Regeneration?

[Guest]

I had a long talk with a well educated church elder about when regeneration occurs and how. He believes in "calvinism" although he prefers to call it reformed soteriology I believe. Anyway, since the church's statement of faith says regeneration causes belief, I asked for biblical proof. Since it's clearly stated that the Holy Spirit comes after belief. He said no problem. Regeneration is a replacement of the heart so that you will believe, and then you are given the Holy Spirit because of the belief. Seems like a clever way of getting around the clear biblical statements to the contrary.

I'd like to hear both sides on this. What in the world is "regenaration" if it's nothing related to recieving the Holy Spirit?

The other elder I asked didn't have an answer at all, and some other church members offered other suggestions but they were all somewhat different. I don't see why.

[Guest]

Sean,

IMHO receiving the Holy Spirit, regeneration, and being born again are virtually synonymous, and are linked to baptism. See John 3:5, Acts 2:38, Romans 6:3-12 (in particular, new life=born again), and Titus 3:5. I know this is heretical to many protestants today but appears to have been the belief of the entire early church immediately after the time if the apostles. If this is not true, then the apostles failed in carrying out the "great commission"; they failed to impart the doctrine "once for all delivered to the saints" to their apprentices!

In Christ, Homer

[Guest]

Hi Sean,

I certainly don't have an exhaustive argument on this subject, but some scriptures that immediately come to my mind are:

1 Peter 1:3
3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who according to His abundant mercy has begotten us again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead,
NKJV

The resurrection and glorification of Jesus was 1st required.


John 20:22
22 And when He had said this, He breathed on them, and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit.
NKJV

This happened on the day of the resurrection. This could be seen as the apostles' regeneration. I don't think this was their baptism in the Spirit since that seemed to happen at Pentecost (I'm slightly charismatic, so I admit I'm a little biased here). I think it may be that when we receive the "divine nature", we are then regenerated.

2 Peter 1:3-4
3 as His divine power has given to us all things that pertain to life and godliness, through the knowledge of Him who called us by glory and virtue, 4 by which have been given to us exceedingly great and precious promises, that through these you may be partakers of the divine nature, having escaped the corruption that is in the world through lust.
NKJV


The apostles already believed, but had not yet received the "divine nature" until Jesus breathed it into them.

For us, I believe this happens simultaneously after we decide to believe.

Eph 2:8
8 For by grace you have been saved through faith,
NKJV

First comes faith, then comes saving grace.

I know that this is not a completely sufficient answer, but it keeps it simple for my mind. I'll be interested in reading some of the posts to come on this.

[Guest]

Re John 20:22 I do not believe the translation is correct; the greek word lambano translated "receive", has the primary meaning of "take". It is translated thus (took or take) five times in the 19th chapter of John. If we translate it as take in 20:22, Jesus is telling them to take the Holy Spirit with them as the are sent out. This translation then agrees with Jesus' statement that the Holy Spirit could not come until He went away.

Homer

[Guest]

Thanks Homer,

And you may be right about this. I have to admit that I don't study the greek as much as I'd like to on too many words that I read in the bible. Sometimes I just take them at face value unless I run into something that doesn't make plain sense to me.

But I would have to ask, in what sense were the apostles being told to "take" the Holy Spirit with them in their travels? And how were they to do that? It doesn't seem to me like remembering to take your wallet or something like that.

Also, if this wasn't to mean "receive", then what was the significance of Jesus breathing on them? Although this word "breathe" is not "pneuma" in this verse, it seems to be closely related since "pneuma" is used to describe both the Holy Spirit and a breath of air NT:4151.

And lastly, it seems very significant that Jesus at this time granted them the authority (or at least the spiritual discernment of) to forgive sins on earth (vs 23). Before this appearing, Peter couldn't even forgive himself, let alone others.

Anyway, thanks again for the reply and I'd be interested to hear your thoughts on these things (and anyone else's for that matter).

God bless.

[_Steve]

Calvinists, because of their peculiar view on total depravity, assert that God must first regenerate a man, bringing him to life from a state of spiritual death, before the man can have power to believe. Non-Calvinists believe that belief precedes regeneration, not vice versa. I believe that there is no scripture that states or implies the Calvinist position on this, and that it is merely a logical inference from the prior assumption of "total depravity." To the Calvinist, "total depravity" does not simply mean "thoroughgoing sinfulness," but it means "utter inability to desire or believe in Christ."

It is equivalent (in their view) to being "dead in trespasses and sins" (Eph.2:1, 5), and, since dead mean believe no tales, a person in that state is unable to believe until God first regenerates him/her—that is, brings him/her to life from the dead (spiritually). This bringing the dead spirit to life is what is meant by regeneration.

This argument sounds reasonable until one begins to ask even the simplest of analytical questions. For example, how do we know that Paul’s phrase, "dead in and sins," means "incapable of belief"? Persons who are unregenerated are not literally dead, and routinely believe many things—sometimes "a dozen impossible things before breakfast." Where do we find support for the assertion that the gospel is the only thing such people are not capable of believing? It is true that people who are literally dead do not perform saving actions, but neither do they perform any actions at all—as all living non-Christian people do. Dead people are not selective in their activities, neglecting only the religious ones.

I would like to present some specific verses that show 1) that persons who are said to be (metaphorically) "dead" can indeed believe and repent, and 2) that the Bible presents belief as the condition for (thus preceding) regeneration—not the other way around:

a) The prodigal son, while away from his father, is declared to have been both "lost" and "dead" (Luke 15:24). Yet, while in that condition, he "came to his senses" and decided to repent and return to his father. What was Jesus trying to teach here about the lost?

b) Abimelech, who had taken Sarah into his harem, was also declared by God to be "dead" (Genesis 20:3), yet, in that condition, he clearly repented and obeyed God.

c) Some of the Egyptians repented and desired to release the Israelites from captivity. What was their condition when they made this decision? They said, "We are all dead men!" (Exodus 12:33)—apparently seeing no obvious reason why they could not be both (metaphorically) “dead” while actively making right choices.

d) Even now, as Christians, according to Paul, our body is "dead" because of sin (Romans 8:10). If being “dead” equates with the inability to obey God, Calvinists, in order to be consistent, ought to claim that our bodies are incapable of obeying God.

It is clear that, in cases like these (and many others, like II Samuel 9:8; 19:28/Matthew 9:18), the term "dead" is used non-literally. It is not used "spiritually." That is, it does not mean "spiritually dead," but it means "as good as dead."

This is clearly seen in comparing statements in Romans 4:19 and Hebrews 11:12. The first says that Abraham, with reference to his having a child at age 100, was "already dead." The second reference, speaking of the exact same thing, says he was "as good as dead." It is clear that the Bible writers often used the term "dead" to mean "doomed," or "near death," or "as good as dead." Why would we make an exception in the case of Ephesians 2:1 and 5?

Calvinists like to point out that Paul says that the carnal mind “is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be. So then, those who are in the flesh cannot please God” (Rom.8:7-8). This sounds like a good text for inability. “If faith pleases God,” they say, “and the unregenerate cannot please God, then the unregenerate cannot exercise faith!”

But Paul is talking about the general behavior of the lost, just as John talks about the general behavior of Christians, when he says, “They that are born of God do not sin.” This is not absolute. Christians sometimes sin. This is even clear in the context of Romans 8, where Paul says that “those who live according to the flesh set their minds on the things of the flesh, but those who live according to the Spirit [set their minds on] the things of the Spirit” (v.5).

Clearly, Christian people’s minds are not always set upon spiritual things, though Paul is correct in saying that this is the general mindset of believers. Likewise, Paul can say that the general mindset of the carnal man is on carnal things without meaning to assert that a carnal man never has a spiritual concern any moment of any day. This simply would not be correct, since non-Christians often have spiritual concerns. To press such an absolute meaning upon Paul’s words is irresponsible exegesis.

Thus there is no biblical basis for claiming that the carnal man—who is metaphorically referred to as “dead”—is thereby declared incapable of any exercise of faith or obedience toward God.

Now there are many scriptures that tell us that regeneration comes after belief, not before. One of the most relevant to the above discussion is Colossians 2:13—

"And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses."

Notice the chronology here: God "quickened" (that is, “made alive” or “regenerated”) us, having forgiven us our sins. Clearly Paul is saying that the forgiveness came before the regeneration.

Forgiveness is equivalent to justification (see Rom.4:1ff). Justification comes as a result of faith. "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness" (Gen.15:6). That is, faith precedes justification, and since justification precedes regeneration, faith must precede regeneration.

Actually, all these things occur simultaneously. It is a logical, rather than chronological, order that is under consideration. It is a question of which thing precipitated the others. Faith obviously is the first domino in the chain—then justification—then regeneration.

The same passage says that we "are risen with him [i.e., “regenerated”] through the faith of the operation of God" (Col.2:11-12). To me this seems to be saying that our faith in the operation of God is the means through which, or the condition for, our regeneration.

John 6:40 says that everyone who believes may have eternal life. Since it is at the point of regeneration that one receives eternal life, this would seem synonymous with saying that whoever believes will be regenerated—naming faith as a prerequisite for regeneration.

This is even clearer in John 20:31— "These things are written that you may believe...and that believing you may have life..."

1 Timothy 1:16, likewise, tells us that people "believe on Him for everlasting life."

If Paul and John believed that one must be regenerated (brought to life) before believing, then it would have been more proper for them to write, "these things are written that you might have life, and having life you might believe" and "those who receive everlasting life, so that they might believe."

The strangest thing about the Calvinist assertions on this point is that the biblical writers did not say this kind of thing at all. They always made faith and repentance conditions for eternal life: "…that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)

[Guest]

["that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish but have everlasting life." (John 3:16)[/quote]

This scripture doesn't seem to be entirely in context related to making your point; however be patient with me, I'm just looking for answers.

Preceding this verse, Jesus is talking to Nicodemus about eternal life. He tells him, [paraphrased] "you cannot even SEE the kingdom unless you are born again" Within the context of his message to Nicodemus this seems to mean that you cannot understand, comprehend, BELIEVE without the new birth first.

He reiterates this point saying, "You are Israel's teacher," said Jesus, "and do you not understand these things?......... Nicodemus was a Pharisee, teacher and member of the ruling council (which I take to mean -- knew a lot about religious law, outwardly appeared to be a man of faith.) Yet Jesus says to him that he doesn't get it. That Nicodemus doesn't believe. He tells him he needs to be born again by the Spirit. He doesn't say believe and you will be born again. In fact he compares those who will be born again with the wind, "The wind blows wherever it pleases. You hear its sound, but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it is going. So it is with everyone born of the Spirit" [this reminds me of the story of Paul's conversion. He outwardly hated Christians; yet he was born again by the Spirit not by a fleshly act of belief (Acts 9)].

"It does not, therefore, depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy." (Rom 9:16)

He goes on to say that the Spirit gives birth to spirit; explaining the new birth. I take this to mean what it says, that its not an act of the flesh (believing) its an act of the Spirit.

1MansView

[Guest]

1Mansview,

Where did you find your paraphrase? The correct translation is enter the Kingdom not see. John 3:5 is completely consistent with Matthew 28:19-20. The kingdom is the church, all who obey him as Lord are His subjects. In Matthew Jesus informs the apostles that disciples are to be made by baptizing them and then teaching them to obey everything He taught them. We enter the Kingdom through baptism; where in scripture do you find baptism preceeding belief?

[Guest]

1Mansview,

Where did you find your paraphrase? The correct translation is enter the Kingdom not see. John 3:5 is completely consistent with Matthew 28:19-20. The kingdom is the church, all who obey him as Lord are His subjects. In Matthew Jesus informs the apostles that disciples are to be made by baptizing them and then teaching them to obey everything He taught them. We enter the Kingdom through baptism; where in scripture do you find baptism preceeding belief?

I’m sorry, I will try not to paraphrase so as to avoid future confusion.

John 3:3 “In reply Jesus declared, "I tell you the truth, no one can SEE the kingdom of God unless he is born again.” (NIV)

John 3:3 “Jesus answered and said to him, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born again he cannot SEE the kingdom of God." (NASB)

John 3:3 “Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot SEE the kingdom of God.” (KJV)

1MansView

[Guest]

1Mansview,

The greek word eido, translated see in John 3:3, also can have the meaning of experience. See Thayer's Lexicon where he renders the meaning in John 3:3 as "to partake of salvation in the Kingdom of God".

Blessings in your study.

Homer