John MacArthur says you have nothing to do with being "born again"

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

justbyfaith

Well-Known Member
Jun 28, 2018
21,740
4,114
113
51
San Pedro
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Right, so being born again is not the result of obeying the gospel. Rather, being born again is the precondition of obeying the gospel.
Didn't see that post; apparently the Lord wanted a 2nd witness to what was spoken. :)
 

justbyfaith

Well-Known Member
Jun 28, 2018
21,740
4,114
113
51
San Pedro
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
In Ancient Jewish Theology they had a similar debate such as the Fate vs Faith.

And it was framed in the context of Sin.
Because sin was considered to be the thing that cursed people. This sin could be either on a corporate level or individual level that caused various ills in the world.

A sinful lifestyle of parents certainly raised up a sinful child to be more wicked.

But sometimes Godly Parents raised up a wicked child as well...the child turning away from God because of "Corporate Sins" of the community.

The same thing was thought to apply itself with illness and deformities...such as blindness. (Today we have eugenics in the form of abortion)

But they framed this argument with "WHO Sinned?"

So one day Peter asked Jesus this very question of huge theological debate.
And Jesus said in essence that neither side is correct.
But as we read in John's Gospel account that they were so caught up in their proofs for their debate...and disgusted that this miracle of Bartemus seeing again didn't prove either side true or false that they declared Bartemus himself was wicked and sinful and kicked him out.
(Going against their theology of blessing the blessed)
And because of this...they missed on meeting the Messiah Jesus.

It's a huge theme in John...takes up a huge chunk of the book. Maybe it's important.
The name of the man who was born blind is not given in scripture. Bartimaeus was a different blind man.
 

07-07-07

Well-Known Member
Nov 18, 2018
1,083
668
113
Rust Belt
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
However, they are not born again because they obey the gospel. They obey the gospel because they are born again. They are born again because they believe the gospel.

True. It takes a new heart and a new spirit, i.e., the born again experience, to obey. What's more, mere belief will not save either, as obedience is required.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Reggie Belafonte

JohnDB

Well-Known Member
Feb 7, 2010
4,342
2,837
113
TN
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The name of the man who was born blind is not given in scripture. Bartimaeus was a different blind man.
Ok...thought it was the same guy.
But I'll admit that you might be right...I'm just shooting from the hip of what I have discovered before without looking back at my notes.

The name wasn't a focus of the research anyway...it was the theologies surrounding this huge story in John.
 

ChristisGod

Well-Known Member
Aug 15, 2020
6,900
3,846
113
64
California
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Your view seems to ignore verse 39, though you quote it. What is the ACTUAL condition for receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit?

The gift of the Holy Spirit is being granted to those whom God calls to himself. (verse 39) What does Peter mean by "called"? In Peter's mind, being called and being chosen are synonymous. 2 Peter 1:10.
Excellent points !
 

ChristisGod

Well-Known Member
Aug 15, 2020
6,900
3,846
113
64
California
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
True. It takes a new heart and a new spirit, i.e., the born again experience, to obey. What's more, mere belief will not save either, as obedience is required.
Obedience is the result of salvation not the means to salvation which requires faith.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Candidus

Tong2020

Well-Known Member
Apr 30, 2020
4,854
848
113
*
Faith
Christian
Country
Philippines
The lamb that was killed represented the perfect Lamb that was to come, Jesus. The OT gives us types and shadows of the real thing. Jesus fulfilled the OT scriptures. The perfect Lamb, Jesus, was offered on the altar of God to shed His blood for the remission of sin. For anyone to minimize the blood of Jesus is either greatly deceived and/or even an imposter; a wolf in the midst of the sheep. From such turn away.
That's right, the OT are shadows of the real thing. So why do you seem to shed light on the real thing with the shadows? Must it not be the other way around?

Also, no one here minimizes the blood of Jesus. Rather, I am just telling you that it is not the literal blood per se, but the life that is in the blood of Jesus, which life is unblemished and which was given up for the sin of the world. As I have been pointing out to you, it is not the literal material blood per se that is the matter, but the life that is in the blood of Jesus, His whole life, that is the matter.

Tong
R1102
 
  • Like
Reactions: Reggie Belafonte

justbyfaith

Well-Known Member
Jun 28, 2018
21,740
4,114
113
51
San Pedro
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Excellent points !

It is a conditional promise that is also given to as many as the Lord our God shall call.

The condition is clearly baptism in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth for the remission of sins.

This would indicate (Romans 8:30) that if anyone is predestinated and called, they will receive this baptism; and in doing so they will be justified and their being glorified is then as good as accomplished.
 

ChristisGod

Well-Known Member
Aug 15, 2020
6,900
3,846
113
64
California
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
On the other hand, we are justified by faith apart from works (Romans 4:1-8, esp. vs.5-6, Ephesians 2:8-9, Titus 3:4-7, esp. v.5, Romans 11:5-6).
So you believe a person can be saved their entire life and have no fruit, is that correct ?
 

07-07-07

Well-Known Member
Nov 18, 2018
1,083
668
113
Rust Belt
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
That's right, the OT are shadows of the real thing. So why do you seem to shed light on the real thing with the shadows? Must it not be the other way around?

Also, no one here minimizes the blood of Jesus. Rather, I am just telling you that it is not the literal blood per se, but the life that is in the blood of Jesus, which life is unblemished and which was given up for the sin of the world. As I have been pointing out to you, it is not the literal material blood per se that is the matter, but the life that is in the blood of Jesus, His whole life, that is the matter.

Tong
R1102

Again, you are using semantics, whether you acknowledge it or not. The literal shedding of Jesus' blood was required. In the OT, the literal blood of an animal had to be sprinkled before God seven times to receive the remission of sin.

Leviticus 4
[3] If the priest that is anointed do sin according to the sin of the people; then let him bring for his sin, which he hath sinned, a young bullock without blemish unto the LORD for a sin offering.
[4] And he shall bring the bullock unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation before the LORD; and shall lay his hand upon the bullock's head, and kill the bullock before the LORD.
[5] And the priest that is anointed shall take of the bullock's blood, and bring it to the tabernacle of the congregation:
[6] And the priest shall dip his finger in the blood, and sprinkle of the blood seven times before the LORD, before the vail of the sanctuary.
[7] And the priest shall put some of the blood upon the horns of the altar of sweet incense before the LORD, which is in the tabernacle of the congregation: and shall pour all the blood of the bullock at the bottom of the altar of the burnt offering, which is at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.

Hebrew 9
[6] Now when these things were thus ordained, the priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God.
[7] But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people:

Jesus was the Lamb of God, a young male without blemish, offered on God's altar to shed His blood for the remission of sin. This is literal. If Jesus would have lived His life, without shedding His blood on God's altar, and died a normal death like everyone else, then there would have been no atonement for sin. So no, it's not just His life. And no, the blood is not just a symbol of His death. God required His physical blood to be shed upon the altar. Any doctrine that denies this is in serious error or even apostasy.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChristisGod

07-07-07

Well-Known Member
Nov 18, 2018
1,083
668
113
Rust Belt
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
On the other hand, we are justified by faith apart from works (Romans 4:1-8, esp. vs.5-6, Ephesians 2:8-9, Titus 3:4-7, esp. v.5, Romans 11:5-6).

The works of the law and/or the works of man, e.g., philanthropy cannot save. But the works of Messiah in a believer shows that he is saved.

Ephesians 2
[10] For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.
 

CadyandZoe

Well-Known Member
May 17, 2020
5,552
2,069
113
Phoenix
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
It is a conditional promise that is also given to as many as the Lord our God shall call.

The condition is clearly baptism in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth for the remission of sins.

This would indicate (Romans 8:30) that if anyone is predestinated and called, they will receive this baptism; and in doing so they will be justified and their being glorified is then as good as accomplished.
Where you see "conditional" I see "consideration".

Statement:
A. baptism is the condition one must meet in order to be forgiven.
B. baptism is one way the penitent indicates his repentance and God hears the prayers of the penitent

Does Peter mean A or B? I think he means B.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Candidus

Candidus

Well-Known Member
Jan 27, 2020
1,620
1,382
113
64
Kuna
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Where you see "conditional" I see "consideration".

Statement:
A. baptism is the condition one must meet in order to be forgiven.
B. baptism is one way the penitent indicates his repentance and God hears the prayers of the penitent

Does Peter mean A or B? I think he means B.
The Bible connects salvation to God's grace, and man's response of faith and repentance in turning to God. Water cannot save or cleanse from sins. It can testify to sins that are already cleansed. Spiritual baptism is essential to salvation; water baptism has nothing to do with it.
 

justbyfaith

Well-Known Member
Jun 28, 2018
21,740
4,114
113
51
San Pedro
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The Holy Ghost is absolutely promised to those who receive baptism in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth for the remission of sins (Acts of the Apostles 2:38-39).

One may also receive Him merely by asking (Luke 11:9-13).

But if there is any doubt, it doesn't hurt to get this one done...baptism in Jesus' Name.
 

ChristisGod

Well-Known Member
Aug 15, 2020
6,900
3,846
113
64
California
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
The Holy Ghost is absolutely promised to those who receive baptism in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth for the remission of sins (Acts of the Apostles 2:38-39).

One may also receive Him merely by asking (Luke 11:9-13).

But if there is any doubt, it doesn't hurt to get this one done...baptism in Jesus' Name.
So I guess in your book I'm not saved since I was baptized in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit as per Jesus command in Matthew 28:18-20.
 

justbyfaith

Well-Known Member
Jun 28, 2018
21,740
4,114
113
51
San Pedro
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
So I guess in your book I'm not saved since I was baptized in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit as per Jesus command in Matthew 28:18-20.
If you will consider that your baptism in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost was in fact, in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins, then you may have a shot at eternal life.

I have a question for you.

Do you believe that sinning is inevitable to the believer?

That we cannot help but sin in the future because we all commit sin in the present?
 

Tong2020

Well-Known Member
Apr 30, 2020
4,854
848
113
*
Faith
Christian
Country
Philippines
Again, you are using semantics, whether you acknowledge it or not.
And again I'd say no semantics play there sir, even while you keep on insisting.

The literal shedding of Jesus' blood was required. In the OT, the literal blood of an animal had to be sprinkled before God seven times to receive the remission of sin.

Leviticus 4
[3] If the priest that is anointed do sin according to the sin of the people; then let him bring for his sin, which he hath sinned, a young bullock without blemish unto the LORD for a sin offering.
[4] And he shall bring the bullock unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation before the LORD; and shall lay his hand upon the bullock's head, and kill the bullock before the LORD.
[5] And the priest that is anointed shall take of the bullock's blood, and bring it to the tabernacle of the congregation:
[6] And the priest shall dip his finger in the blood, and sprinkle of the blood seven times before the LORD, before the vail of the sanctuary.
[7] And the priest shall put some of the blood upon the horns of the altar of sweet incense before the LORD, which is in the tabernacle of the congregation: and shall pour all the blood of the bullock at the bottom of the altar of the burnt offering, which is at the door of the tabernacle of the congregation.

Hebrew 9
[6] Now when these things were thus ordained, the priests went always into the first tabernacle, accomplishing the service of God.
[7] But into the second went the high priest alone once every year, not without blood, which he offered for himself, and for the errors of the people:
I am afraid that you will also tell me the same thing with regards the material flesh and material blood of Jesus Christ, that the literal eating of the literal material flesh and the literal drinking of the literal material blood of Jesus is required to have eternal life and for one to abide in Him.

I already pointed out to you, those OT passages and reference to sin offering are but a shadow of the reality sir. And while you acknowledge that, you seem to not get what that means and makes of the blood thereof. Remember, the wage and payment for sin is death, that is, the taking away of life. It is His life (not the material blood) that Jesus gave up on the cross. It is His life that Jesus gave up for the sheep.

Jesus was the Lamb of God, a young male without blemish, offered on God's altar to shed His blood for the remission of sin. This is literal. If Jesus would have lived His life, without shedding His blood on God's altar, and died a normal death like everyone else, then there would have been no atonement for sin. So no, it's not just His life. And no, the blood is not just a symbol of His death. God required His physical blood to be shed upon the altar. Any doctrine that denies this is in serious error or even apostasy.
Still, you are trying to explain the real thing using the shadow. And you seem to have a different understanding of what life is in saying "So no, it's not just His life."

I noticed that you have abandoned and ignored my question and argument in post #172:

If a lamb had defects, what does that have to do with its blood? What does the blood of the lamb have to do with it being blemished or unblemished?

Tong
R1103