Regeneration w/o Living Water?

[The Archangel]

And then we have the Apostle John who is actually speaking on behalf the Holy Spirit Himself....

"(But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)"

You keep saying this....

So, the text says "for the Holy Ghost was not yet given..." But what does that mean? Does it mean "regeneration" as you insist is must? Do we see the Holy Spirit working in a regenerative way (among other ways) in the Old Testament? Of course we do.

Why, then MUST this statement mean "regeneration?"

The Archangel

 

[steaver]

You keep saying this....

So, the text says "for the Holy Ghost was not yet given..." But what does that mean? Does it mean "regeneration" as you insist is must? Do we see the Holy Spirit working in a regenerative way (among other ways) in the Old Testament? Of course we do.

Why, then MUST this statement mean "regeneration?"

The Archangel

John told us it is the giving of the living water (see verse 38). Thus, the title of this thread, can one be regenerated and not have the living water?

 

[convicted1]

Brother Willis, good morning.

If you do not mind, let me add a few points of clarification regarding free will.

As Monergists we do not believe in a self autonomous free will the way Synergists do. Synergist free will teaches that mans will can operate independent of God. This is what allows the sinner to accept or reject the offer of salvation. This type of free will must reject original sin and that man is completely fallen in his sinful nature.

Monergists that the will of sinful man is held in bondage to his sinful nature. The presence of bondage means that mans will is not free. Regeneration, which proceeds justification, releases the will of man from bondage. Once the will of man has been released, he is able to freely believe in God. Man will has been liberated to do what God original created Adam to do.

So, Monergists believe in free will. We just do not believe in the self autonomous free will that Synergists believe in.

The will operates freely in the confines of its nature, but it's not a free will. Free means no restrictions...

 

[robustheologian]

The will operates freely in the confines of its nature, but it's not a free will. Free means no restrictions...

Yep...technically no one has a free will.

 

[convicted1]

The Apostle John, who penned the Gospel of John on behalf of the Holy Spirit concerning this being born from above, declared this Spirit regeneration spoken of was not yet given. And you declare that it was. Now you want me to believe you over John.

Was the Spirit/Living Water given before Jesus Christ was glorified? Yes or No? Will you listen to John on this matter, or continue the drum beat for regeneration coming before then?

In Luke 10, Jesus sent seventy in pairs. They were given power to heal, put their peace in whatever place they dwelt, to heal the sick, &c. And you believe they did this w/o the indwelling of the Spirit?

 

[Reformed]

The will operates freely in the confines of its nature, but it's not a free will. Free means no restrictions...

It depends how you define free will. As a Christian I am free to obey God, something I could not do prior to being freed from my bondage to sin.

 

[convicted1]

As you'll see I note below, perhaps I should offer up my interpretation of Free Will. See, I don't believe man can come to God whenever he so chooses

Then the will isn't free. :smilewinkgrin:

I believe there must be the drawing power of God, as you so quoted.

:thumbsup:

However, I believe God can draw someone and that person is then free to accept or reject God.

People freely reject God...no need to be given that ability...

That is my interpretation of Free Will.

Thank you...I adamantly disagree, but thanks again.

As a "however" to the however, however (see what I did there?), I also see people in the Bible seeking God and I see God honoring that.

People seek God only after being effaciously drawn.

That tells me there is a bit of mobility allowed to man in the flesh.

What mobility? People effaciously drawn come. Those not drawn, don't.

The Ethiopian is a good example. He obviously had some impetus to read the scriptures. We could argue where that impetus came from until we are blue in the face. But he admitted that he could not fully understand what they meant without guidance.

He'd been to Jerusalem to worship, correct? Yet he lacked something. God sent Philip to him. Work this out for yourself.

As to your statement that drawing by the Spirit precludes anything that sinner does positively towards God...consider Deuteronomy 30:11. We have Moses speaking to Israel and telling them that the commandment of God is not far off or hidden, that it is not out of reach. He even goes so far as to say that he was laying before them "life and good, and death and evil." If man was unable to do anything "positive" toward God, then why bother telling them that the commandment was not far off, and that it was "life or death?"

Act 17:30. Could the Jews in Moses' days perfectly keep the Law? Did God know if they could or couldn't? What was the end result when they broke the Law?

Thank you. I've heard it put both ways, so I wanted to confirm the terms you were dealing in. That said, it leads me to a next question:
Can someone be "born again" and not be saved?

One(regeneration) leads directly(simultaenously) to the other(conversion of the soul/salvation)...

 

[convicted1]

It depends how you define free will. As a Christian I am free to obey God, something I could not do prior to being freed from my bondage to sin.

I was referring to sinners, Brother. We are free in Christ...

 

[convicted1]

How can anyone debate another with such a mixed up understanding of salvation? So one can be born of God and still be unsaved? Amazing!!

And again, what did you to help your momma when she birthed you?

 

[steaver]

In Luke 10, Jesus sent seventy in pairs. They were given power to heal, put their peace in whatever place they dwelt, to heal the sick, &c. And you believe they did this w/o the indwelling of the Spirit?

That is for you to reconcile with John. I already know the answer....

The Apostle John, who penned the Gospel of John on behalf of the Holy Spirit concerning this being born from above, declared this Spirit regeneration spoken of was not yet given. And you declare that it was. Now you want me to believe you over John.

Was the Spirit/Living Water given before Jesus Christ was glorified? Yes or No? Will you listen to John on this matter, or continue the drum beat for regeneration coming before then?

And again, what did you to help your momma when she birthed you?

Absolutely nothing, just as I did absolutely nothing when the Holy Spirit birthed me.

Now your turn....Was the Spirit/Living Water given before Jesus Christ was glorified? Yes or No? (You may refer to John chapter 7 verses 37-39)

 

[steaver]

You keep saying this....

So, the text says "for the Holy Ghost was not yet given..." But what does that mean? Does it mean "regeneration" as you insist is must? Do we see the Holy Spirit working in a regenerative way (among other ways) in the Old Testament? Of course we do.

Why, then MUST this statement mean "regeneration?"

The Archangel

Brother I perceive you are not like some here who just choose to ignore a portion of scripture just to save a doctrinal position. John through the Holy Spirit is very blunt, leaving no wiggle room for any misinterpreting on this point.

The living water Jesus said He would give IS the Holy Ghost, John is crystal clear this was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.

Go back to chapter 4 where Jesus proclaimed this living water is eternal life.

So far this is irrefutable, I don't know how you could possibly disagree.

This may be where we part ways, but I then go back to chapter 3 and keeping with Jesus' message of being born of water and spirit, I conclude regeneration/born again is the receiving of the Holy Ghost living water/eternal life.

The NT is the beginning of the preaching of the kingdom of God coming to earth spiritually.

If you still believe regeneration happens without the giving of the Spirit living water/ eternal life, I would like you to explain how you come to this conclusion WHILE NOT ignoring John 7:37-39.

 

[convicted1]

John Calvin on John 7:39....

39. But this he spoke of the Spirit. The word water is sometimes applied to the Spirit on account of its purity, because it is his office to cleanse our pollutions; but in this and similar passages this term is employed in a different acceptation, which is, that we are destitute of all the sap and moisture of life, unless when the Spirit of God quickens us, and when he waters us, as it were, by secret vigor. Under one part he includes the whole; [196] for under the one word water he includes all the parts of life. Hence we infer also, that all who have not been regenerated by the Spirit of Christ ought to be reckoned dead, whatever may be the pretended life of which they boast.

For the Holy Spirit was not yet given. We know that the Spirit is eternal; but the Evangelist declares that, so long as Christ dwelt in the world in the mean form of a servant, that grace of the Spirit, which was poured out on men after the resurrection of Christ, had not been openly manifested. And, indeed, he speaks comparatively, in the same manner as when the New Testament is compared to the Old. God promises his Spirit to his elect and believers, as if he had never given him to the Fathers. At that very time, the disciples had undoubtedly received the first-fruits of the Spirit; for whence comes faith but from the Spirit? The Evangelist, therefore, does not absolutely affirm that the grace of the Spirit was not offered and given to believers before the death of Christ, but that it was not yet so bright and illustrious as it would afterwards become. For it is the highest ornament of the kingdom of Christ, that he governs his Church by his Spirit; but he entered into the lawful and -- what may be called -- the solemn possession of his kingdom, when he was exalted to the right hand of the Father; so that we need not wonder if he delayed till that time the full manifestation of the Spirit.

But one question still remains to be answered. Does he mean here the visible graces of the Spirit, or the regeneration which is the fruit of adoption? I:answer: The Spirit, who had been promised at the coming of Christ, appeared in those visible gifts, as in mirrors; but here the question relates strictly to the power of the Spirit, by which we are born again in Christ, and become new creatures. That we lie on earth poor, and famished, and almost destitute of spiritual blessings, while Christ now sits in glory at the right hand of the Father, and clothed with the highest majesty of government, ought to be imputed to our slothfulness

Adam Clarke....

Was not yet given - Δεδομενον, given is added by the Codex Vaticanus, (B.) the Syriac, all the Persic, later Syriac with an asterisk, three copies of the Slavonic, Vulgate, and all the Itala but three; and several of the primitive fathers. The word seems necessary to the completion of the sense.

Certain measures of the Holy Spirit had been vouchsafed from the beginning of the world to believers and unbelievers: but that abundant effusion of his graces spoken of by Joel, Joel 2:28, which peculiarly characterized the Gospel times, was not granted till after the ascension of Christ:

1. Because this Spirit in its plenitude was to come in consequence of his atonement; and therefore could not come till after his crucifixion.

2. It was to supply the place of Christ to his disciples and to all true believers; and therefore it was not necessary till after the removal of his bodily presence from among them. See our Lord's own words, John 14:16-18, John 14:26; John 15:26; John 16:7-15.

Albert Barnes....

Of the Spirit - Of the Holy Spirit, that should be sent down to attend their preaching and to convert sinners.
For the Holy Ghost was not yet given - Was not given in such full and large measures as should be after Jesus had ascended to heaven. Certain measures of the influences of the Spirit had been always given in the conversion and sanctification of the ancient saints and prophets; but that abundant and full effusion which the apostles were permitted afterward to behold had not yet been given. See Acts 2; Acts 10:44-45.

Jesus was not yet glorified - Jesus had not yet ascended to heaven - to the glory and honor that awaited him there. It was a part of the arrangement in the work of redemption that the influences of the Holy Spirit should descend chiefly after the death of Jesus, as that death was the procuring cause of this great blessing. Hence, he said John 16:7, "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." See also John 7:8-12; John 14:15-16, John 14:26. Compare Ephesians 4:8-11.

I am quite sure you won't accept their teachings, but that is what the text means...

 

[convicted1]

Brother I perceive you are not like some here who just choose to ignore a portion of scripture just to save a doctrinal position. John through the Holy Spirit is very blunt, leaving no wiggle room for any misinterpreting on this point.

The living water Jesus said He would give IS the Holy Ghost, John is crystal clear this was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.

Go back to chapter 4 where Jesus proclaimed this living water is eternal life.

So far this is irrefutable, I don't know how you could possibly disagree.

This may be where we part ways, but I then go back to chapter 3 and keeping with Jesus' message of being born of water and spirit, I conclude regeneration/born again is the receiving of the Holy Ghost living water/eternal life.

The NT is the beginning of the preaching of the kingdom of God coming to earth spiritually.

If you still believe regeneration happens without the giving of the Spirit living water/ eternal life, I would like you to explain how you come to this conclusion WHILE NOT ignoring John 7:37-39.

Were Moses, Aaron, David, Solomon, Samson, Jeremiah, Esther, Ruth, Abraham, Sarah, Joshua, Caleb, saved?

 

[steaver]

John Calvin on John 7:39....

Adam Clarke....

Albert Barnes....

I am quite sure you won't accept their teachings, but that is what the text means...

:laugh: ".....that is what the text means" ? Why? Because they say so? They do nothing more than give their flawed opinion without substance to back it up. Your right, I do not accept their teaching on this because it goes directly against the Apostle's crystal clear teaching that the Holy Spirit/Living Water was not yet given!! You may note however, that these men DO believe John was speaking on regeneration in this passage, yet they want to divide the Holy Spirit into how much volume of living water He is putting out and when. Ridiculous!

 

[steaver]

Were Moses, Aaron, David, Solomon, Samson, Jeremiah, Esther, Ruth, Abraham, Sarah, Joshua, Caleb, saved?

They were saved by grace through faith to Paradise at some level of Heaven. Afterwards they were taken into the presence of the Father, after the death, burial, resurrection and glorification of Jesus Christ. You have to understand, regeneration is a NT implementation. God calls it the New Covenant in the blood of Jesus Christ. You will find this all through the NT when you study it.

 

[steaver]

This passage is detrimental to the doctrine of Calvinism. As brother convicted demonstrated, even commentarians have to pull stuff out of thin air in order to attempt an understanding of the clear teaching that the living water was not yet given. Here is a fresh idea! How about we except what APOSTLE John said, even if that goes against Mr Calvin?