Regeneration before or after saving faith

[Renniks]

Does anyone really believe God forces anyone to remain. Everything is about choice, Adam, Abraham, Moses, Elijah. God asks, openly, freely and awaits a response. Korahs rebellion is a good example. The Lord left it until the final proof.

Everything rests on us knowing and choosing. Nothing is forced, because love desires this pure reality above everything else.

Even though satan has fallen he is asked what he thinks of Job. Jonah was asked to prophecy to Nineveh and he ran away. Jonah knew God and did not want Nineveh spared. Yet in the end he freely gave in, and did the Lord's will. This is profound how the Lord works. Not our way, not this patient.

I agree that it's all about choice.
In Calvinism, choice is only an illusion. It's all determined. It's fatalism with God thrown in.

 

[DNB]

Your view is not even Arminian. It is the heresy called Pelagianism. This view holds to the belief babies are born innocent, the doctrine of Original Sin is false. It is a heresy. A former pastor of mine, who is NOT a Calvinist by any stretch of the imagination, believes in the doctrine of Original Sin. This teaching is not a Calvinist only belief, but many non-Calvinists believe it, too.

SG, I just have to say that you are the king of taking verses out of context!
Whether you're right or wrong about your stances on original sin or the disposition of infants (I disagree with both), your proof-text reflects a profound incompetency in comprehending Scripture, ....or at least, justifying your view-point. Plus, your perceived view on the authority of creeds and councils, again, reflects a lack of understanding on the processes and circumstances surrounding their development.
Meaning, it appears that you're giving them too much weight in your arguments. Your making an appeal to them as though they are authoritative on any level, or that they are the basis for the definition of heresy.

 

[DNB]

No my friend. Nowhere does the Greek word helko mean that God draws and those who choose to obey come. In none of those passages I cited that uses that word does it mean that. Acts of the Apostles 16:19, some versions use the word 'dragged', as that is what they really did to Paul and Silas.

So this can not mean that God is drawing everybody whoever lived. That is where ppl go off the rails in their theology when they try to posit that into their belief that world means 'everybody whoever lived'.

Do not love the world nor the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him.[2 John 2:15]

In that verse, world does not mean everybody whoever lived. I can not mean that, because if it did, then if we love everybody without exception, then the love of the Father is not in us. Which goes against loving our enemies.

You're terrible, absolutely bad.
The word 'World' in this context means satan's world, and/or the things pertaining to the material world and the flesh.

 

[reformed1689]

You keep on believing that

I will since that is what is biblical.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

I will since that is what is biblical.

In your mind

And thats fine, it is your right

but do not expect everyone too. Because we just can't see it. no matter how hard you try to show us. Not because we are not open. But because there is to many unanswered questions. and to many literal passages which do not appear to support you. Like the ones we discussed about in Titus.

 

[Hidden In Him]

When does one become Regenerated? Does it happen before in order to empower us to believe or does it happen after we believe?

Play nice

Hi Friend of.

The answer is after, and probably much more "after" than you think. It's used twice, once in Titus 3:5 and once in Matthew 19:28. In the latter, we have: "You who have followed Me, in the regeneration (παλιγγενεσίᾳ), when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, you also shall sit upon twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel." This is an obvious reference to His return, when the saints shall receive their glorified bodies. Thus physical regeneration is in view here.

In Titus 3:5 we have, "4 But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared, 5 He saved us, not by works of righteousness which we have done but according to his mercy, through the washing of regeneration (παλιγγενεσίας), and through the renewing of the Holy Spirit; 6 which He shed upon us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour." (Titus 3:4-6).

According to Paul's theology, water baptism followed by the baptism in the Holy Spirit represented resurrection unto newness of life spiritually. But it was ultimately a representation of the resurrection from the dead, i.e the actual regeneration, that will take place at Christ's return. That's how these two verses go together. But again, technically the spiritual experience was not complete unless it was accompanied by the baptism in the Holy Spirit. Those who only receive water baptism in today's Christianity are short-circuiting the steps described in the New Testament. They are saved by believing, but they have not yet "received" as described in Acts 8:14-17. Thus, the "renewing of the Holy Ghost" that Paul referred to in Titus 3:5 was to the baptism in the Holy Spirit, which is what the apostles were sent to bestow upon the Samaritans through laying on of hands, for as of yet they had only believed.

In short, if you are asking when believers become regenerated in the Spirit, it happens when they are baptized in the Holy Spirit. But ultimately this only represents the true regeneration, which will take place at the return of Christ, as per Matthew 19:28.

 

[DNB]

Hi Friend of.

The answer is after, and probably much more "after" than you think. It's used twice, once in Titus 3:5 and once in Matthew 19:28. In the latter, we have: "You who have followed Me, in the regeneration (παλιγγενεσίᾳ), when the Son of man shall sit in the throne of his glory, you also shall sit upon twelve thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel." This is an obvious reference to His return, when the saints shall receive their glorified bodies. Thus physical regeneration is in view here.

In Titus 3:5 we have, "4 But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared, 5 He saved us, not by works of righteousness which we have done but according to his mercy, through the washing of regeneration (παλιγγενεσίας), and through the renewing of the Holy Spirit; 6 which He shed upon us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour." (Titus 3:4-6).

According to Paul's theology, water baptism followed by the baptism in the Holy Spirit represented resurrection unto newness of life spiritually. But it was ultimately a representation of the resurrection from the dead, i.e the actual regeneration, that will take place at Christ's return. That's how these two verses go together. But again, technically the spiritual experience was not complete unless it was accompanied by the baptism in the Holy Spirit. Those who only receive water baptism in today's Christianity are short-circuiting the steps described in the New Testament. They are saved by believing, but they have not yet "received" as described in Acts 8:14-17. Thus, the "renewing of the Holy Ghost" that Paul referred to in Titus 3:5 was to the baptism in the Holy Spirit, which is what the apostles were sent to bestow upon the Samaritans through laying on of hands, for as of yet they had only believed.

In short, if you are asking when believers become regenerated in the Spirit, it happens when they are baptized in the Holy Spirit. But ultimately this only represents the true regeneration, which will take place at the return of Christ, as per Matthew 19:28.

Great exposition!
Both, very Biblical, and very practical!

 

[SovereignGrace]

You're terrible, absolutely bad.
The word 'World' in this context means satan's world, and/or the things pertaining to the material world and the flesh.

Uh huh! Adios!

 

[SovereignGrace]

You're terrible, absolutely bad.
The word 'World' in this context means satan's world, and/or the things pertaining to the material world and the flesh.

Which shows that world does not mean everybody whoever lived. That was my point. Instead of asking me to clarify my post, you just jumped in and put me on blast. Good bye.

 

[reformed1689]

In your mind

And thats fine, it is your right

but do not expect everyone too. Because we just can't see it. no matter how hard you try to show us. Not because we are not open. But because there is to many unanswered questions. and to many literal passages which do not appear to support you. Like the ones we discussed about in Titus.

What passage it Titus? I must have missed that post.

 

[DNB]

Which shows that world does not mean everybody whoever lived. That was my point. Instead of asking me to clarify my post, you just jumped in and put me on blast. Good bye.

Because this passage has nothing to do with people per se, but a system.
It does not apply to your point. You keep doing this.

 

[Preacher4Truth]

forgive me

myself and the user in question have been at odds before,

I now have him on ignore

This is even more saddening than your former post and paints an unfortunate picture of your person and character.

We need men today that own up to the one they've lied about and libeled, not what is exemplified in the milquetoast response above. 1 Corinthians 16:13 is in order.

 

[Paul Christensen]

Calvin had no authority over Servetus in Geneva concerning his punishment. He, Calvin, was not a citizen of Geneva, and he tried to convince Servetus not to come there lest he die at their hands, not his hands. He also tried to convince authorities to behead instead of burn him because he thought it to be a less painful option. Servetus was not an innocent "Christian," he denied Christ was the Son of God altogether, even unto death. That makes him an unbeliever.

I suggest those who won't believe or read the theology of Calvin and hate him in ignorance also not read the theology of Moses who himself murdered. Probably ought to stop reading Paul as well for being responsible for the deaths of Christians.

Yes. We must understand that in those times it was a capital offence in law to deny the existence of God or to teach heresy. Calvin was not the magistrate who sentenced Servetus. He was convicted of a capital offence according to the law, and the legal method of execution for heretics was burning at the stake

By the way, this is not a defence of the RCC, who burned people at the stake for just owning a translation of the Bible that was not Latin, or who refused to pray to Mary, or accept the authority of the pope, which may have been forced into law by the rat-bag church to suit its purposes.

 

[Preacher4Truth]

Yes. We must understand that in those times it was a capital offence in law to deny the existence of God or to teach heresy. Calvin was not the magistrate who sentenced Servetus. He was convicted of a capital offence according to the law, and the legal method of execution for heretics was burning at the stake

By the way, this is not a defence of the RCC, who burned people at the stake for just owning a translation of the Bible that was not Latin, or who refused to pray to Mary, or accept the authority of the pope, which may have been forced into law by the rat-bag church to suit its purposes.

Exactly correct. I appreciate your stance in the grace of God.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Yes. We must understand that in those times it was a capital offence in law to deny the existence of God or to teach heresy. Calvin was not the magistrate who sentenced Servetus. He was convicted of a capital offence according to the law, and the legal method of execution for heretics was burning at the stake

By the way, this is not a defence of the RCC, who burned people at the stake for just owning a translation of the Bible that was not Latin, or who refused to pray to Mary, or accept the authority of the pope, which may have been forced into law by the rat-bag church to suit its purposes.

Thank you for this well balanced post. Those who hate Calvinism have already consigned John Calvin to hell. They automatically think he was some tyrant in Geneva. He wasn’t best I can tell, but my exposure to this history is not as in-depth as others. None of us knows all that truly transpired and who exactly called for Servetus’ execution. In my opinion, it was the gov’t, not Calvin.

 

[Paul Christensen]

Exactly correct. I appreciate your stance in the grace of God.

It is interesting to learn that only one heretic was burned at the stake during Calvin's lifetime, and that for a definite heresy that was undermining the basic principles of Reformed Christianity of the time.

I think there were many who disagreed with Calvin during his lifetime, and he would have had debates with them as he did with Servetus. But it is obvious that he did not view those disagreements as "horrid blasphemies". It is noted that Calvin went to great lengths even at his own risk to visit Servetus in France where he could have been arrested by the RCC inquisitors and burned at the stake himself. It shows that he did everything in his power to reform Servetus and avoid him being arrested and convicted of heresy and blasphemy. I think that shows Calvin's true character.

If Calvin was really a cruel murderer as his opponents maintain, then everything he taught in his institutes and commentaries would be meaningless and he would have been as bad as the Pharisees, by not doing himself what he taught others to do.

 

[Preacher4Truth]

It is interesting to learn that only one heretic was burned at the stake during Calvin's lifetime, and that for a definite heresy that was undermining the basic principles of Reformed Christianity of the time.

I think there were many who disagreed with Calvin during his lifetime, and he would have had debates with them as he did with Servetus. But it is obvious that he did not view those disagreements as "horrid blasphemies". It is noted that Calvin went to great lengths even at his own risk to visit Servetus in France where he could have been arrested by the RCC inquisitors and burned at the stake himself. It shows that he did everything in his power to reform Servetus and avoid him being arrested and convicted of heresy and blasphemy. I think that shows Calvin's true character.

If Calvin was really a cruel murderer as his opponents maintain, then everything he taught in his institutes and commentaries would be meaningless and he would have been as bad as the Pharisees, by not doing himself what he taught others to do.

Not sure if you're familiar with Calvin and Jacques Gruet or not but more lies against the former are there.

 

[Anthony D'Arienzo]

Good posting Holy Brethren,
Some posters avoid truth more than the paniced citizens trying to avoid the corona virus.
I will be online in about 30 minutes to investigate the shenanigans taking place on here,lol.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Good posting Holy Brethren,
Some posters avoid truth more than the paniced citizens trying to avoid the corona virus.
I will be online in about 30 minutes to investigate the shenanigans taking place on here,lol.

Uh oh!

 

[Renniks]

Not sure if you're familiar with Calvin and Jacques Gruet or not but more lies against the former are there.

Really, You put a link mocking a fellow Christian on all your posts?
You know Flowers was a Calvinist. Does it gall you that much that some come to their senses?