Proof Regeneration Precedes Faith

Post by **_tartanarmy** » Sat May 26, 2007 4:30 am

Regeneration, Faith and Drawing

Question

It is my understanding that our faith in Christ is what saves us (John 3:16; Eph. 2:8). If regeneration (being born again) precedes faith, doesn't that mean that when we first become born again we are still unsaved until we have "saving faith"?

Jesus said that Nicodemus needed to be born again (John 3:7) even though Nicodemus was drawn to Christ because of his miraculous works (John 3:2; 10:37-38). Does God draw/drag (John 6:44) us before regeneration? If not, what state was Nicodemus in when he came to Jesus by night? What does this say about people today who straddle the fence for days, months or years at a time before finally becoming or not becoming Christians?

Answer

When we say that regeneration precedes faith, we are speaking of "logical precedence" rather than "temporal precedence." That is, logically speaking, an unregenerate heart cannot have faith (Rom. 8:5-9). Therefore, if anyone is to have faith, he must first be regenerated. But this does not mean that a person may be regenerated and not yet have faith. On the contrary, faith and regeneration are simultaneous.

The drawing that Jesus mentions in John 6:44 should not be confused with the interest Nicodemus had in Jesus as a result of Jesus' miracles.

In John 6:44, Jesus was teaching that fallen human beings are incapable of turning to Jesus for salvation. His point was that until God does something miraculous in and to a person, that person cannot come to faith. This powerful drawing is an expression of faith in response to what we call "irresistible grace."

It takes place simultaneously with and as a logical consequence of regeneration. Those who are regenerated have new natures that love God, and their immediate response is to cling to Christ in faith.

Note that in John 6:63-65 Jesus explained that the drawing of John 6:44 had not happened to some of those who were with him, even though they were clearly around him because they were interested in him just as Nicodemus was.

Nicodemus' himself appears to have been unsaved when he came to Jesus in John 3: in John 3:12, Jesus indicated that Nicodemus did not believe Jesus' teachings; and in John 3:7 he said that Nicodemus had to be born again.

Mark

Post by **_Sean** » Sat May 26, 2007 8:50 am

tartanarmy wrote:
-Arminians will not present a God who does not know everything (Omniscience) but will negate God in having meticulous control over all events,

It depends on what you mean by "meticulous control over all events".

tartanarmy wrote:
they will pit scripture against scripture, in order to hold to libertarian free will, creating contradictions within scripture.

I find that statement quite amusing.

tartanarmy wrote:
(Note, Arminians will hold to God knowing all things, which means what we do next week, next year etc is fixed and certain, which cannot be changed, thereby destroying Libertarian free will!

Actually, that's not quite accurate. We believe that God knows all things that will happen, and yes, except God intervene it cannot be changed. This, however, does not effect "free will" because we don't know what will happen. God knows the choices that man will make before he makes them. If God knows what we will do next week, then how did we not have a choice? The objection you raise only makes sense if God cannot see our future choices. Which is what Open Theism claims. So it is a strange argument for Calvinist to make. It's like saying that since we can't change the past, we didn't have a choice. God knows what our choices will be. The fact that he knows the outcome of those choices does not negate the ability to make choices.

It's ok if you disagree, just be aware of what we believe and hold that against us. It does no good to hold what we don't believe against us.

Peace brother Mark.

Post by **__id_1679** » Sat May 26, 2007 10:33 am

Hello Sean,

You wrote: "Now, with the passages you have already cited you may wonder why I don't find them convincing. I don't find them convincing because they don't say that being born again is what causes one to have the ability to believe."

Well, I am sorry you don't find them convincing. Mark I think gave us a pretty extensive commentary on the subject. Although I do not consider myself Arminian or Calvinistic, what I believe about salvation lines up more directly with the reformed view. I will admit there is a bit of a mystery here that surpasses human comprehension. I mean while regeneration(new birth) is not effected by the will of man, nor is it a cooperative effort between God and man, faith is necessary for salvation.
We can observe that regeneration and faith are distinct. But they occur simultaneously. What I am focusing on at the moment, is God's side of the issue.

The result of regeneration is a divine nature ; 2Pet. 1:4; a new self: Eph 4:24; a capacity for righteous living; and therefore we who believe, a new creature 2Cor. 5:17 We have recieved a new mind; 1Cor 2:16 that we may know God; a new heart that we may love God; Rom 5:5, 1 John 4:9,and a new will; Rom 6:13 that we may obey God.

BTW, "if your eye causes you to sin, gouge it" out as Jesus said, but I see that yours are intact! LOL!!! How many brothers here are walking around with empty eye sockets?

Sorry, I couldn't help myself!
Love you brother
Bob

Post by **_Homer** » Sun May 27, 2007 12:04 am

Mark wrote:

Command does not imply human ability.

Would you say that command implies responsibility? If there is no responsibility is there culpability?

For God is longsuffering towards His elect, not wishing that any of them shall perish, but that all given to the Son by the Father from eternity, shall be saved.

Guess which words the Calvinist adds here. Hint: I'll spot you "fro" and "etern".

Several texts from 1 John demonstrate that regeneration precedes faith.

The texts are as follows: “If you know that he is righteous, you may be sure that everyone who practices righteousness has been born of him” (1 John 2:29). “No one born of God makes a practice of sinning, for God's seed abides in him, and he cannot keep on sinning because he has been born of God” (1 John 3:9). “Beloved, let us love one another, for love is from God, and whoever loves has been born of God and knows God” (1 John 4:7). “Everyone who believes that Jesus is the Christ has been born of God, and everyone who loves the Father loves whomever has been born of him” (1 John 5:1).

We can make two observations from these texts. First, in every instance the verb “born” (gennaô) is in the perfect tense, denoting an action that precedes the human actions of practicing righteousness, avoiding sin, loving, or believing.

Any non-Calvinist should be able to agree with what you say here with one exception, which I will deal with momentarily. Who can disagree with the Apostle? Who believes we regenerate ourselves? Certainly the Spirit of God dwelling within produces good works. What does this have to do with regeneration preceding faith? However, "believes" is mentioned only once in all you have cited and that as a present participle indicating a continuous or repeated action (faith). This says nothing about regeneration preceding faith; its in your imagination.

On May 26 you wrote:

Therefore, if anyone is to have faith, he must first be regenerated. But this does not mean that a person may be regenerated and not yet have faith. On the contrary, faith and regeneration are simultaneous.

But on May 22 I had written I had written:

Given your comments in various posts and what you affirm in the cases of both Cornelius and Lydia, that neither were regenerated until the arrival of Peter and Paul respecively bringing the Gospel message to them, I do not see how you can maitain your ground that the unregenerate can do no thing good and pleasing to God prior to regeneration.

Prior to the time, on your own abmission, of Cornelius' regeneration, scripture says this of him, Acts 10:1-4:

1 There was a certain man in Caesarea called Cornelius, a centurion of what was called the Italian Regiment, 2 a devout man and one who feared God with all his household, who gave alms generously to the people, and prayed to God always. 3 About the ninth hour of the day he saw clearly in a vision an angel of God coming in and saying to him, “Cornelius!”
4 And when he observed him, he was afraid, and said, “What is it, lord?”
So he said to him, “Your prayers and your alms have come up for a memorial before God.

And you replied on May 22:

If I may inject a thought about Corneilus' regeneration. 1) It was noted he was a "God fearer". This suggests to me a prior work of the Spirit before his conversion was evident. I will assume at least, he understood from his fellowship with the Jews (those to whom God entrusted with his oracles as Paul states in Romans) the Law and the Prophets, Israel's hope of restoration and deliverence by the Messiah. So at least some "ground work " was laid as a foundation by the Spirit. 2) In Jn 12:20, "Greeks"
(gentiles like Cornelius) were requesting to see Jesus. Jesus relates this to his impending death. 3) In vs 32 of ch 12; Jesus proclaims when he is lifted up, WILL DRAW all men to himself.
When Cornelius was "called" through his vision to hear the gospel from Peter, his regeneration was made evident by his conversion. So really it was Cornelius repsonding only because of IMHO, a prior work of the Spirit
upon him. He did not initiate the vision. He did not of his own "will" seek out for Christ and the gospel. He was drawn and directed by the Spirit.
His regeneration was completed unto his conversion by the Spirit.

But you previously had written:

Quote:
regeneration does not occur ex nihilo, but the Gospel is a concommitant. Is this your view? Would this be correct in your view, in the case of both Lydia and Cornelius?

Yes, and I really appreciate your perceptiveness here Homer!

So you insist that faith and regeneration are simultaneous (albeit with regeneration preceding and enabling faith; by a nanosecond?) but when the case of Cornelius conflicts with your view you conveniently hypothesize (or, as you say "assume"), a prior regeneration (or partial one?) prior to Peter's bringing the gospel to his attention and clearly, as Peter indicated, prior to his being saved. How convenient for your system!

Heard your great expositor RC Sproul on Friday expounding on how evangelical Christians (Arminians) were a great failure, did not believe in God's sovereignty and thus do not understand grace, implying we are all hell-bound apostates. Never heard a more arrogant, condescending speech. Then he carried on about "carnal Christians" as though there aren't plenty among the children of the reformed tradition. What would be more conducive to carnal Christianity than Calvinism's child. the OSAS doctrine? Certainly doesn't spring forth from the teachings of men such as Wesley, Clarke, Campbell, et al.

Post by **_tartanarmy** » Mon May 28, 2007 5:59 am

2 Pet. 2:5 - God did not spare the ancient world, but saved Noah, one of eight people, a preacher of righteousness, bringing in the flood on the world of the ungodly;

Who was Noah preaching to? It was those who weren't spared and were punished by the flood because God saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually.

If no man, either elect or reprobate, can resist the will of God, against whom or what is the Spirit striving when He "strives with man"? If there is in man no faculty of decision which God takes into account, any striving of the Spirit that fails to bring man to submission proves God incapable of performance.

Any "striving" not intended to bring man to submission would be a farce and prove God hopelessly insincere. If decision rests with God alone, any striving at all is totally phony and superfuous

Again, we have Libertarian free will as the grid which interprets scripture.
Scripture teaches that apart from free grace, all men without exception resist the Holy Spirit.
This fact alone, is only overcome, in those whom God chooses to overcome, namely the Elect.

Are you really going to say that you are a Christian because at some point you decided to allow God His “striving” to be effective with you?

That is just another way of saying that you did something that other sinners did not do.

The difference is in you, not grace. You allowed God’s “striving” with you to accomplish something, whereas others have not allowed this.
Sorry, but that makes God subject to sinners and is an insult to grace.

The reason you allowed God to save you is because God first regenerated you, that made the difference between you and your unbelieving neighbour, nothing else. It was by sheer grace alone that you became a Christian, otherwise you have something to boast in, making grace no longer grace.

Give up libertarian free will and embrace free grace instead, is my sincere advice. All men by nature are sinners, and the only freedom of will they have, is found in their enslavement to the sinful nature which is hostile to God.

Unless that nature is overcome by sheer grace alone, it will never embrace Christ as Lord and Saviour.

That is why you will find yourself praying to God that He might soften peoples hearts. That is why you will find yourself praying for God to overcome your neighbours stubborn and wilful rejection of Christ.
What you are praying for is right and proper. It is called “regeneration”.

Most Arminians are Calvinists in prayer!

Mark

Post by **_tartanarmy** » Mon May 28, 2007 6:46 am

tartanarmy wrote:

-Arminians will not present a God who does not know everything (Omniscience) but will negate God in having meticulous control over all events,

It depends on what you mean by "meticulous control over all events".

Seems a straightforward enough statement to me. Means everything that happens God has total control over it.

tartanarmy wrote:

they will pit scripture against scripture, in order to hold to libertarian free will, creating contradictions within scripture.

Very Happy I find that statement quite amusing.

Lol, I was not trying to be amusing brother!
Here is a simple one for starters.

Scripture explicitly says that the natural man cannot please God, and is spiritually discerned and not able to come to Christ. 1Co 2:14, Rom 8:7, Joh 6:65

Arminians teach that faith precedes regeneration. You do not need to be a rocket scientist to grasp that this “faith” would be something that pleases God?

But scripture teaches that the natural man cannot please God!
Cannot come to Christ!
Is not subject to the law of God and not even able to do so!
Scripture is just tossed aside (sorry, but what else can I say!) and Libertarian philosophy trumps the day!

tartanarmy wrote:

(Note, Arminians will hold to God knowing all things, which means what we do next week, next year etc is fixed and certain, which cannot be changed, thereby destroying Libertarian free will!

Actually, that's not quite accurate. We believe that God knows all things that will happen, and yes, except God intervene it cannot be changed. This, however, does not effect "free will" because we don't know what will happen.

Not knowing “what” will happen is irrelevant! The fact is, “what” will happen is “fixed and certain”.
Libertarian free will is not compatible with that!!
Free will is a Myth!

God knows the choices that man will make before he makes them. If God knows what we will do next week, then how did we not have a choice?

This is some strange logic there brother!

You believe in free will.
For your will to be truly “free”, the choices you make must not be predetermined, fixed and certain!

The fact that what you will “choose” to do next week is “fixed and certain” means that you have no “free choice” to do otherwise!
Surely you can grasp that simple fact.

No Calvinist denies that men make choices! We deny that our choices come from a “free” will.

The objection you raise only makes sense if God cannot see our future choices. Which is what Open Theism claims. So it is a strange argument for Calvinist to make.

Your logic here is terribly flawed.
Open Theists can easily hold to Libertarian free will, the reason being, they deny that God has exhaustive foreknowledge of the future. That is “the only” way you can hold to free will.

But what a price to pay for Libertarianism! It is outright Heresy!

It's like saying that since we can't change the past, we didn't have a choice.

That is just a completely useless statement!
Please think about it again!

God knows what our choices will be. The fact that he knows the outcome of those choices does not negate the ability to make choices.

But no one in the Calvinist/Arminian debate is saying that man does not make choices!
The debate is about free will, which scripture does not teach!

It's ok if you disagree, just be aware of what we believe and hold that against us. It does no good to hold what we don't believe against us. Smile

Peace brother Mark.

No worries!
Do you believe that you have free will or not?

If not, what will that do to all of your Arminian presuppositions about free will?

Will you just live with the inconsistency?
Become an Open Theist?
Or humble yourself before God and give Him all the glory for saving you and enabling you to exercise faith as a result of Him giving you a new heart and disposition, because of what the Calvinist Hymn writer John Newton called “Amazing Grace?”

Mark

Post by **_SoaringEagle** » Mon May 28, 2007 10:12 pm

Traveler:

Regeneration is the new birth "from above" that imparts new life enabling us to respond in a relationship with God. Therefore faith follows as the result not the cause of our new birth.

God is the cause of the new birth, not us. However, salvation has a co-operative aspect. Our response of repentant faith to the convincing and convicting work of the Spirit is an essential condition, as I repeat.

John 4:14 ... whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him will never thirst. But the water that I shall give him will become in him a fountain of water springing up into everlasting life."

Christ proposes life like a marriage proposal, we accept or reject this life, once again pointing out that reconciliation indeed involves two parties hence i.e. synergistic. I'll say this again: Irresistible grace is an oxymoron. Love and grace can be rejected or God is guilty of causation/coercion negating human responsibility. Irresistable Grace limits the love of God and makes His holiness arbitrary. We cannot elevate a wrong view on sovereignty above His holiness and love.

John 20:31 but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.

God in His Sovereignty chose that those that don't know Him can have life by believing. Faith is the key that opens the door of faith into the Kingdom of God.

Post by **_tartanarmy** » Tue May 29, 2007 10:34 pm

God is the cause of the new birth, not us. However, salvation has a co-operative aspect. Our response of repentant faith to the convincing and convicting work of the Spirit is an essential condition, as I repeat.

So, you are a Calvinist? Why are we banging heads then?
Mark

Post by **_tartanarmy** » Tue May 29, 2007 11:01 pm

God is the cause of the new birth, not us. However, salvation has a co-operative aspect. Our response of repentant faith to the convincing and convicting work of the Spirit is an essential condition, as I repeat.

That is reformed thinking!

John 4:14 ... whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him will never thirst. But the water that I shall give him will become in him a fountain of water springing up into everlasting life."

True, post regeneration.

Christ proposes life like a marriage proposal, we accept or reject this life, once again pointing out that reconciliation indeed involves two parties hence i.e. synergistic.

No, you say that God is THE CAUSE of the new birth. Reconciliation has to do with being united to Christ. That starts at the new birth, but before that, it was accomplished upon the cross.
In time, what was accomplished upon the cross is revealed to the elect, which results in repentance and faith.

I'll say this again: Irresistible grace is an oxymoron. Love and grace can be rejected or God is guilty of causation/coercion negating human responsibility.

Which is it? Does God cause it or not?
Scripture teaches that ALL MEN REJECT Christ and the gospel. ALL MEN.
God then decides to save some, and the some shall come to Him.
That is scripture.
All that the Father gives me, shall come to me!!

Irresistable Grace limits the love of God and makes His holiness arbitrary. We cannot elevate a wrong view on sovereignty above His holiness and love.

But that is precisely what you do!
His holiness demands justice, and if that were carried out to the letter, then no one would be saved! Why then question Him, when God decides to save some for His glory and others are left in their sins to the praise of His justice?

Do you just want to praise God for His mercy, but not praise Him for His justice?
Is God under obligation to give us all mercy?
Do you believe God should send every single one of us to Hell?
Are you somehow better than other sinners who do go to Hell?
If you truly believe that YOUR FAITH makes the difference between those who go to heaven and those who go to Hell, then you should praise yourself not God. Can you not see that?

John 20:31 but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.

God in His Sovereignty chose that those that don't know Him can have life by believing. Faith is the key that opens the door of faith into the Kingdom of God.

Faith is never the key in scripture! Never!
God's faithfulness to save His people is the key. Nothing else!
Faith is real and it is necessary, BUT IS ITSELF A GIFT!!

Think of faith as an eyeball. An eye is given so that we can see. It is not given in order to look at itself!
The key is not the eye, but what the eye beholds.
That is scripture, and that is Calvinism in a nutshell.

Joh 6:29 Jesus answered and said to them, This is the work of God, that you believe on Him whom He has sent.

Mark

Post by **__id_1679** » Wed May 30, 2007 8:51 am

Mark,

Maybe to encourage our brothers with regard to the subject at hand is, ask what their definition of "good" is? Since most here believe man has recieved salvation/new birth as a result of their "good free will choice", how do they answer Ps 14:1-3? Who is good?

Peace in Him,
Bob