Were Old Tesament Saints Born Again?

[Jedi Knight]

I have not read this thread, only skimmed a few responses and last few posts.

1) I agree with your Pastor friends, indwelling only occurs under the New Covenant. Why couldn't OT saints be indwelt? Because they had not be washed with the blood of Jesus.

2) What does the term "born anew" mean. I believe we are conceived and born spiritually dead, i.e. in a separated from God state, for we are conceived in iniquity. Therefore to be born anew means we are made alive, i.e. in a united with God state. When God puts us spiritually in Christ, where we undergo the circumcision of Christ and we arise in Christ a new creation, we are "born anew. This is our "regeneration" which means to be originated again. Thus "made alive" regenerated, and born anew all refer to exactly the same thing, our conversion from a spiritually dead, separated from God, by nature a child of wrath person to be saved by the blood person. God transfers us from the realm of darkness, metaphorically "in Adam" to the kingdom of His Son, i.e. "in Christ" and transforms us by the washing of regeneration and the renewing by the Holy Spirit. This refers to us being indwelt. So indwelling only occurs after a person is spiritually in Christ. Therefore we are in Christ and Christ is in us.

3) Thus no OT saint was born anew before Christ died and He became the propitiation or means of salvation for the whole world. There gained approval through faith, but why did they go to Abraham's bosom and not heaven. Because they were still separated by their unholiness from God.

4) After Christ died, then He took the "captives" held in Abraham's bosom to heaven. Now when a person dies they either go to Hades, or to be present with the Lord in heaven.
This is the only view that is consistent with all scripture.

He would agree with your assessment. That said I do not agree with that but did discuss it throughout this thread.

 

[Van]

Promise to the OT saints, Deuteronomy 30:6 is conditioned upon keeping the whole law, which none did. By the law no flesh is justified. Therefore this verse (and passage) does not support the premise of OT saints being born anew.

John 5:24 says any who hears “my word” i.e. the gospel of Christ, and believes Him who sent Me, i.e. believes in the promise of redemption through faith in Christ, shall have eternal life. The OT saints did not have the gospel of Christ because it was a mystery.
Therefore this verse, too, does not support the premise that the OT saints were born anew before Christ died to provide the propitiation.

In 1 John does indeed say who has the spirit, referring to being indwelt, has life, and he does not have the spirit has not life. This refers to salvation initiated under the New Covenant, and does not address the OT saints who were not yet washed with His blood.

Next is the claim that the OT saints had to be indwelt because unless they were, they would not seek after God. The bible, from one end to the other has lost people seeking after God through works. What separates the OT saints is they put their faith in God.
The verse that says “no one seeks God” does not say no one seeks God at any time. The fact is no one seeks God when they are sinning. If you look at Psalm 14, you see God looking to see if any were seeking God. David says that they have all turned aside. Therefore this refers to the wicked fools who say there is no God. Then a second question is asked, verse 4. Do all the workers of wickedness not know…and do not call upon the Lord? The answer is in verse 5. There they are in great dread, those that have sought God as a refuge. Thus, the premise that no one seeks God at any time is demonstrated false, the idea from Romans 3 is no one seeks God when they are sinning and everyone sins.

Yes, we agree, if a person does not have an indwelt Spirit, they do not belong to Christ. Thus the OT saints, who had obtained approval through faith in God, did not yet “belong” to Christ. He had not yet become their propitiation, and they had not yet been washed with His blood.

When a person is indwelt, they are indwelt “forever.” Therefore when David fears the loss of the Holy Spirit, as Saul suffered the loss, he is referring to the holy Spirit coming upon a person, anointing them for service, not the indwelling of the New Covenant.

Next we have the premise that the inspired Old Testament writers, who had the Holy Spirit “in them” were therefore indwelt.

1Pe 1:11 Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.

The Holy Spirit is in folks who are inspired but they were not indwelt, for they had not been washed by the blood of the New Covenant. Thus the influence, the control of the very words chosen, was “in” the inspired writers. There is no question that when the Holy Spirit came upon OT saints, equipping them for service such as writing the OT, the influence of the Holy Spirit was in them.

 

[Jedi Knight]

John 5:24 shall have eternal life.

Reread John 5:24 and tell me what it says about eternal life....your misquoting to fit your view.

 

[Wherever You Go]

I've read most of this thread.

One thing to point out is that time and chronology mean very little to God. He created them, after all, as part of the finite universe he put us in. The mere fact that the OT believers lived before the time of the cross, does not mean that it ultimately made a difference to God. Just as it is also true that Christ's death on the cross did not only pay for all the sins committed up to that time, but also to the sins that would be committed in the future. That's one thing that would have boggled the OT saints' minds-- probably many of them thought that when the Messiah came, he would make all things right, and there would be no more sinning any more-- that it would be the end of all things. Maybe they didn't think that, hard to say, but they did not have a very firm view of what would happen in the future, after Messiah came. They did not realize he would ascend back into Heaven and stay away for some 2000 years in between His first and second coming.

All that to say that time and chronology make little difference to God. He could have, if he had chosen, had them go to Heaven when they died. In fact there are Baptists who believe that Paradise and Heaven are exactly the same thing. I'm not saying I'm one of them. Unlike some of the people who have posted, I do not have hard and fast beliefs about things I don't fully understand, that could be looked at more than one way.

What I can say:

The OTS were looking forward to the Messiah who would save them

God did not send them to Hell (torment) when they died.

Job understood (whether by teaching, or by revelation) that he would see his redeemer after his death

David understood that it was a comfort that he could join his dead infant son after death

Elijah was seen to be raised bodily "up" toward Heaven, not "down" to the grave-- did he go to Heaven when others went to Paradise?

Interestingly, when Christ died and the temple veil was rent in two, there was a great earthquake, and many OTS who had died came out of their graves and appeared to many. A brief verse, but what implications found there? Why did they come back to their earthly bodies? Did they go in their earthly bodies up to Heaven after that in a sort of "Paradise Jail-Break Rapture?" Who did they appear to, and did they say anything? Will the OTS be raised from the dead in our Rapture yet in the future, or did they already have theirs?

Too bad, for sake of this discussion, that some of them didn't appear to the gospel writers and give a description of what paradise was like, and what concepts they had of Messiah when they were yet on earth, and whether they had the Holy Spirit at all times after their point of conversion!

Oh, and after all this heated debating, don't you think we should all take a deep breath and a group hug? :1_grouphug: :smilewinkgrin:

 

[beameup]

I've read most of this thread.



Job understood (whether by teaching, or by revelation) that he would see his redeemer after his death

Job mentions the Mazzaroth in ch. 38 (what we could call the Zodiac today, which is a corruption of the Mazzaroth).
It has been conjectured that the Mazzaroth presented the entire gospel in the night sky (as it appeared in ancient times).

Romans 1:20

 

[Wherever You Go]

Yes, I have heard that before and it may well be true. I wish it were more clearly documented in the scripture so we could know for sure the full endorsement of God on the ideas behind the constellations. Obviously the Southern Cross (and there are other crosses in the sky) point to the crucifixion of the Savior, but strangely, could someone previous to the Roman era have known what crucifixion was, or its significance?

 

[Van]

Reread John 5:24 and tell me what it says about eternal life....your misquoting to fit your view.

24 “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and (A)believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and (B)does not come into judgment, but has (C)passed out of death into life. (NASB)

John 5:24 says any who hears “my word” i.e. the gospel of Christ, and believes Him who sent Me, i.e. believes in the promise of redemption through faith in Christ, shall have eternal life. The OT saints did not have the gospel of Christ because it was a mystery.
Therefore this verse, too, does not support the premise that the OT saints were born anew before Christ died to provide the propitiation.

So yet again I am charged with misquoting, when my in quotation reference matches the NASB. Next I am charged with misquoting to fit my view. So a false charge.

Why not address my rebuttal to your views and leave the ad homenims out?

 

[Van]

Fundamentally Disagree

One thing to point out is that time and chronology mean very little to God. He created them, after all, as part of the finite universe he put us in. The mere fact that the OT believers lived before the time of the cross, does not mean that it ultimately made a difference to God. Just as it is also true that Christ's death on the cross did not only pay for all the sins committed up to that time, but also to the sins that would be committed in the future. That's one thing that would have boggled the OT saints' minds-- probably many of them thought that when the Messiah came, he would make all things right, and there would be no more sinning any more-- that it would be the end of all things. Maybe they didn't think that, hard to say, but they did not have a very firm view of what would happen in the future, after Messiah came. They did not realize he would ascend back into Heaven and stay away for some 2000 years in between His first and second coming.

All that to say that time and chronology make little difference to God. He could have, if he had chosen, had them go to Heaven when they died.

Scripture cannot be broken. If to make a view fit, you must nullify the sequence presented by God for our instruction, then your view is without merit.

In fact there are Baptists who believe that Paradise and Heaven are exactly the same thing. I'm not saying I'm one of them. Unlike some of the people who have posted, I do not have hard and fast beliefs about things I don't fully understand, that could be looked at more than one way.

Yes Paradise and the third heaven are the same place, the abode of God. However, Abraham's bosom is not Paradise.

What I can say:

The OTS were looking forward to the Messiah who would save them

True, and He did.

God did not send them to Hell (torment) when they died.

True, they were taken to Abraham's bosom.

Job understood (whether by teaching, or by revelation) that he would see his redeemer after his death.

Yes, but Job also expected some time to pass, and thus he had to wait in Abraham's bosom.

David understood that it was a comfort that he could join his dead infant son after death

23 “But now he has died; why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I will go to him, but he will not return to me.” At a minimum, this verse indicates David expected to "join" his son in death, i.e. David too will go to Sheol.

Elijah was seen to be raised bodily "up" toward Heaven, not "down" to the grave-- did he go to Heaven when others went to Paradise?

The bible speaks of three "heavens." The first heaven is where the birds fly and clouds float, i.e. the atmosphere. The second heaven is where the sun, moon and stars hang out. The third heaven, AKA Paradise, is the abode of God. The Elijah going up into the clouds does not indicate he entered the third heaven Remember Jesus said no one had ascended to heaven, John 3:13.

Interestingly, when Christ died and the temple veil was rent in two, there was a great earthquake, and many OTS who had died came out of their graves and appeared to many. A brief verse, but what implications found there? Why did they come back to their earthly bodies? Did they go in their earthly bodies up to Heaven after that in a sort of "Paradise Jail-Break Rapture?" Who did they appear to, and did they say anything? Will the OTS be raised from the dead in our Rapture yet in the future, or did they already have theirs?

Speculations abound concerning Matthew 27:51-53, but these like the other ones described in scripture were probably short term for the purpose to demonstrating God's power over death. And again, their spirits were brought from Abraham's bosom, not Paradise or heaven.

 

[Wherever You Go]

Thank you, Van.

Some people I know refer to Abraham's Bosom and Paradise as being the same thing, the pleasant compartment of Sheol. When Jesus said to the thief on the cross, "Today you will be with me in Paradise" they say that the thief was among the last ones to go to Paradise, he went there with Jesus in time "for the jail-breaking party" and they all went to Heaven after that.

Then there are those who believe that Jesus spent his three days of death in Hell, paying for the sins of mankind, before going to Paradise, opening the cage, and letting all the captives free.

People I know believe that when it says that Lazarus was in Abraham's bosom, that merely means that Abraham was the one who greeted him there (being the one responsible for the Jewish race) and that Lazarus was so glad to be there and so comforted by Abraham, that he was clinging to the patriarch as a small child would do, and that he was thus in Abraham's actual bosom, that is to say, embracing him. After all, the rich man "lifted up his eyes, being in torment" and it seems, based on the parallelism of the parable/account, that he and Lazarus died about the same time. Therefore, when he lifted up his eyes, finding himself in torment, and saw Lazarus, also newly arrived in Sheol, the beggar was embracing Abraham, whom he would have recognized from the teaching of the jews as being his benefactor, patron, patriarch, a great man he had looked up to in life. The inference need not be that Lazarus continued clinging to Abraham for a long time, it would have been as the meeting of two long-last friends, though they did not know each other in life. No doubt God had put Abraham in charge (or Abraham had taken it on himself) to greet each new descendent of his who entered the abode of the righteous dead.

To call the entire realm of the righteous dead "Abraham's Bosom" is something commonly done by many theologians, but why would it have to be so, when a simpler explanation would do? Did the Jewish scholars prior to the birth of Christ call it that? It says the angels carried him to Abraham's bosom, but that would be like saying "the ship carried the sailor all the way across the ocean and right into the arms of his sweetheart." And with angels, they could actually deposit a man right into the embrace of the patriarch, for his welcome to the place of rest.

 

[Jedi Knight]

24 “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and (A)believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and (B)does not come into judgment, but has (C)passed out of death into life. (NASB)



So yet again I am charged with misquoting, when my in quotation reference matches the NASB. Next I am charged with misquoting to fit my view. So a false charge.

You FIRST said "shall have" instead of "has". Your argument was Jesus didn't die yet so they couldn't be born again obviously some were receiving eternal life before that had yet "future" occurred......same with the OT saints.

 

[Van]

Lets do this by the numbers.

Thank you, Van.

Some people I know refer to Abraham's Bosom and Paradise as being the same thing, the pleasant compartment of Sheol. When Jesus said to the thief on the cross, "Today you will be with me in Paradise" they say that the thief was among the last ones to go to Paradise, he went there with Jesus in time "for the jail-breaking party" and they all went to Heaven after that.

Then there are those who believe that Jesus spent his three days of death in Hell, paying for the sins of mankind, before going to Paradise, opening the cage, and letting all the captives free.

People I know believe that when it says that Lazarus was in Abraham's bosom, that merely means that Abraham was the one who greeted him there (being the one responsible for the Jewish race) and that Lazarus was so glad to be there and so comforted by Abraham, that he was clinging to the patriarch as a small child would do, and that he was thus in Abraham's actual bosom, that is to say, embracing him. After all, the rich man "lifted up his eyes, being in torment" and it seems, based on the parallelism of the parable/account, that he and Lazarus died about the same time. Therefore, when he lifted up his eyes, finding himself in torment, and saw Lazarus, also newly arrived in Sheol, the beggar was embracing Abraham, whom he would have recognized from the teaching of the jews as being his benefactor, patron, patriarch, a great man he had looked up to in life. The inference need not be that Lazarus continued clinging to Abraham for a long time, it would have been as the meeting of two long-last friends, though they did not know each other in life. No doubt God had put Abraham in charge (or Abraham had taken it on himself) to greet each new descendent of his who entered the abode of the righteous dead.

To call the entire realm of the righteous dead "Abraham's Bosom" is something commonly done by many theologians, but why would it have to be so, when a simpler explanation would do? Did the Jewish scholars prior to the birth of Christ call it that? It says the angels carried him to Abraham's bosom, but that would be like saying "the ship carried the sailor all the way across the ocean and right into the arms of his sweetheart." And with angels, they could actually deposit a man right into the embrace of the patriarch, for his welcome to the place of rest.

1) Heaven (the third heaven) and Paradise are one and the same place. Paul uses these terms interchangeably.

2) To some degree the people in Hades were aware of the comfortable people in Abraham's bosom, so perhaps Abraham's bosom is located near Hades.

3) Jesus took the thief to Paradise, which is the third heaven, but this occurred after Christ's death, the shedding of His blood, on the cross, not before.

4) Abraham's bosom is not Paradise. Paradise and heaven are the same place. No one was taken from Paradise or heaven because no one had ascended there.

5) The duration of the stay in Abraham's bosom is fixed by the death date of the earliest captive, and so Abraham would have been in the place for more than 1500 years. No one ascended from that place to Paradise/Heaven until after Jesus died.

 

[Wherever You Go]

Your 5 points may all very well be correct, Van. I do have one more question. If Abraham was there 1500 years, what did they call it 2000 years before that? Abel's Bosom? Abel being, evidently, the first human being to arrive there.

 

[Van]

Your 5 points may all very well be correct, Van. I do have one more question. If Abraham was there 1500 years, what did they call it 2000 years before that? Abel's Bosom? Abel being, evidently, the first human being to arrive there.

I do not know what the place was called before Abraham was taken there. As far as I know, the Bible does not reveal this information. But it does reveal it is a location with many people, and it is separated from the place of torment and those in both places cannot travel to the other place because of a great chasm.

 

[Jedi Knight]

24 “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and (A)believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and (B)does not come into judgment, but has (C)passed out of death into life. (NASB)



So yet again I am charged with misquoting, when my in quotation reference matches the NASB.

Guess you cannot man up and say oops? You did not quote this scripture this way before. Perhaps go reread your other post for confirmation.

 

[Jedi Knight]

Exactly when did people start to recieve eternal life? OT or NT or after his death or resurrection?

 

[Van]

Pitchback

Guess you cannot man up and say oops? You did not quote this scripture this way before. Perhaps go reread your other post for confirmation.

Still finding fault with others, rather than admitting my quote, i.e. "my word" was a direct, accurate quote from John 5:24. See post 147 folks.

 

[Van]

Great Question

Exactly when did people start to receive eternal life? OT or NT or after his death or resurrection?

What does scripture say?

Matthew 19:29 says believers, those who have turned away from the treasures of earthly relationships, will inherit eternal life. But when do we inherit? When we were spiritually placed in Christ?

Mark 10:30 indicates we receive eternal life in the age to come. Ditto Luke 18:30. But the age to come is not clearly defined.

Matthew 25:46 indicates we receive eternal life upon physical death.

John 3:15 makes clear that whoever believes in Him will have eternal life, thus whoever God puts spiritually in Christ is certain to inherit eternal life.

John 3:36 says whoever believes in Him has eternal life. So this verse points to having it upon being placed in Christ.

John 5:24 also says whoever believes in Him has eternal life.

John 6:40 indicates our "eternal life" starts with our physical resurrection on the last day. This might mesh as the inauguration of the "age to come"?

John 17:2 indicates that whoever God has given to Christ, Christ will give eternal life.

Romans 6:22 indicates eternal life is the outcome of salvation.

1 Timothy 1:16 indicates a person must believe in Jesus for eternal life.

1 John 3:15 equates being indwelt with the Holy Spirit with having "eternal life" i.e. God, in us. Thus upon salvation where we are placed spiritually in Christ and indwelt with the Spirit of Christ, we have received eternal life using this meaning.

In summation, the Bible seems to indicate two meaning, 1) we have eternal life when God puts us spiritually in Christ, and 2) we are guaranteed eternal life when placed in Christ and indwelt, but eternal life begins when we are resurrected at Christ's second coming. In short, spiritual eternal live begins when God puts us spiritually in Christ, and physical eternal life begins when we are resurrected.

As for the OTS, they gained approval by faith and were taken to Abraham's bosom, or what became known as Abraham's bosom, and waited there until Christ washed them with His blood and took them to heaven. They now are asleep in Christ and will be raised to eternal physical life on the last day.

 

[Jedi Knight]

A person has eternal life the moment they believe.

 

[Jedi Knight]

John 3:36 "He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him."

 

[Jedi Knight]

, accurate quote from John 5:24. See post 147 folks.

see YOUR post 142. "Shall have eternal life" is not NASB friend. YOU CORRECTED YOURSELF in post 147 AFTER playing the victim card with NO apology.