mean to imply it negates the view to the past, the perfect tense necessitates this but its force of use is present most often, particularly here. Now my view that it is most often used this way is debatable, but I don't think we are debating how often what force is used when but are discussing this use here. And here the present force is being used for the emphasis.

So let me be clear. I understand the general definition of the perfect tense. An completed action in the past with present or ongoing results. But the uses of the perfect has varying forces. One emphasizing the past action and the other emphasizing the present results of that past action and both of these categories have their own subtle but significant nuances. I realize you know this but I say this to make clear to you that I do as well.

1. I'm in agreement with your understand, but neither is the fact of a past completed action negated, though the present results might be emphasized.

2. Therefore, it comes down to context and theology.

 

[TCGreek]

1. 1 John 4:7 reads, "Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God, and whoever loves has been born of God and knows God" (1 John 4:7, emphasis mine).

2. The same elements are here. Should we then argue that your ability to love precedes your newbirth/regeneration?

 

[Allan]

I don't disagree with what you are saying and don't believe it runs contrary to what I am saying. My point is that the present force is generally the majority use. That does not mean to imply it negates the view to the past, the perfect tense necessitates this but its force of use is present most often, particularly here. Now my view that it is most often used this way is debatable, but I don't think we are debating how often what force is used when but are discussing this use here. And here the present force is being used for the emphasis.

So let me be clear. I understand the general definition of the perfect tense. An completed action in the past with present or ongoing results. But the uses of the perfect has varying forces. One emphasizing the past action and the other emphasizing the present results of that past action and both of these categories have their own subtle but significant nuances. I realize you know this but I say this to make clear to you that I do as well.

Ok, I read you clearly now. :thumbs:

 

[Allan]

What is the point of Mark 5:34?

It is the same as 1 John 5:1

If we are to derive chronolgy from the Perfect tense, we must deduce that the woman was whole before she had faith

Thus my comment regarding 1 John 5:1:

It could be said like this :
Every person who is [currently CONTINUING in] Belief that Jesus is the Christ has been Fathered [into birth] of God.
This verse reveals both actions stemming from a past point, therefore it is about a state of being and NOT about chronology brother. It is not about those who are just now believeing (since believing is in the Present Active Participle) showing they were already born of God but that it establishes those who are currently believing to be definitively in the Family of God.

It can be paraphrase this way as well :
Those who are Fathered (born) of God are known because of their continuing belief that Jesus is the Christ.

If you will notice, it acknowledges the Past action done while concentrating on its present realities which Alex spoke of.

It is not referencing chronology but a state of present being due to the past acts of belief and being born.

 

[TCGreek]

It is the same as 1 John 5:1

If we are to derive chronolgy from the Perfect tense, we must deduce that the woman was whole before she had faith

Thus my comment regarding 1 John 5:1:

If you will notice, it acknowledges the Past action done while concentrating on its present realities.

Like Alex spoke of. It is not referencing chronology but a state of present being due to the past acts of belief and being born.

1. And I voiced my agreement for that use of the perfect, but context and theology must decide.

2. What do we do with 1 John 4:7 that is more like 5:1 than Mark 5:34?

 

[Allan]

3. If YOU understand regeneration that way, then yes.

So let me get this straight (cause I'm not sure I have)
You hold a person is first saved, then comes to believe?
or
That a person must believe in order to be saved?

5. I had no idea you would get all that from what I said.

Well unless you go back and answer the OP so I know better where you stand, I will be all over the map :laugh:

This is why I stated:

I only ask that we begin at the OP's questions so we can better elaborate brother. I look forward to discussing this more, since I believe I still have mountains to learn regardless what I think I understand.

 

[TCGreek]

So let me get this straight (cause I'm not sure I have)
You hold a person is first saved, then comes to believe?
or
That a person must believe in order to be saved?


Well unless you go back and answer the OP so I know better where you stand, I will be all over the map :laugh:

This is why I stated:

So, in your theology Regeneration/Newbirth=Salvation, correct?

 

[Allan]

1. And I voiced my agreement for that use of the perfect, but context and theology must decide.

2. What do we do with 1 John 4:7 that is more like 5:1 than Mark 5:34?

Nothing different. It is seen the same way.

1Jo 4:7 ¶ Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God.

It could be redered like this :
Beloved,... let Every person who is [currently CONTINUING in] love for one another has been Fathered [into birth] of God.
This verse still (like 1 John 5:1) reveals both actions stemming from a past point, therefore it is about a state of being and NOT about chronology, just as it is with 1 John 5:1. It is not about those who are just now loving one another (since love is in the Present Active Participle) showing they were already born of God but that it establishes those who are currently loving one another to be definitively in the Family of God - born.

It can be paraphrase this way as well :
Those who are Fathered (born) of God are known because of their continuing love for the brethren.

 

[Allan]

So, in your theology Regeneration/Newbirth=Salvation, correct?

umm... Belief/faith = Regeneration/Newbirth/salvation

Regeneration and the Newbirth are different terms regarding the same thing, salvation.

and you?

Does this mean you wont answer the OP as well?