I have not heard this discussed, but the heroes of faith in the Old Testament are held up to us as examples, Hebrews 11. I have not heard of anyone who claims regeneration, or being "born again", is anything other than a New Testament phenomenon. If faith is impossible without prior regeneration, how did these "giants of faith", or anyone for that matter, become a believer prior to the New Testament period?
I would argue that, aside from Christ, we have no greater exhibition of faith in the entire scriptures than Abraham exhibited when he was prepared to offer Isaac. When was Abraham regenerated? Or is the Gospel too incredible, too powerless (in spite of what Paul says in Romans 1:16), to be believed absent a miraculous intervention in the heart by God?
Regeneration and the Old Testament Saints
Regeneration and the Old Testament Saints
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
A Berean
Homer,
I know you are waiting to hear from a Calvinist on this one. I would only mention that Calvinists I have talked to do believe that Old Testament saints were regenerated. There is not really a good case for this, other than the logical necessities of their system. The New Testament ties regeneration to the resurrection of Christ (1 Peter 1:3). It is the Holy Spirit's coming to dwell in us that regenerates us (John 3:5-6/Tit.3:5), and John said that the Spirit was not yet given prior to Christ's glorification/resurrection (John 7:39).
I know you are waiting to hear from a Calvinist on this one. I would only mention that Calvinists I have talked to do believe that Old Testament saints were regenerated. There is not really a good case for this, other than the logical necessities of their system. The New Testament ties regeneration to the resurrection of Christ (1 Peter 1:3). It is the Holy Spirit's coming to dwell in us that regenerates us (John 3:5-6/Tit.3:5), and John said that the Spirit was not yet given prior to Christ's glorification/resurrection (John 7:39).
Last edited by FAST WebCrawler [Crawler] on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
In Jesus,
Steve
Steve
Homer,
I have a meeting in a few minutes, and I do not have my Bible out, but I want to partially answer your post. Depending on the day, I will complete this later.
In reading your posts, I usually do not see anything that I find all that worrisome (from my limited opinion). I may disagree with some of your views, but I would not categorize them as heresy; I just do not happen to see them taught in Scripture. However, your last post does worry me quite a bit, because in your zeal to show that regeneration does not precede faith, you have advanced an argument that makes regeneration of no value at all and nothing more than an arbitrary prerequesite in the New Testament.
As I understand your argument, it goes something like this: you do not believe that people were regenerated in the Old Testament, and yet there were people like Abraham, Moses, David, Solomon, the prophets - these were godly men, righteous men, obedient men. Therefore, this proves that regeneration is not a precondition for faith.
But you see, if this were true, then regeneration is not a prerequesite for any aspect of the Christian life. Abraham, it says in Genesis "believed God and it was imputed to him for righteousness". Abraham, supposedly as an unregenerate, was saved. Abraham, an unregenerate, was God's friend. David, an unregenerate, is said to have been a man after God's own heart. Yet Paul said of the man in the flesh, the unregenerate man in Romans 8, that his mind is at enmity with the law of God and is not subject to it, nor can it be, and that those who are unregenerate cannot please God.
Moses was said to be one of the most humble men that ever lived at the end of Deuteronomy, and yet he accomplished this as an unregenerate man, whose heart was not touched by the Holy Spirit. He somehow manifested one of the most difficult fruits of the Spirit to cultivate, and did so to a degree that most of us regenerate folks cannot even approximate, and yet he did it on his own.
Solomon was one of the wisest people who ever lived, and not just worldly wise, but wise in the things of God. He accomplished this while unregenerate, yet Paul, an OT scholar, said that the natural, unregenerate man cannot receive spiritual things because they are spiritually discerned.
If these men were able to please God, befriend God, and be humble and wise, all to degrees that I think you and I would have to admit surpass David and Homer, then what is the need for regeneration? True, Jesus said that a man must be born again to see the Kingdom of God, but is this to address any real need in the man or is this just an arbitrary new requirement? It appears, according to you, that a person does not need the Spirit of Christ to live like Christ, if he can do so without regeneration. For most of this debate, we are all acknowledging that God enables us and must so, but we disagree as to the degree to which He must. But this argument, which has the strong scent of Pelagius, leads one to believe that this enablign to live the life of faith is superfluous. You might respond by saying "But I didn't say the Holy Spirit didn't help them", but in fact, that is what you are saying by implication, because unless He is in our hearts and strengthening our inner man, He is not helping us in our walk. The Bible does not countenance or describe some "alternative" form of help where He runs along side us but our hearts are unchanged. The Spirit may come upon someone to speak or perform miracles, but that is not the same ministry as bearing the fruits of the Spirit that these godly OT saints clearly showed. And His empowering us to live a life of faith is never from the outside in, but from the inside out.
Unless you can provide evidence that human nature somehow changed in the intertestamental period, and people became a weaker stock that need regeneration in order to live a resurrection life, then according to Paul people constituitonally are unable without the Spirit in their hearts to do the things these men in the OT did. If they could, we would not need the Holy Spirit to do what men in the NT claimed they could not do without Him. If Jesus said "Apart from me you can do nothing", I do not think Abraham, who is the father of our faith, our kind of faith, would be any exception and in fact he could not be our model to follow since he did not have our Spirit, if your argument were true.
I have a meeting in a few minutes, and I do not have my Bible out, but I want to partially answer your post. Depending on the day, I will complete this later.
In reading your posts, I usually do not see anything that I find all that worrisome (from my limited opinion). I may disagree with some of your views, but I would not categorize them as heresy; I just do not happen to see them taught in Scripture. However, your last post does worry me quite a bit, because in your zeal to show that regeneration does not precede faith, you have advanced an argument that makes regeneration of no value at all and nothing more than an arbitrary prerequesite in the New Testament.
As I understand your argument, it goes something like this: you do not believe that people were regenerated in the Old Testament, and yet there were people like Abraham, Moses, David, Solomon, the prophets - these were godly men, righteous men, obedient men. Therefore, this proves that regeneration is not a precondition for faith.
But you see, if this were true, then regeneration is not a prerequesite for any aspect of the Christian life. Abraham, it says in Genesis "believed God and it was imputed to him for righteousness". Abraham, supposedly as an unregenerate, was saved. Abraham, an unregenerate, was God's friend. David, an unregenerate, is said to have been a man after God's own heart. Yet Paul said of the man in the flesh, the unregenerate man in Romans 8, that his mind is at enmity with the law of God and is not subject to it, nor can it be, and that those who are unregenerate cannot please God.
Moses was said to be one of the most humble men that ever lived at the end of Deuteronomy, and yet he accomplished this as an unregenerate man, whose heart was not touched by the Holy Spirit. He somehow manifested one of the most difficult fruits of the Spirit to cultivate, and did so to a degree that most of us regenerate folks cannot even approximate, and yet he did it on his own.
Solomon was one of the wisest people who ever lived, and not just worldly wise, but wise in the things of God. He accomplished this while unregenerate, yet Paul, an OT scholar, said that the natural, unregenerate man cannot receive spiritual things because they are spiritually discerned.
If these men were able to please God, befriend God, and be humble and wise, all to degrees that I think you and I would have to admit surpass David and Homer, then what is the need for regeneration? True, Jesus said that a man must be born again to see the Kingdom of God, but is this to address any real need in the man or is this just an arbitrary new requirement? It appears, according to you, that a person does not need the Spirit of Christ to live like Christ, if he can do so without regeneration. For most of this debate, we are all acknowledging that God enables us and must so, but we disagree as to the degree to which He must. But this argument, which has the strong scent of Pelagius, leads one to believe that this enablign to live the life of faith is superfluous. You might respond by saying "But I didn't say the Holy Spirit didn't help them", but in fact, that is what you are saying by implication, because unless He is in our hearts and strengthening our inner man, He is not helping us in our walk. The Bible does not countenance or describe some "alternative" form of help where He runs along side us but our hearts are unchanged. The Spirit may come upon someone to speak or perform miracles, but that is not the same ministry as bearing the fruits of the Spirit that these godly OT saints clearly showed. And His empowering us to live a life of faith is never from the outside in, but from the inside out.
Unless you can provide evidence that human nature somehow changed in the intertestamental period, and people became a weaker stock that need regeneration in order to live a resurrection life, then according to Paul people constituitonally are unable without the Spirit in their hearts to do the things these men in the OT did. If they could, we would not need the Holy Spirit to do what men in the NT claimed they could not do without Him. If Jesus said "Apart from me you can do nothing", I do not think Abraham, who is the father of our faith, our kind of faith, would be any exception and in fact he could not be our model to follow since he did not have our Spirit, if your argument were true.
Last edited by leeweiland on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
In Christ,
David
David
David,
Homer may yet reply to you, but I disagree that, if a man could be saved in the Old Testament without regeneration, that regeneration plays no role in salvation for us. In my reading of scripture, Jesus added new dimensions to salvation, which were not part of the experience of the patriarchs.
They were justified, just as we are. However, we are additionally regenerated and filled with the Holy Spirit. There is no evidence that the saints in the Old Testament were regenerated, or that any but a very few (e.g., Moses and 70 others of the Exodus generation) were filled with the Spirit. Nor were they, as we are, given authority over the demonic powers, nor seated in Christ in the heavenly places.
Their justification guaranteed their ultimate welcome into the presence of God, but it did not come with all of the benefits associated with New Testament salvation. If it did, then what did Jesus change by coming?
You say that this doctrine attributes great virtues to men without their being "touched by the Spirit of God." This is another Calvinistic mischaracterization of historic Chrstianity. Only Pelagians would doubt that the Holy Spirit was not involved in influencing the Old Testament saints. But regeneration is another matter. We are regenerated when we are risen with Christ to a new life (Col.2:12-13/Rom.6:4/ 1 Pet.1:3). Please do not ignore these passages in answering.
Calvinists make much of Romans 8:7-8, as did you in your last post. They certainly make more of it than does Paul, and their view proves too much.
Paul says that those who are "carnally minded" are enemies of God and cannot be subject to Him (vv.6-7). True. But only a Calvinist would argue that the unregenerate is at all times carnally minded. There is no reason to make Paul deny that there are non-Christians who sometimes have spiritual thoughts and aspirations. I believe that only a determined idealogue could think that a man could never be found among the Hindus or the Muslims, or the Jews, who had a genuine desire to know the Deity, and a desire for spiritual things. Of course, having a spiritual orientation, on this view, does not equal being saved.
I am not such an idealogue. I prefer to let the scriptures speak about the state of the Old Testament saints, and the uniqueness of the great salvation introduced by Christ.
Paul does say that those who are unregenerate do set their minds on carnal things, just as those who are regenerated set their minds on spiritual things (v.5). This is only generally, not absolutely, true. Regenerated people do not only and always think about spiritual things (we have our sinful moments); nor can we insist, from Paul's comparison, that unregenerate people only and always think about carnal things. One branch of Paul's comparison cannot be more absolute than the other.
Because unregenerated people do not have the in-dwelling Holy Spirit, they cannot really maintain a consistent spiritual mentality, and their default mentality, into which they must revert, renders them incapable of pleasing God in their lives, as Paul points out (v.8).
This, at least, is my understanding of the case.
Homer may yet reply to you, but I disagree that, if a man could be saved in the Old Testament without regeneration, that regeneration plays no role in salvation for us. In my reading of scripture, Jesus added new dimensions to salvation, which were not part of the experience of the patriarchs.
They were justified, just as we are. However, we are additionally regenerated and filled with the Holy Spirit. There is no evidence that the saints in the Old Testament were regenerated, or that any but a very few (e.g., Moses and 70 others of the Exodus generation) were filled with the Spirit. Nor were they, as we are, given authority over the demonic powers, nor seated in Christ in the heavenly places.
Their justification guaranteed their ultimate welcome into the presence of God, but it did not come with all of the benefits associated with New Testament salvation. If it did, then what did Jesus change by coming?
You say that this doctrine attributes great virtues to men without their being "touched by the Spirit of God." This is another Calvinistic mischaracterization of historic Chrstianity. Only Pelagians would doubt that the Holy Spirit was not involved in influencing the Old Testament saints. But regeneration is another matter. We are regenerated when we are risen with Christ to a new life (Col.2:12-13/Rom.6:4/ 1 Pet.1:3). Please do not ignore these passages in answering.
Calvinists make much of Romans 8:7-8, as did you in your last post. They certainly make more of it than does Paul, and their view proves too much.
Paul says that those who are "carnally minded" are enemies of God and cannot be subject to Him (vv.6-7). True. But only a Calvinist would argue that the unregenerate is at all times carnally minded. There is no reason to make Paul deny that there are non-Christians who sometimes have spiritual thoughts and aspirations. I believe that only a determined idealogue could think that a man could never be found among the Hindus or the Muslims, or the Jews, who had a genuine desire to know the Deity, and a desire for spiritual things. Of course, having a spiritual orientation, on this view, does not equal being saved.
I am not such an idealogue. I prefer to let the scriptures speak about the state of the Old Testament saints, and the uniqueness of the great salvation introduced by Christ.
Paul does say that those who are unregenerate do set their minds on carnal things, just as those who are regenerated set their minds on spiritual things (v.5). This is only generally, not absolutely, true. Regenerated people do not only and always think about spiritual things (we have our sinful moments); nor can we insist, from Paul's comparison, that unregenerate people only and always think about carnal things. One branch of Paul's comparison cannot be more absolute than the other.
Because unregenerated people do not have the in-dwelling Holy Spirit, they cannot really maintain a consistent spiritual mentality, and their default mentality, into which they must revert, renders them incapable of pleasing God in their lives, as Paul points out (v.8).
This, at least, is my understanding of the case.
Last edited by FAST WebCrawler [Crawler] on Wed May 09, 2007 2:02 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Reason:
Reason:
In Jesus,
Steve
Steve
Steve,
Could you provide me with a Scripture that shows an unregenerate man being spiritually minded?
I guess you are correct; at this forum, only Calvinists would argue that an unregenerate person cannot be spiritual without the Spirit first changing them. I feel uneasy about that, to be honest. If this sentiment were true, then would this spirituality be from us? From God? How did we muster this "spiritualness", seeing as how we are cut off from God, the giver of spiritual life?
You had said that only a determined idealogue could say that only regenerated Christians have spiritual thoughts. But you see, the problem is, that your statement is also feeding off of its own idealogical fuel. The issue I have with your statement is that I do not see in the Scriptures where practitioners of idolatry or false religion who seek a righteousness of their own apart from Christ are ever cast in a spiritual, semi-spiritual, or somewhat spiritual light. Let me define what I mean by spiritual. I do not mean someone just interested in knowing more about whether there is a God, the mysteries of what lies beyond the grave, or where we came from, since there is a manner in which God has already revealed the answers to those questions in nature, Paul said, but that people suppress these truths. Granted, creation is no where near as clear as Scripture, but the content of that revelation is the same message as in the Scripture. And it is for this reason, this self-deception as Paul describes it, that the wrath of God is revealed from heaven "against all ungodliness and unrighteousness". All of these ungodly acts Paul goes on to describe in Romans 1, they all stem from the judgment of God on people who, at least in part, know our God but suppress His truth and turn from Him to other gods, and as a result are given over to these pursuits. In their pursuit of other gods, whatever their form, they may want to attain what we have attained through Christ (forgiveness, salvation, provision, a sense of purpose) but the mere desiring of these birthrights of the Christian while rejecting true life in the Son is not spiritual in the least.
In your letter to me, you accused me of being arrogant when I stated these things. How can you know their heart, you asked? But you see you also are judging their heart by saying they are spiritual minded in doing these things, not to mention you would be judging mine in that instance. I think what you mean to say in this line of reasoning is that it is off limits to say that people of false religions are categorically unspiritual in their pursuits; we just cannot know for sure. But I think the Bible is abundantly clear that we can know, and in so doing we can avoid being ignorant of the true nature of the world around us. When people state that there is no one true religion since there are so many contradictory and competitive practices, each seeming so similar, we have an answer from the Scriptures that it is not any confusion on God's part in communicating to us, but rather our distaste for Him accounts for so many repeated and failed attempts to replace Him.
Asking questions about spiritual matters or being overtly religious in ones lifestyle is not enough to gauge someone's spirituality since Paul described people who were ever learning about religion but never really coming to any true knowledge, and those that had a form of godliness (as in false religions) but denying its power.
There is no arrogance on my part from making such assertions, since I do not claim any apostolic insight into this world. Paul, however, seems to give us a peek behind the scenes of why everywhere we have so many religions. It is not that God is confusing us with mixed messages, or that people, though not truly innocent, nonetheless innocently get their wires crossed and maybe become Hindus or Deists. Rather, everywhere His message is proclaimed, whether in the clarion call of the gospel preached or the glory of the Godhead revealed in what He has made, the message is rejected by men of all kinds in favor of some other visage of the Almighty.
When Paul says that those in the flesh cannot be subject to God's law, I don't understand how that person can, despite this impediment, be spiritual while unable to submit to the Spirit's commands.
You are right, we are not spiritually minded as believers 100% of the time but there is a difference between us and the unsaved I think. We have a war going on between the Spirit of Christ and our bodily members (Ro 7)and our old ways. I do not think that unbelievers are cast in that light; there is a unity of varying degrees, so to speak, between their heart and their actions.
The verses you mentioned link the regeneration of the person to the death and resurrection of Jesus. Amen, brother. Faith saves us (through Christ) as well because of His death and resurrection. Is this not what Abraham believed? The fact Jesus had not yet died would not have prevented God from "crediting it to him for righteousness", since Abraham's faith was in the yet future Messiah. I do not think Abraham understood with the clarity we do with the NT, but I think Hebrews 11 makes is clear that Abraham had his eyes on a spiritual promised land. I believe he understood the typology of what God was saying better than Genesis may state, based on what Hebrews says.
I thought your last paragraph was interesting, and I would like to consider this more. I am going to think about this.
Jesus seemed to think that regeneration was a fairly plain teaching in the OT, since he seemed disappointed in Nicodemus as a teacher of Israel for not understanding what He meant when He said "a man must be born again".
Could you provide me with a Scripture that shows an unregenerate man being spiritually minded?
I guess you are correct; at this forum, only Calvinists would argue that an unregenerate person cannot be spiritual without the Spirit first changing them. I feel uneasy about that, to be honest. If this sentiment were true, then would this spirituality be from us? From God? How did we muster this "spiritualness", seeing as how we are cut off from God, the giver of spiritual life?
You had said that only a determined idealogue could say that only regenerated Christians have spiritual thoughts. But you see, the problem is, that your statement is also feeding off of its own idealogical fuel. The issue I have with your statement is that I do not see in the Scriptures where practitioners of idolatry or false religion who seek a righteousness of their own apart from Christ are ever cast in a spiritual, semi-spiritual, or somewhat spiritual light. Let me define what I mean by spiritual. I do not mean someone just interested in knowing more about whether there is a God, the mysteries of what lies beyond the grave, or where we came from, since there is a manner in which God has already revealed the answers to those questions in nature, Paul said, but that people suppress these truths. Granted, creation is no where near as clear as Scripture, but the content of that revelation is the same message as in the Scripture. And it is for this reason, this self-deception as Paul describes it, that the wrath of God is revealed from heaven "against all ungodliness and unrighteousness". All of these ungodly acts Paul goes on to describe in Romans 1, they all stem from the judgment of God on people who, at least in part, know our God but suppress His truth and turn from Him to other gods, and as a result are given over to these pursuits. In their pursuit of other gods, whatever their form, they may want to attain what we have attained through Christ (forgiveness, salvation, provision, a sense of purpose) but the mere desiring of these birthrights of the Christian while rejecting true life in the Son is not spiritual in the least.
In your letter to me, you accused me of being arrogant when I stated these things. How can you know their heart, you asked? But you see you also are judging their heart by saying they are spiritual minded in doing these things, not to mention you would be judging mine in that instance. I think what you mean to say in this line of reasoning is that it is off limits to say that people of false religions are categorically unspiritual in their pursuits; we just cannot know for sure. But I think the Bible is abundantly clear that we can know, and in so doing we can avoid being ignorant of the true nature of the world around us. When people state that there is no one true religion since there are so many contradictory and competitive practices, each seeming so similar, we have an answer from the Scriptures that it is not any confusion on God's part in communicating to us, but rather our distaste for Him accounts for so many repeated and failed attempts to replace Him.
Asking questions about spiritual matters or being overtly religious in ones lifestyle is not enough to gauge someone's spirituality since Paul described people who were ever learning about religion but never really coming to any true knowledge, and those that had a form of godliness (as in false religions) but denying its power.
There is no arrogance on my part from making such assertions, since I do not claim any apostolic insight into this world. Paul, however, seems to give us a peek behind the scenes of why everywhere we have so many religions. It is not that God is confusing us with mixed messages, or that people, though not truly innocent, nonetheless innocently get their wires crossed and maybe become Hindus or Deists. Rather, everywhere His message is proclaimed, whether in the clarion call of the gospel preached or the glory of the Godhead revealed in what He has made, the message is rejected by men of all kinds in favor of some other visage of the Almighty.
When Paul says that those in the flesh cannot be subject to God's law, I don't understand how that person can, despite this impediment, be spiritual while unable to submit to the Spirit's commands.
You are right, we are not spiritually minded as believers 100% of the time but there is a difference between us and the unsaved I think. We have a war going on between the Spirit of Christ and our bodily members (Ro 7)and our old ways. I do not think that unbelievers are cast in that light; there is a unity of varying degrees, so to speak, between their heart and their actions.
The verses you mentioned link the regeneration of the person to the death and resurrection of Jesus. Amen, brother. Faith saves us (through Christ) as well because of His death and resurrection. Is this not what Abraham believed? The fact Jesus had not yet died would not have prevented God from "crediting it to him for righteousness", since Abraham's faith was in the yet future Messiah. I do not think Abraham understood with the clarity we do with the NT, but I think Hebrews 11 makes is clear that Abraham had his eyes on a spiritual promised land. I believe he understood the typology of what God was saying better than Genesis may state, based on what Hebrews says.
I thought your last paragraph was interesting, and I would like to consider this more. I am going to think about this.
Jesus seemed to think that regeneration was a fairly plain teaching in the OT, since he seemed disappointed in Nicodemus as a teacher of Israel for not understanding what He meant when He said "a man must be born again".
Last edited by leeweiland on Wed May 09, 2007 3:01 pm, edited 3 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
In Christ,
David
David
Hi Brother David,
You wrote:
"Could you provide me with a Scripture that shows an unregenerate man being spiritually minded?"
How about merely examples? Moses, Elijah, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Cornelius (pre-conversion). I believe that what I mentioned in my previous post would point to these men not having been regenerated. Nothing but an a priori Calvinistic commitment would introduce the idea that these men were regenerated as we are.
You wrote:
"If this sentiment were true, then would this spirituality be from us? From God? How did we muster this spiritualness, seeing as how we are cut off from God without hope?"
Nothing is entirely from us. "Every good and perfect gift is from above, and comes down from the Father of lights." But there are indeed things required of us. Even the breath that keeps us alive and the food we eat are God's gifts to us, without which we could do nothing at all. He must receive all the glory for all things, even the things we are required to do.
The idea that an unregenerate man is not capable of possessing any spiritual passion seems to ride completely upon Calvinism's wresting of Romans 3:10-18 entirely out of its context, and forcing it to say what Paul is not intending to affirm. This view is said to be the only way to preserve all the glory for God alone.
However, there is another side to this matter. Humanity was created "in the image of God." This image included (I am persuaded) a rational/spiritual dimension to human nature. It is clear that James does not believe that man, in the fall, lost every part of this divine likeness (James 3:9). Why should we pretend that there remains nothing residual in man, after the fall, that reflects this divine spark? Is it because we fear that we shall become liberals and humanists? Only the characteristic inability of the Calvinist to engage in nuance thinking would demand such an absurd pendulum-swing.
When a man, though fallen, exhibits spiritual desire, the Calvinist must say, "This is either fake, or it is the result of regeneration, else God's glory is compromised." The non-Calvinist (following the original, historic opinion of the church) can say, "It is a testimony to the greatness of God, and to His glory, that His image in man, though marred by the fall, cannot be totally obliterated." The darkness, though great, can not entirely overcome the light, that "lightens every man that comes into the world" (John 1:9). What a glorious God this must be, who not only can withstand every effort of the enemy to eradicate Him from the world, but also whose enemy cannot even expunge His reflected image in those whom He sovereignly chose to create in His likeness!
By the way, the statement about our prior condition being "without hope" (Eph.2:12) was addressing the state of lost Gentiles, "aliens from the commonwealth of Israel"--not the generality of unregenerated people (which would include unsaved Jews, who were not aliens from the commonwealth of Israel). Paul is saying that the religions followed by the Gentiles do not offer any real hope to those who follow them. The Ephesians followed "hopeless" religions before they came to Christ--religions that offered them no hope in this world or the next. This passage is not speaking of absolute hopelessness of all unregenerated people, since many of them did get saved, proving that they were not truly "hopeless cases."
You wrote:
"When Paul says that those in the flesh cannot be subject to God's law, I don't understand how that person can, despite this impediment, can be spiritual while unable to submit to the Spirit's commands."
The man is not "spiritual" (that is, he is not a "spiritual man"). We are talking (with Paul) about "setting one's mind on the things of the Spirit." We agree that unregenerate people can not do this with consistency...it is too much at odds with the power of sin, which they cannot resist. However, Paul does not tell us that such a person is incapable of wishing for deliverance to a more spiritual state. Such a wish would be, at least momentarily, "setting his mind on" spiritual things.
You wrote:
"You are right, we are not spiritually minded as believers 100% of the time but there is a difference between us and the unsaved I think. We have a war going on between the Spirit of Christ and our bodily members (Ro 7)and our old ways. I do not think that unbelievers are cast in that light; there is a unity of varying degrees, so to speak, between their heart and their actions."
You are, I believe, mostly correct. Your error, in my estimation, is in your not allowing the scriptures to reflect the nuances that inhere in reality (the truth). In one sense, there are only two classes of men: the believers and the unbelievers. However, these groups are not themselve homogenous categories. Some unbelievers believe more than do others. Likewise, some believers believe less than do others. Unbelievers are never described, in scripture, as being all of one spiritual type, or of equally evil dispositions. All are lost, but not all are necessarily equally corrupt. The Calvinist might say, "True, but only because God restrains the evil in some more than in others!" But this is not a scriptural declaration, but an ideological one.
The scriptures do make extremely unflattering statements about certain sinners. Men are a bad lot, generally, and the scriptures do not mince words about this. However, the passages cited about total depravity, in every case I can recall, describe a certain group of sinners in a certain setting--e.g. those just before the flood, the generality of the Jews of Isaiah's, or Jeremiah's, or Jesus' days, etc. I think you have said it is invalid to apply such passages only to those parties that were being thus described, but isn't this simply what exegesis requires? To extend the meaning beyond that justified in the passage would be eisegesis, would it not?
Apart from the passage we are discussing in Romans 8, do you know of any that speak of total depravity in which the passage has the class of "all unregenerated people" in mind? I would be willing to look at the evidence, if it is presented.
You wrote:
"The verses you mentioned link the regeneration of the person to the death and resurrection of Jesus. Amen, brother. Faith saves us (through Christ) as well because of His death and resurrection. Is this not what Abraham believed?"
I am not sure exactly what the content of Abraham's belief entailed. We know that he believed more than what Genesis tells us, since this is affirmed in Hebrews 11:16, 19, but the only specific reference to the belief that justified him is that he "believed in the Lord" (Gen.15:6).
You wrote:
"The fact Jesus had not yet died would not have prevented God from "crediting it to him for righteousness", since Abraham's faith was in the yet future Messiah. I do not think Abraham understood with the clarity we do with the NT, but I think Hebrews 11 makes is clear that Abraham had his eyes on a spiritual promised land. I believe he understood the typology of what God was saying better than Genesis may state, based on what Hebrews says."
If Abraham believed such things by revelation, it is possible that others may also have, in Old Testament times. But this would be speculation merely, since we are not told. In the Old Testament, we are told that he was justified, and Paul affirms this in the New Testament. However, neither testament tells us that he, or anyone prior to Christ, was regenerated. If Paul felt that this was the case, he must have known how silent the scriptures were on the point, and he would have done well to make some statement about it, to allay the inevitable confusion caused by the silence of the Old Testament. Had he done so, we would not be debating this point right now.
You wrote:
"Jesus seemed to think that regeneration was a fairly plain teaching in the OT, since he seemed disappointed in Nicodemus as a teacher of Israel for not understanding what He meant when He said "a man must be born again."
Yes, Jesus thought the Old Testament plainly taught regeneration--and I agree! It is surprising that Nicodemus found the concept so foreign. Most commentators (including Calvinists, like F.F.Bruce) think that the Old Testament teachings to which Jesus alluded can be found in Ezekiel 36:25-27 and Jeremiah 31:31-34. I think so also. However, these passages associate this phenomenon with the coming of the "New Covenant." These passages clearly promise certain blessings that did not accrue to the first covenant, including the blessing of a changed heart and the indwelling Spirit--which we refer to as regeneration.
You wrote:
"Could you provide me with a Scripture that shows an unregenerate man being spiritually minded?"
How about merely examples? Moses, Elijah, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Cornelius (pre-conversion). I believe that what I mentioned in my previous post would point to these men not having been regenerated. Nothing but an a priori Calvinistic commitment would introduce the idea that these men were regenerated as we are.
You wrote:
"If this sentiment were true, then would this spirituality be from us? From God? How did we muster this spiritualness, seeing as how we are cut off from God without hope?"
Nothing is entirely from us. "Every good and perfect gift is from above, and comes down from the Father of lights." But there are indeed things required of us. Even the breath that keeps us alive and the food we eat are God's gifts to us, without which we could do nothing at all. He must receive all the glory for all things, even the things we are required to do.
The idea that an unregenerate man is not capable of possessing any spiritual passion seems to ride completely upon Calvinism's wresting of Romans 3:10-18 entirely out of its context, and forcing it to say what Paul is not intending to affirm. This view is said to be the only way to preserve all the glory for God alone.
However, there is another side to this matter. Humanity was created "in the image of God." This image included (I am persuaded) a rational/spiritual dimension to human nature. It is clear that James does not believe that man, in the fall, lost every part of this divine likeness (James 3:9). Why should we pretend that there remains nothing residual in man, after the fall, that reflects this divine spark? Is it because we fear that we shall become liberals and humanists? Only the characteristic inability of the Calvinist to engage in nuance thinking would demand such an absurd pendulum-swing.
When a man, though fallen, exhibits spiritual desire, the Calvinist must say, "This is either fake, or it is the result of regeneration, else God's glory is compromised." The non-Calvinist (following the original, historic opinion of the church) can say, "It is a testimony to the greatness of God, and to His glory, that His image in man, though marred by the fall, cannot be totally obliterated." The darkness, though great, can not entirely overcome the light, that "lightens every man that comes into the world" (John 1:9). What a glorious God this must be, who not only can withstand every effort of the enemy to eradicate Him from the world, but also whose enemy cannot even expunge His reflected image in those whom He sovereignly chose to create in His likeness!
By the way, the statement about our prior condition being "without hope" (Eph.2:12) was addressing the state of lost Gentiles, "aliens from the commonwealth of Israel"--not the generality of unregenerated people (which would include unsaved Jews, who were not aliens from the commonwealth of Israel). Paul is saying that the religions followed by the Gentiles do not offer any real hope to those who follow them. The Ephesians followed "hopeless" religions before they came to Christ--religions that offered them no hope in this world or the next. This passage is not speaking of absolute hopelessness of all unregenerated people, since many of them did get saved, proving that they were not truly "hopeless cases."
You wrote:
"When Paul says that those in the flesh cannot be subject to God's law, I don't understand how that person can, despite this impediment, can be spiritual while unable to submit to the Spirit's commands."
The man is not "spiritual" (that is, he is not a "spiritual man"). We are talking (with Paul) about "setting one's mind on the things of the Spirit." We agree that unregenerate people can not do this with consistency...it is too much at odds with the power of sin, which they cannot resist. However, Paul does not tell us that such a person is incapable of wishing for deliverance to a more spiritual state. Such a wish would be, at least momentarily, "setting his mind on" spiritual things.
You wrote:
"You are right, we are not spiritually minded as believers 100% of the time but there is a difference between us and the unsaved I think. We have a war going on between the Spirit of Christ and our bodily members (Ro 7)and our old ways. I do not think that unbelievers are cast in that light; there is a unity of varying degrees, so to speak, between their heart and their actions."
You are, I believe, mostly correct. Your error, in my estimation, is in your not allowing the scriptures to reflect the nuances that inhere in reality (the truth). In one sense, there are only two classes of men: the believers and the unbelievers. However, these groups are not themselve homogenous categories. Some unbelievers believe more than do others. Likewise, some believers believe less than do others. Unbelievers are never described, in scripture, as being all of one spiritual type, or of equally evil dispositions. All are lost, but not all are necessarily equally corrupt. The Calvinist might say, "True, but only because God restrains the evil in some more than in others!" But this is not a scriptural declaration, but an ideological one.
The scriptures do make extremely unflattering statements about certain sinners. Men are a bad lot, generally, and the scriptures do not mince words about this. However, the passages cited about total depravity, in every case I can recall, describe a certain group of sinners in a certain setting--e.g. those just before the flood, the generality of the Jews of Isaiah's, or Jeremiah's, or Jesus' days, etc. I think you have said it is invalid to apply such passages only to those parties that were being thus described, but isn't this simply what exegesis requires? To extend the meaning beyond that justified in the passage would be eisegesis, would it not?
Apart from the passage we are discussing in Romans 8, do you know of any that speak of total depravity in which the passage has the class of "all unregenerated people" in mind? I would be willing to look at the evidence, if it is presented.
You wrote:
"The verses you mentioned link the regeneration of the person to the death and resurrection of Jesus. Amen, brother. Faith saves us (through Christ) as well because of His death and resurrection. Is this not what Abraham believed?"
I am not sure exactly what the content of Abraham's belief entailed. We know that he believed more than what Genesis tells us, since this is affirmed in Hebrews 11:16, 19, but the only specific reference to the belief that justified him is that he "believed in the Lord" (Gen.15:6).
You wrote:
"The fact Jesus had not yet died would not have prevented God from "crediting it to him for righteousness", since Abraham's faith was in the yet future Messiah. I do not think Abraham understood with the clarity we do with the NT, but I think Hebrews 11 makes is clear that Abraham had his eyes on a spiritual promised land. I believe he understood the typology of what God was saying better than Genesis may state, based on what Hebrews says."
If Abraham believed such things by revelation, it is possible that others may also have, in Old Testament times. But this would be speculation merely, since we are not told. In the Old Testament, we are told that he was justified, and Paul affirms this in the New Testament. However, neither testament tells us that he, or anyone prior to Christ, was regenerated. If Paul felt that this was the case, he must have known how silent the scriptures were on the point, and he would have done well to make some statement about it, to allay the inevitable confusion caused by the silence of the Old Testament. Had he done so, we would not be debating this point right now.
You wrote:
"Jesus seemed to think that regeneration was a fairly plain teaching in the OT, since he seemed disappointed in Nicodemus as a teacher of Israel for not understanding what He meant when He said "a man must be born again."
Yes, Jesus thought the Old Testament plainly taught regeneration--and I agree! It is surprising that Nicodemus found the concept so foreign. Most commentators (including Calvinists, like F.F.Bruce) think that the Old Testament teachings to which Jesus alluded can be found in Ezekiel 36:25-27 and Jeremiah 31:31-34. I think so also. However, these passages associate this phenomenon with the coming of the "New Covenant." These passages clearly promise certain blessings that did not accrue to the first covenant, including the blessing of a changed heart and the indwelling Spirit--which we refer to as regeneration.
Last edited by FAST WebCrawler [Crawler] on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
In Jesus,
Steve
Steve
Steve G,
I have not yet mastered how to quote other posts, but here is my response.
I laughed (not sarcastically) when you mentioned the OT saints. Touche! I think it may be question begging, since we are debating that point, but you it was witty.
I see Romans 3:10-18 as proof of Romans 3:23. Paul is arguing for v23 based on what God's word has said of unregenerate men in the past. I am at my office and I do not have a Bible, but I know that Ps 14:1 starts with the "the fool says in his heart 'There is no God'". You have stated previously that this limits the target of this Psalm. But the second verse speaks of the children of men, does it not?
When we read Isasiah 7:14 in the OT context, it is hard to imagine that this verse is about Jesus over 1000 years later. Try convincing a Jew of this! But the NT says that it is. I do not believe that the NT is taking the verse out of context, but there are certain insights that the NT writers had that we may not from our less inspired reading, and we should use their interpretation of the OT. I think Paul is using Ro. 3:10-18 in just such a fashion. He is arguing that these verses describe all of us to varying degrees, in our natural state; here is the law's judgment on us, and this is proof that all have sinned and fall short of his glory.
I agree that not all the lost are equally depraved, or as evil as they could be, nor did I argue this. The gradations you draw, such as greater or lesser degrees of unbelief, are really no different than saying greater or lesser degrees of calling God a liar, since whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ does this. These are lesser or greater degrees of evil.
God's restraint is not made up by my idealogy - in Romans 1, God gives people over to a progressively debased mind based on how hard they fight to suppress His from their thoughts, which means that prior to His removal of this restraint, they were less debased because of His restraint.
In Hebrews 11, Abraham was looking for that spiritual city whose builder and maker is God, just as we do. True, Hebrews does not say he was regenerated, but I think Hebrews indicates that the promised land was a small sampling of what the promise to Abraham and His Seed really entailed, the whole world. This is a very deep eschatological insight for an OT patriarch, but maybe not so surprising if we consider that though his knowledge of God was probably not as extensive as ours, his faith and our faith are of the same vein. Abraham, by believing in God, must have understood that God is the justifier of men and must have had some insight into the future Messiah. I am reading between the lines, but I am not sure why else Abraham would be looking to the church, the New Jerusalem, if He did not have some knowledge of these things.
The man in Romans 8 who is in the flesh does not have the spirit of God; I think we agree on that. But how can a person who is by nature at war with God's law want to be delivered from his sin, if it is by the knowledge of the law that we know what sin is?
I have not yet mastered how to quote other posts, but here is my response.
I laughed (not sarcastically) when you mentioned the OT saints. Touche! I think it may be question begging, since we are debating that point, but you it was witty.
I see Romans 3:10-18 as proof of Romans 3:23. Paul is arguing for v23 based on what God's word has said of unregenerate men in the past. I am at my office and I do not have a Bible, but I know that Ps 14:1 starts with the "the fool says in his heart 'There is no God'". You have stated previously that this limits the target of this Psalm. But the second verse speaks of the children of men, does it not?
When we read Isasiah 7:14 in the OT context, it is hard to imagine that this verse is about Jesus over 1000 years later. Try convincing a Jew of this! But the NT says that it is. I do not believe that the NT is taking the verse out of context, but there are certain insights that the NT writers had that we may not from our less inspired reading, and we should use their interpretation of the OT. I think Paul is using Ro. 3:10-18 in just such a fashion. He is arguing that these verses describe all of us to varying degrees, in our natural state; here is the law's judgment on us, and this is proof that all have sinned and fall short of his glory.
I agree that not all the lost are equally depraved, or as evil as they could be, nor did I argue this. The gradations you draw, such as greater or lesser degrees of unbelief, are really no different than saying greater or lesser degrees of calling God a liar, since whoever denies that Jesus is the Christ does this. These are lesser or greater degrees of evil.
God's restraint is not made up by my idealogy - in Romans 1, God gives people over to a progressively debased mind based on how hard they fight to suppress His from their thoughts, which means that prior to His removal of this restraint, they were less debased because of His restraint.
In Hebrews 11, Abraham was looking for that spiritual city whose builder and maker is God, just as we do. True, Hebrews does not say he was regenerated, but I think Hebrews indicates that the promised land was a small sampling of what the promise to Abraham and His Seed really entailed, the whole world. This is a very deep eschatological insight for an OT patriarch, but maybe not so surprising if we consider that though his knowledge of God was probably not as extensive as ours, his faith and our faith are of the same vein. Abraham, by believing in God, must have understood that God is the justifier of men and must have had some insight into the future Messiah. I am reading between the lines, but I am not sure why else Abraham would be looking to the church, the New Jerusalem, if He did not have some knowledge of these things.
The man in Romans 8 who is in the flesh does not have the spirit of God; I think we agree on that. But how can a person who is by nature at war with God's law want to be delivered from his sin, if it is by the knowledge of the law that we know what sin is?
Last edited by leeweiland on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
In Christ,
David
David
Steve and Homer and everyone,
I am going to be out of pocket for the next couple of weeks with trips and meetings. I am not ignoring you, but I just won't be around to blog.
I have enjoyed it. Take care.
I am going to be out of pocket for the next couple of weeks with trips and meetings. I am not ignoring you, but I just won't be around to blog.
I have enjoyed it. Take care.
Last edited by leeweiland on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
In Christ,
David
David
"Therefore, all people are conceived in sin and are born children of wrath, unfit for any saving good, inclined to evil, dead in their sins, and slaves to sin; without the grace of the regenerating Holy Spirit they are neither willing nor able to return to God, to reform their distorted nature, or even to dispose themselves to such reform." (Canons of Dordt, III & IV, Article 3)
Here are some Old Testament Scriptures on people choosing and seeking God "without being born again." These are just a few examples:
"But from there you will seek the LORD your God, and you will find Him if you search for Him with all your heart and all your soul." (Deuteronomy 4:29)
15"If it is disagreeable in your sight to serve the LORD, choose for yourselves today whom you will serve: whether the gods which your fathers served which were beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you are living; but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD."
16The people answered and said, "Far be it from us that we should forsake the LORD to serve other gods;
17for the LORD our God is He who brought us and our fathers up out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage, and who did these great signs in our sight and preserved us through all the way in which we went and among all the peoples through whose midst we passed.
18"The LORD drove out from before us all the peoples, even the Amorites who lived in the land. We also will serve the LORD, for He is our God."
19Then Joshua said to the people, "You will not be able to serve the LORD, for He is a holy God He is a jealous God; He will not forgive your transgression or your sins.
20"If you forsake the LORD and serve foreign gods, then He will turn and do you harm and consume you after He has done good to you."
21The people said to Joshua, "No, but we will serve the LORD."
22Joshua said to the people, "You are witnesses against yourselves that )you have chosen for yourselves the LORD, to serve Him." And they said, "We are witnesses."
(Joshua 24:15-22 NASB)
"5 "Behold, you will call a nation you do not know, And a nation which knows you not will run to you, Because of the LORD your God, even the Holy One of Israel; For He has glorified you." 6 Seek the LORD while He may be found; Call upon Him while He is near. 7 Let the wicked forsake his way And the unrighteous man his thoughts; And let him return to the LORD, And He will have compassion on him, And to our God, For He will abundantly pardon." (Isaiah 55:5-7)
Are we to believe creeds written by fallible men, or are the scriptures not plain enough on this matter? If they did not have free will, it sure fooled me.
Here are some Old Testament Scriptures on people choosing and seeking God "without being born again." These are just a few examples:
"But from there you will seek the LORD your God, and you will find Him if you search for Him with all your heart and all your soul." (Deuteronomy 4:29)
15"If it is disagreeable in your sight to serve the LORD, choose for yourselves today whom you will serve: whether the gods which your fathers served which were beyond the River, or the gods of the Amorites in whose land you are living; but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD."
16The people answered and said, "Far be it from us that we should forsake the LORD to serve other gods;
17for the LORD our God is He who brought us and our fathers up out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage, and who did these great signs in our sight and preserved us through all the way in which we went and among all the peoples through whose midst we passed.
18"The LORD drove out from before us all the peoples, even the Amorites who lived in the land. We also will serve the LORD, for He is our God."
19Then Joshua said to the people, "You will not be able to serve the LORD, for He is a holy God He is a jealous God; He will not forgive your transgression or your sins.
20"If you forsake the LORD and serve foreign gods, then He will turn and do you harm and consume you after He has done good to you."
21The people said to Joshua, "No, but we will serve the LORD."
22Joshua said to the people, "You are witnesses against yourselves that )you have chosen for yourselves the LORD, to serve Him." And they said, "We are witnesses."
(Joshua 24:15-22 NASB)
"5 "Behold, you will call a nation you do not know, And a nation which knows you not will run to you, Because of the LORD your God, even the Holy One of Israel; For He has glorified you." 6 Seek the LORD while He may be found; Call upon Him while He is near. 7 Let the wicked forsake his way And the unrighteous man his thoughts; And let him return to the LORD, And He will have compassion on him, And to our God, For He will abundantly pardon." (Isaiah 55:5-7)
Are we to believe creeds written by fallible men, or are the scriptures not plain enough on this matter? If they did not have free will, it sure fooled me.
Last edited by Guest on Wed Dec 31, 1969 7:00 pm, edited 0 times in total.
Reason:
Reason:
A Berean