Regeneration and born again are not synonymous

[Josheb]

Context is everything.

Well, context isn't everything, but it is critically important to a sound exegesis and a correct understanding of scripture. The problem is the context of a new birth and that of a new heart are completely different, but they were treated synonymously without warrant or explanation. In other words, you failed to render the contexts (plural correctly (and violated your own standard). Start by comparing verse about birth with verses about birth, verses about things from above with things from above, verses about the will of God with verses about the will of God, and don't conflate birth with heart.

These are OT saints who were due the Promise.

Then you acknowledge saints existed in the Old Testament. This begs a very important question: How can a person be a saint and not be born anew from above? Before attempting to answer that question you might start by defining the word "saint."

 

[Josheb]

With regards to my comment and concern about Catholics and baptism...Catholics, while trying desperately to maintain the illusion that the types have power (so believers feel the need for the hierarchy who are the only ones who can administer it.), and not wanting to confront the idea that it's faith that initiated the the Spirit baptism, will often claim that it is water baptism that initiated the Spirit baptism. They reason that it take faith to first get water baptized. I make sure to maintain the distinction between water baptism, a symbolic public testimony after the fact, and the Spirit baptism that is the result of faith. When lines are blurred, I feel compelled to clarify.

I thought this thread was about confronting the premises 1) the OT saints were born again and 2) a person must be born again to believe.

A servant is not greater than his Master.

How does that prove the OT saints were not born again?

Why is it so easy for you to see regeneration after being born from above, but hard for you to see regeneration before being born from above?

{Edit by admin}. I do not have any problem seeing.

I make that same distinction. I just do it in both directions both before and after being brought to life. By your own words, you do not see being born again and regeneration as the same context. I see regeneration in a bigger context than life to death, as you call it, also. I call life to death, being born again.

Ok, at the end of your quote, are you claiming two new births? Please explain what you mean there.

Dave

I did not say I see the new birth from above and regeneration in different contexts, and I did not claim there are two new births. What I did posts was genethe anothen and paliggensia can both mean new birth and both indicate a new birth from above (see Post #47). In point of fact, none of my posts in that entire page of posts use the word "context."

{Edit by admin. Violation of rules 2.1 and 2.2}

 

[Dave]

That is incorrect.

What scripture clearly teaches is we are saved through faith, not by it. Nowhere in the entirety of the Bible does scripture ever state "saved by faith." Nowhere. We are saved by grace through faith for works. We are justified by faith, not saved by faith. BIG difference.

Ephesians 2:4-10
But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), and raised us up with Him, and seated us with Him in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus, so that in the ages to come He might show the surpassing riches of His grace in kindness toward us in Christ Jesus. For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them.

• Saved by grace
• Saved through faith
• Saved for works (having been created in Christ).

That is what scripture clearly teaches.

Romans 3:28
For we maintain that a man is justified by faith apart from works of the Law.

Romans 5:1-2
Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom also we have obtained our introduction by faith into this grace in which we stand; and we exult in hope of the glory of God.

Galatians 3:23-24
But before faith came, we were kept in custody under the law, being shut up to the faith which was later to be revealed. Therefore, the Law has become our tutor to lead us to Christ, so that we may be justified by faith.

Justified by faith, not saved by it.

• Saved by grace (the cause).
• Saved through faith (the means).
• Saved for works (the purpose).
• Justified by faith (the cause).

Do not conflate justification with salvation. That is Catholicism. There's not a single place in scripture where we can find "saved by faith" stated.

Thoughts? I think before anyone sets about confronting others' doctrines s/he should confront his/her own doctrines first because scripture never states anyone is saved by faith. It never states faith initiates Spirit baptism. It never states baptism is a result of faith. It never states gennethe anothen is the result of faith, either. I've been doing Boolean searches of scripture along the way and there are many statements in your posts that are nowhere found in scripture. It very much looks like you're either inventing things as you go or learned some very scripture-less teaching.

Romans 10:9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.

That's faith, bro. Saved by faith. Also see Acts 16:31. It's a simple truth that your trying to complicate for whatever reason. From that simple truth, we know that faith is what brings the baptism with the Holy Spirit by Jesus, the baptism unites us with Jesus, makes us saved in everyway. Even born again. Line upon line....

 

[Dave]

Then you acknowledge saints existed in the Old Testament. This begs a very important question: How can a person be a saint and not be born anew from above? Before attempting to answer that question you might start by defining the word "saint."

By promise. I'll get the rest tomorrow.

Dave

 

[Josheb]

Romans 10:9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.

That's faith, bro. Saved by faith. Also see Acts 16:31. It's a simple truth that your trying to complicate for whatever reason. From that simple truth, we know that faith is what brings the baptism with the Holy Spirit by Jesus, the baptism unites us with Jesus, makes us saved in everyway. Even born again. Line upon line....

That verse was written by a born again, regenerate, saved believer to born again, regenerate, saved believers about the faith of thosee born again, regenerate, saved believers.

Q: To whom is the "you" in that verse referring?
A: The saints in Rome (see Rom. 1:7).

Q: To whom is the "you" in that verse referring?
A: According to the first verse in that chapter the "you" refers to "the brethren" (see Rom. 10:1).

Q: To whom is the "you" in that verse referring?
A: According to the previous verse the "you" refers to those in whom the word is near, in their mouth and in their heart, which would be the saints in Rome (see Rom. 10:8).

Q: To whom is the "you" in that verse NOT referring?
A: People other than those in whom God's word dwells in their heart, people other than the saints in Rome.

So, once again, your exegesis is lacking.



In the larger context of Romans 10:9, Paul is quoting Deuteronomy 30:14.

Deuteronomy 30:6-14
Moreover, the LORD your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your descendants, to love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, so that you may live. The LORD your God will inflict all these curses on your enemies and on those who hate you, who persecuted you. And you shall again obey the LORD and observe all His commandments which I command you today. Then the LORD your God will prosper you abundantly in all the work of your hand, in the offspring of your body and in the offspring of your cattle and in the produce of your ground, for the LORD will again rejoice over you for good, just as He rejoiced over your fathers; if you obey the LORD your God to keep His commandments and His statutes which are written in this book of the law, if you turn to the LORD your God with all your heart and soul. For this commandment which I command you today is not too difficult for you, nor is it out of reach. It is not in heaven, that you should say, 'Who will go up to heaven for us to get it for us and make us hear it, that we may observe it?' Nor is it beyond the sea, that you should say, 'Who will cross the sea for us to get it for us and make us hear it, that we may observe it?' But the word is very near you, in your mouth and in your heart, that you may observe it.

This presents a huge problem for your position because if Paul is applying this text to the saints living in Rome then either the same condition of sainthood exists in the Deuteronomy audience or Paul has radically changed the meaning of the Deuteronomy text to mean something it did not mean when first said by God. Paul has changed God's word. Paul has changed the meaning of God's words.

In even larger context, and this is also very fatal to the synergist position, the people in Deuteronomy 30 to whom those words were first spoken were people living in a monergistically God initiated covenant relationship they had not been asked to join .

• God initiates His covenant(s).
• God chooses the participant(s) monergistically.
• Before He chooses the participant(s), God never asks the participant(s)s if they want to be chosen.
• God calls the covenant participant(s) monergistically.
• Before God calls the participant, He never asks the participant if they want to be chosen.
• God initiates and establishes the covenant, the choosing of its participants, the calling of its participants, and He does all of that without ever asking any of them if they want any part of it.
• It is not until after the covenant relationship is established that God asks anything about the want of the participant(s).

That is exactly what has happened in Deuteronomy 30. The only reason those people are there at all is because they are a fulfillment of a promise first made to Abraham. God initiated a covenant with Abraham. God did not ask Abraham if Abraham wanted God to initiate a covenant with Abraham. God chose Abraham and, again, God did not ask Abraham if Abraham would like to be chosen for a covenant with God. God just did it, and Abraham did not even know it had happened. God then called Abraham. God, again, did not ask Abraham if he would like to be called. God just called him without Abe's consent, AND God called Abraham with an expectation Abraham would obey. There was no allowance for Abraham to say, "No. choose someone else, call someone else, I'm not interested." The day scripture explicitly states the covenant is established is in Genesis 15.

Abraham setup a suzerain ritual that day but God never showed up and Abraham fell asleep. While sleeping God spoke to Abraham, saying,

Genesis 15:12-16
Now when the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell upon Abram; and behold, terror and great darkness fell upon him. God said to Abram, "Know for certain that your descendants will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, where they will be enslaved and oppressed four hundred years. But I will also judge the nation whom they will serve, and afterward they will come out with many possessions. As for you, you shall go to your fathers in peace; you will be buried at a good old age. Then in the fourth generation they will return here, for the iniquity of the Amorite is not yet complete."

Hundreds of years later that group of people - the group God had promised Abraham - stood before God in a monergistically, God-initiated covenant and they were given a choice.

Deuteronomy 30:15-20
"See, I have set before you today life and prosperity, and death and adversity; in that I command you today to love the LORD your God, to walk in His ways and to keep His commandments and His statutes and His judgments, that you may live and multiply, and that the LORD your God may bless you in the land where you are entering to possess it. But if your heart turns away and you will not obey, but are drawn away and worship other gods and serve them, I declare to you today that you shall surely perish. You will not prolong your days in the land where you are crossing the Jordan to enter and possess it. I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants, by loving the LORD your God, by obeying His voice, and by holding fast to Him; for this is your life and the length of your days, that you may live in the land which the LORD swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to give them."

Those Hebrews were not asked if they wanted to be participants in the covenant God first initiated with Abraham. They were not asked if they wanted to be called into the covenant relationship. The were commanded and commanded with an expectation to obey God. God literally killed everyone who disobeyed Him. Those that left Egypt never made it to the promised land - the land promised to Abraham and his seed (singular).

On the day God stated He established the covenant with Abraham, Abe set up a suzerain ritual. That ritual would have required Abraham to walk through the sundered carcasses and pledge fealty to God upon the penalty of death if he violated his pledge of fealty. This has numerous contexts but chief among them is the fact Abraham had several opportunities to pledge fealty to other monarchs in his wanderings, but he always refused to do so. Most importantly, God never showed up for Abe to perform the ritual. Abe fell asleep and while he was asleep God came to Abe in a vision and in that vision Abraham saw a smoking pot and a flaming torch (see Exodus 13:21).

Genesis 15:17-18
It came about when the sun had set, that it was very dark, and behold, there appeared a smoking oven and a flaming torch which passed between these pieces. On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, "To your descendants I have given this land....

In other words, it was God who walked through the sundered carcasses pledging fealty to God upon the penalty of His death.

The covenant established with Abraham was Christological! Paul makes this abundantly clear in his letter to the Galatians when he wrote,

Galatians 3:16
Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. He does not say, "And to seeds," as referring to many, but rather to one, "And to your seed," that is, Christ.

The promises in the covenant God made in Genesis 15 were made to Abraham and his seed, Jesus Christ. That OT covenant was Christological. The Deuteronomy 30 people to whom Romans 10:9 was first spoken were people living in a Christological relationship God had established monergistically.


Your exegesis is lacking if you think Romans 10:9 applies to every godless god-denying sinner who has ever lived.


One last point. The promises made in Deuteronomy were said to be everlasting. Those promises included blessings and curses. The curses are just as everlasting as the blessings. One of the curses is destruction. God's promise to destroy the covenant breakers is just as everlasting as His promise to bless the covenant keepers.

Romans 9:6-8 (excerpted for the sake of space)
But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel; nor are they all children because they are Abraham's descendants.............. it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants.

The context in which Romans 10:9 occurs is that not all of Israel is Israel and not all descendants of Abraham are Abraham. The descendants included in God's Christological covenant relationship are the people of God's promise (those monergistically chosen by God, monergistically called by God, and those monergistically commanded by God with an expectation of obedience).

Those separated by God for sacred purpose = saints. Either the Deuteronomy 30 audience included born again saints or Paul is misusing God's word.

 

[Josheb]

Romans 10:9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.

Show me an example of someone confessing Jesus is Lord, believing in their heart God has raised him from the dead who does not already have God at work within them for that purpose.

After you do that, I will show you an example of an Old Testament saint confessing Jesus as Lord and believing in his heart God would raise him from the dead . If you cannot provide me with the example I requested just let me know. Post something like, "I am unaware of any such person," or "I cannot think of anyone like that in scripture," (put an acknowledgment in your own words) and I will still provide an example of an Old Testament person that confessed Jesus as Lord and believed in his heart God would raise him from the dead.

 

[Josheb]

By promise. I'll get the rest tomorrow.

Dave

No worries. The posts aren't going anywhere, and I appreciate you hanging in here with me. Take your time. I mean that. I will check in when I can but my daughter is wedding this weekend , so I'll be very busy for the next four or five days . I ask only that you remember the topic of this thread, the task you have set for yourself: confronting the premise the OT saints were not born anew from above.*









* Or, more thoroughly: 1) regeneration and born again are not synonymous, 2) the OT saints were not born again, and 3) regeneration does not proceed faith. A number of tangents exist, and I'd like us to stay op-relevant.
.

 

[Dave]

The facts or correct but they are also diversionary. The one specific point you are supposed to be confronting is whether or not the the OT saints were born again.

No, I don't believe that OT saints were born again. I do believe that they had some form of regeneration. But it did not make them complete in Him and lacking nothing, as we are told in Colossians 2:10-14, after the placing into. But before Pentecost they were lacking the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and all the benefits that the indwelling allows, both legal and practical. They were not "in Him". That's what the baptism does.

This is lacking here...not just the Spirit, but as a result, they were lacking in understanding. All these are OT passages from John before the ascension, and the Holy spirit (indwelling) was given.

John 14: 16-20, 25-26 And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may abide with you forever-- the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him; but you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you. I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you. "A little while longer and the world will see Me no more, but you will see Me. Because I live, you will live also. At that day you will know that I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you.... (25-26)"These things I have spoken to you while being present with you. But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you.

John 16: 25 "These things I have spoken to you in figurative language; but the time is coming when I will no longer speak to you in figurative language, but I will tell you plainly about the Father.

And John 16:12-16 I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you. All things that the Father has are Mine. Therefore I said that He will take of Mine and declare it to you. "A little while, and you will not see Me; and again a little while, and you will see Me, because I go to the Father."

So, I believe that they had faith in the OT, and this faith and their understanding, though limited, was from God, not from the flesh. However, this limited understanding, I believe is the because they didn't have the NT indwelling, making them one with Jesus. They had Jesus there physically, which I can best comprehend as similar to the Holy Spirit being upon then, which is an OT gesture, but He is not in them yet.

So my question to you is, what were they lacking in John that that had in Colossians? They had faith in both, meaning both before and after the cross. But after the cross was something more. They were clearly lacking something in their regeneration. "will teach you all things". Wasn't He teaching them all things already? "you will live also". Weren't they living already?

My conclusion is that they were not born from above yet. Being born of God is the direct result of the Spiritual union with Christ, being in Christ. That's the result of the baptism with the Holy Spirit. The NT indwelling. In Christ is access to all the benefits both legally (justified), and practically (born again). That's why in Colossians it can be said that they are complete in Him and lacking nothing.

OT saints who died before Jesus appeared in His incarnation died not having received the Promise of the father. They weren't in heaven nor could they be because they we're made clean yet. They were not born from above. They didn't even know the Gospel yet. that's why Jesus when He descended, preached to the Spirits in prison (Hades). So this is not just a legality issue, but it's also a practical matter. Nicodemus had the same problem. I believe that he was lacking in understanding because he wasn't born again.

Can you agree without using any labels that before Pentecost a believers regeneration was lacking in a few different ways?

The verse that I gave to define born again is my definition. I know it's called being raised up with Him, born from above, born of God and born again. I know we die with Him and are raised up with Him. I know that OT saints had some primitively form of regeneration that was added to, or replaced, or topped off, if you will, in the NT placing into Christ when they were raised up with him as a result of being in Christ.

BTW, the first 6 questions would be no. If you replaced born from above etc with regeneration, the answer would be yes.

7) Faith does not come from the flesh.

8) I don't understand your question. All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. Anyone made perfect is in Christ. OT saints included. Whether by Promise, or actual.

9) Peter is drawing parallels between the flood and God's judgment. The idea being that Jesus is our Ark, and being placed "in Him" we are delivered from/sheltered from God judgment. Baptism describes an action, but water isn't part of the definition of it. It means to place into, to immerse, and third to dip into. The Gentile Naaman was simply dipped into water and it didn't have anything to do with baptism as we understand it, not in Spirit, or in type. So, unless I'm missing something, the passage in 1 Kings 5 doesn't apply.

10) If I believed that regeneration and born from above were synonymous, that would indeed be a valid point of contention. The only alternative would be the flesh. But that's not what I believe the Bible teaches.

Dave

 

[Dave]

I'll need to answer post 85 and anything after either tonight or tomorrow.

 

[Arial]

No, I don't believe that OT saints were born again. I do believe that they had some form of regeneration. But it did not make them complete in Him and lacking nothing, as we are told in Colossians 2:10-14, after the placing into. But before Pentecost they were lacking the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and all the benefits that the indwelling allows, both legal and practical. They were not "in Him".

How would you have any way of knowing that? The Bible doesn't say it.

They were not "in Him". That's what the baptism does.

Do you mean water baptism or baptism of the Holy Spirit? I feel certain that you mean the Spirit baptism. I am pointing out that the way you say it above can be misconstrued.

Do you think the persons in Acts 18 and 19 did not have the indwelling Holy Spirit, just because they had never heard of it. That would suggest that a person can be saved through faith and not be indwelt by the Spirit. Or that they could be saved without being in Christ. The speaking in tongues in the early days of the gospel beginning to spread was a sign that the Spirit baptism had occurred, and the sign is no longer necessary. If you notice in Acts, Paul was speaking in synagogues a great deal of the time, to Jews, and Gentiles who had converted to Judaism. Therefore they had heard of John's baptism but not the Spirit baptism, not even after they believed the gospel. Evidently those who first took the gospel to them had not either. Were they believers who were not in Christ?

 

[Dave]

How would you have any way of knowing that? The Bible doesn't say it.

Do you mean water baptism or baptism of the Holy Spirit? I feel certain that you mean the Spirit baptism. I am pointing out that the way you say it above can be misconstrued.

Do you think the persons in Acts 18 and 19 did not have the indwelling Holy Spirit, just because they had never heard of it. That would suggest that a person can be saved through faith and not be indwelt by the Spirit. Or that they could be saved without being in Christ. The speaking in tongues in the early days of the gospel beginning to spread was a sign that the Spirit baptism had occurred, and the sign is no longer necessary. If you notice in Acts, Paul was speaking in synagogues a great deal of the time, to Jews, and Gentiles who had converted to Judaism. Therefore they had heard of John's baptism but not the Spirit baptism, not even after they believed the gospel. Evidently those who first took the gospel to them had not either. Were they believers who were not in Christ?

Hi Arial. There's a lot to go over there. I must reference you to a thread I started that records the nuances of that transitional period. If it doesn't help, let me know.

D

Thread 'What Happened In Acts?'

Feb 4, 2025

OT SAINTS SAVED BY FAITH

First, to grasp what was happening in Acts, you must understand that the OT saints were also saved by faith. They put their faith in God that He would provide a Savior. God had passed over their sins until Christ died on the cross.

Hebrews 10:1-4 For the law, having a shadow of the good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with these same sacrifices, which they offer continually year by year, make those who approach perfect. For then would they not have ceased to be offered? For the worshipers, once purified, would have had no more...

• Dave
• Replies: 35
• Forum: New Testament

• 

Dave

 

[Dave]

That verse was written by a born again, regenerate, saved believer to born again, regenerate, saved believers about the faith of thosee born again, regenerate, saved believers.

Q: To whom is the "you" in that verse referring?
A: The saints in Rome (see Rom. 1:7).

Q: To whom is the "you" in that verse referring?
A: According to the first verse in that chapter the "you" refers to "the brethren" (see Rom. 10:1).

Q: To whom is the "you" in that verse referring?
A: According to the previous verse the "you" refers to those in whom the word is near, in their mouth and in their heart, which would be the saints in Rome (see Rom. 10:8).

Q: To whom is the "you" in that verse NOT referring?
A: People other than those in whom God's word dwells in their heart, people other than the saints in Rome.

So, once again, your exegesis is lacking.



In the larger context of Romans 10:9, Paul is quoting Deuteronomy 30:14.

Deuteronomy 30:6-14
Moreover, the LORD your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your descendants, to love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, so that you may live. The LORD your God will inflict all these curses on your enemies and on those who hate you, who persecuted you. And you shall again obey the LORD and observe all His commandments which I command you today. Then the LORD your God will prosper you abundantly in all the work of your hand, in the offspring of your body and in the offspring of your cattle and in the produce of your ground, for the LORD will again rejoice over you for good, just as He rejoiced over your fathers; if you obey the LORD your God to keep His commandments and His statutes which are written in this book of the law, if you turn to the LORD your God with all your heart and soul. For this commandment which I command you today is not too difficult for you, nor is it out of reach. It is not in heaven, that you should say, 'Who will go up to heaven for us to get it for us and make us hear it, that we may observe it?' Nor is it beyond the sea, that you should say, 'Who will cross the sea for us to get it for us and make us hear it, that we may observe it?' But the word is very near you, in your mouth and in your heart, that you may observe it.

This presents a huge problem for your position because if Paul is applying this text to the saints living in Rome then either the same condition of sainthood exists in the Deuteronomy audience or Paul has radically changed the meaning of the Deuteronomy text to mean something it did not mean when first said by God. Paul has changed God's word. Paul has changed the meaning of God's words.

In even larger context, and this is also very fatal to the synergist position, the people in Deuteronomy 30 to whom those words were first spoken were people living in a monergistically God initiated covenant relationship they had not been asked to join .

• God initiates His covenant(s).
• God chooses the participant(s) monergistically.
• Before He chooses the participant(s), God never asks the participant(s)s if they want to be chosen.
• God calls the covenant participant(s) monergistically.
• Before God calls the participant, He never asks the participant if they want to be chosen.
• God initiates and establishes the covenant, the choosing of its participants, the calling of its participants, and He does all of that without ever asking any of them if they want any part of it.
• It is not until after the covenant relationship is established that God asks anything about the want of the participant(s).

That is exactly what has happened in Deuteronomy 30. The only reason those people are there at all is because they are a fulfillment of a promise first made to Abraham. God initiated a covenant with Abraham. God did not ask Abraham if Abraham wanted God to initiate a covenant with Abraham. God chose Abraham and, again, God did not ask Abraham if Abraham would like to be chosen for a covenant with God. God just did it, and Abraham did not even know it had happened. God then called Abraham. God, again, did not ask Abraham if he would like to be called. God just called him without Abe's consent, AND God called Abraham with an expectation Abraham would obey. There was no allowance for Abraham to say, "No. choose someone else, call someone else, I'm not interested." The day scripture explicitly states the covenant is established is in Genesis 15.

Abraham setup a suzerain ritual that day but God never showed up and Abraham fell asleep. While sleeping God spoke to Abraham, saying,

Genesis 15:12-16
Now when the sun was going down, a deep sleep fell upon Abram; and behold, terror and great darkness fell upon him. God said to Abram, "Know for certain that your descendants will be strangers in a land that is not theirs, where they will be enslaved and oppressed four hundred years. But I will also judge the nation whom they will serve, and afterward they will come out with many possessions. As for you, you shall go to your fathers in peace; you will be buried at a good old age. Then in the fourth generation they will return here, for the iniquity of the Amorite is not yet complete."

Hundreds of years later that group of people - the group God had promised Abraham - stood before God in a monergistically, God-initiated covenant and they were given a choice.

Deuteronomy 30:15-20
"See, I have set before you today life and prosperity, and death and adversity; in that I command you today to love the LORD your God, to walk in His ways and to keep His commandments and His statutes and His judgments, that you may live and multiply, and that the LORD your God may bless you in the land where you are entering to possess it. But if your heart turns away and you will not obey, but are drawn away and worship other gods and serve them, I declare to you today that you shall surely perish. You will not prolong your days in the land where you are crossing the Jordan to enter and possess it. I call heaven and earth to witness against you today, that I have set before you life and death, the blessing and the curse. So choose life in order that you may live, you and your descendants, by loving the LORD your God, by obeying His voice, and by holding fast to Him; for this is your life and the length of your days, that you may live in the land which the LORD swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, to give them."

Those Hebrews were not asked if they wanted to be participants in the covenant God first initiated with Abraham. They were not asked if they wanted to be called into the covenant relationship. The were commanded and commanded with an expectation to obey God. God literally killed everyone who disobeyed Him. Those that left Egypt never made it to the promised land - the land promised to Abraham and his seed (singular).

On the day God stated He established the covenant with Abraham, Abe set up a suzerain ritual. That ritual would have required Abraham to walk through the sundered carcasses and pledge fealty to God upon the penalty of death if he violated his pledge of fealty. This has numerous contexts but chief among them is the fact Abraham had several opportunities to pledge fealty to other monarchs in his wanderings, but he always refused to do so. Most importantly, God never showed up for Abe to perform the ritual. Abe fell asleep and while he was asleep God came to Abe in a vision and in that vision Abraham saw a smoking pot and a flaming torch (see Exodus 13:21).

Genesis 15:17-18
It came about when the sun had set, that it was very dark, and behold, there appeared a smoking oven and a flaming torch which passed between these pieces. On that day the LORD made a covenant with Abram, saying, "To your descendants I have given this land....

In other words, it was God who walked through the sundered carcasses pledging fealty to God upon the penalty of His death.

The covenant established with Abraham was Christological! Paul makes this abundantly clear in his letter to the Galatians when he wrote,

Galatians 3:16
Now the promises were spoken to Abraham and to his seed. He does not say, "And to seeds," as referring to many, but rather to one, "And to your seed," that is, Christ.

The promises in the covenant God made in Genesis 15 were made to Abraham and his seed, Jesus Christ. That OT covenant was Christological. The Deuteronomy 30 people to whom Romans 10:9 was first spoken were people living in a Christological relationship God had established monergistically.


Your exegesis is lacking if you think Romans 10:9 applies to every godless god-denying sinner who has ever lived.


One last point. The promises made in Deuteronomy were said to be everlasting. Those promises included blessings and curses. The curses are just as everlasting as the blessings. One of the curses is destruction. God's promise to destroy the covenant breakers is just as everlasting as His promise to bless the covenant keepers.

Romans 9:6-8 (excerpted for the sake of space)
But it is not as though the word of God has failed. For they are not all Israel who are descended from Israel; nor are they all children because they are Abraham's descendants.............. it is not the children of the flesh who are children of God, but the children of the promise are regarded as descendants.

The context in which Romans 10:9 occurs is that not all of Israel is Israel and not all descendants of Abraham are Abraham. The descendants included in God's Christological covenant relationship are the people of God's promise (those monergistically chosen by God, monergistically called by God, and those monergistically commanded by God with an expectation of obedience).

Those separated by God for sacred purpose = saints. Either the Deuteronomy 30 audience included born again saints or Paul is misusing God's word.

All this because I said that we're saved by faith? Unless, by "through faith" in Ephesians 2:8-10 you were suggesting a process of sorts, it's not in conflict with what I said. In that context, "by faith" and "through faith" both mean the same thing. Even in it's smallest context, Romans 10:9 is a true statement. It doesn't need more context to be true. We don't need to know the cause of the cause of the cause for that simple statement to be true. What does it say? Faith in Jesus = saved.

Romans 10:9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.

Nothing that you wrote overturns that simple truth. Paul quoting Deuteronomy doesn't change anything. In Deuteronomy they are told that they already have God's command in their mouths and hearts. It is near them. Paul applies that idea to faith in Christ. They would be declared righteous. But remember, Romans was written after the cross. OT saints still had to wait for it to actually happen for all the benefits to apply to them.

Yes, I know Romans was written to believers, and I know not all Israel is Israel, and I know about the Promised "Seed". In fact, I quoted that passage in this thread already as one of the four verses to build from.

Galatians 3:26-29 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

The Promise is realized by way of the baptism, which is realized by faith. That's what I said.

Show me an example of someone confessing Jesus is Lord, believing in their heart God has raised him from the dead who does not already have God at work within them for that purpose.

Your argument is against something I don't believe. Regeneration before faith. Born again after faith.

Dave

 

[Josheb]

No, I don't believe that OT saints were born again.

I took that to be your position when the op stated it was time to confront that point of view.

I do believe that they had some form of regeneration.

Make that case. I'll read it. I'll give it consideration as objectively as I can and critique it accordingly.

But it did not make them complete in Him and lacking nothing, as we are told in Colossians 2:10-14, after the placing into. But before Pentecost they were lacking the indwelling of the Holy Spirit and all the benefits that the indwelling allows, both legal and practical. They were not "in Him". That's what the baptism does.

Okay. However, I have observed several weak points in the use of scripture to support that position. Even if your position is correct, it is reached by a problematic use of scripture.

This is lacking here...not just the Spirit, but as a result, they were lacking in understanding. All these are OT passages from John before the ascension, and the Holy spirit (indwelling) was given.

Be careful of "onlyism."

Onlyism is the practice of inserting of the word "only" into verses where they word does not exist and does not belong. For example, 1 John 3:4 does NOT state, "ONLY sin is lawlessness. That "only" is nowhere found in the passage and to put it into the verse causes conflict with other scripture. Another example would be to read Ephesians 4:11 as "He gave some to be only apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers." The word only does not belong there. That list of positions is not exhaustive. Paul simply listed five of the many leadership/service roles Jesus gave the Church.

Stay away from the idea the giving of the Spirit can occur in ONLY one way and Pentecost is it. God gifts the Holy Spirit, and the Holy Spirit indwells and works within people in many different ways throughout the entirety of scripture. All kinds of conflicts will be created if you restrict the salvific work of the Holy Spirit to one, or two, conditions. Aside from that list of questions I provided in Post #80, you'll have to explain how Isaiah could stand before God and not be instantly incinerated, how he could see the kingdom and not be born anew from above.

John 3:3
Jesus answered and said to him, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.”

One of the great curiosities of born-againism is that Jesus did not say a person has to be born again to be saved. He said a person has to be born again to see the kingdom. We infer a certain synonymity between "born again" and "saved" because we do not construe a person being able to see the kingdom without also being saved from sin. The phrase" born again," must, therefore, be synonymous with salvation.
.

John 14: 16-20, 25-26 And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may abide with you forever-- the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him; but you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you. I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you. "A little while longer and the world will see Me no more, but you will see Me. Because I live, you will live also. At that day you will know that I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you.... (25-26)"These things I have spoken to you while being present with you. But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you.

John 16: 25 "These things I have spoken to you in figurative language; but the time is coming when I will no longer speak to you in figurative language, but I will tell you plainly about the Father.

And John 16:12-16 I still have many things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now. However, when He, the Spirit of truth, has come, He will guide you into all truth; for He will not speak on His own authority, but whatever He hears He will speak; and He will tell you things to come. He will glorify Me, for He will take of what is Mine and declare it to you. All things that the Father has are Mine. Therefore I said that He will take of Mine and declare it to you. "A little while, and you will not see Me; and again a little while, and you will see Me, because I go to the Father."

Great. However, I would ask you two questions:

1. Has there ever been a point when Jesus was not ontologically the resurrection?
2. Can Jesus pray for people living on earth while he is in heaven and, as God/Son of God, command whatever he likes from his position in heaven?

If the answer to the first question is "No," and the answer to the second question is "Yes," everything you just listed could have existed in the OT, at least in part (Heb. 11) and the idea Jesus is describing a temporal-only condition is problematic.

So, I believe that they had faith in the OT, and this faith and their understanding, though limited, was from God, not from the flesh. However, this limited understanding, I believe is the because they didn't have the NT indwelling, making them one with Jesus.

Yes, you are repeating yourself but not explaining yourself. You are not proving the position. You're not examining your own presuppositions critically. Before some of this content is posted you should be asking yourself, "Is this actually true? Should I give my own beliefs more critical examination before I post this because that guy Josh is going to do his best to take it apart before he approves it for himself."

The limited understanding of the OT saints is not in dispute. I wholeheartedly agree with you. They understood something of Christ and his resurrection from the dead, but they did not fathom all of it. The question I would ask you is, "How could the fathom any of it if they did not have the effects of either genethe anothen or paliggenesia? God revealed Himsel to a lot of people in the OT but most of them denied what they'd seen and heard. Nearly the entire Sadducean and Levitical order remained obstinately rebellious, heard-hearted, and....... unknowing while a small group of people (those with whom God monergistically initiated a Christological covenant and chose, called, and commanded within that covenant. The Christological covenant started at least as far back as Genesis 12 or 15. The Christological covenant necessarily entails salvation from sin, living by the law of the Spirit, gennethe anothem, paliggenesia, and a bunch of other stuff that was reveal more clearly in the New Testament. I encourage you not to assume something did not exist in the OT simply because it was explained in the newer revelation of the NT. When scripture says something was "veiled," that does not mean it was non-existent. Just because an OT saint did not understand something does not mean they weren't born again or regenerate. Be careful with those causal inferences.

Start with the stuff the NT explicitly states did and did not exist. Make any inferences based on what is explicitly stated in scripture, not what is argued by post-canonical doctrines.

They had Jesus there physically, which I can best comprehend as similar to the Holy Spirit being upon then, which is an OT gesture, but He is not in them yet.

I will concede the New Testament salvific indwelling of God in humans is unique in many ways, but it is not unique in all ways. One of the problems you'll have to surmount is all the many verses in the Bible that talk about the light's inability to dwell with darkness (and vice versa). God cannot inhabit the OT prophets unless he has to some degree or another cleaned them up, cleaned them out, justified them, sanctified them, and otherwise prepared the individual to contain His Spirit. The same holds true of the gospel-era disciples. The indwelling of the Spirit they possessed when they commanded creation cast out demands, and healed sick folk is an indwelling of God in that individual. Is it different than the Pentecost and post-Pentecost experience? Yes, but that does not change the fact God either indwelt a pile of refuse and contradicted Himself, or God changed every individual in whom He dwelt and through whom He worked for salvific purpose.

Hebrews 11:39-40
And all these, having gained approval through their faith, did not receive what was promised, because God had provided something better for us, so that apart from us they would not be made perfect.

That text states they are "made complete" in "us" (the Church; those to whom God had spoken through His son and appointed as heirs). That "made complete" implies the process had already been started in every one of those individuals mentioned in that chapter. God began His salvific work in them and completed that work in us. That "us" is a curious qualifier because the author of Hebrews did not say they were completed in Christ . No, he plainly stated their completion was accomplished in Christ's body, not Christ himself . How can those people have had God begun the Christological salvific purpose, revealed divine knowledge to them that was received and understood, indwelt them with His Spirit and not birthed them anew from above and/or regenerated them? How could the see the kingdom if not gennethe anothen.

Of course, the Dispensational Premillennialist has a radically different view of the kingdom than all the rest of Christendom so that question cannot be answered with consensus, but the question itself is justified and worth asking if we're trying to fathom what the OT saints did and did not experience relative to the new birth.

And I have not forgotten your position, an acknowledgment of some degree or kind of regeneration, but not new birth.

So my question to you is, what were they lacking in John that that had in Colossians?

The answer to that question might take multiple posts but it could be summarized in a single sentence: Dispositionally, they lacked nothing; experientially they lacked many things.

They had faith in both, meaning both before and after the cross. But after the cross was something more. They were clearly lacking something in their regeneration. "will teach you all things". Wasn't He teaching them all things already? "you will live also". Weren't they living already?

All very good questions. However, I encourage you to look both ways from the point of the pre-Calvary disciple, backwards and forwards because there is evidence in the New Testament that some in the OT knew a lot more than the eleven. Abraham, for example, understood a monogene son would be sacrificed to pay for his sins and God would provide that sacrifice. Daivd, understood the anointed one would be his Lord, be a son of God, and would resurrect from the grave. Prior to the resurrection, those two guys grasped a lot more than the twelve, and God's spirit indwelt them sufficiently to foment prophecy.

My conclusion is that they were not born from above yet.

Yes, but there are deficits in the reasoning by which that conclusion is reached. The deficits exist, apparently, because the whole of scripture isn't considered, what parts of scripture are used aren't exegeted very well, unsupported assumptions are made, and a few contradictions ensue.

 

[Josheb]

Being born of God is the direct result of the Spiritual union with Christ, being in Christ.

Yep.

That's the result of the baptism with the Holy Spirit.

Yep.

The NT indwelling.

Maybe not. What is the difference between an OT indwelling and an NT indwelling. I haven't read anything addressing that matter. What is the difference between a pre-Pentecost indwelling and a post-Pentecost indwelling? Were Apollos and the Acts 19 disciples saved? If so, then how can they be saved if they've not been born anew from above? How can they be saved without being regenerate? How can they be called "disciples" if they're not saved? They are stated to have faith, so how can they have faith and not be Spirit baptized?

You have not addressed any of these questions. Granted, they are an exception to the rule, but any sound doctrine has to have an explanation for the exceptions that is more than a shrug of the proverbial shoulders and a concession to their existence as an exception.

In Christ is access to all the benefits both legally (justified), and practically (born again).

Which the OT saints possessed. The righteous live by faith. That's an OT standard, not something new to the NT.

That's why in Colossians it can be said that they are complete in Him and lacking nothing.

Yes, I understand that. It does not need to be repeated further. The problem is there are defiictis in the case supporting that conclusion.

OT saints who died before Jesus appeared in His incarnation died not having received the Promise of the father.

Got scripture for that? Moses and Elijah appeared with Jesus at the transfiguration.

They weren't in heaven nor could they be because they we're made clean yet.

Got scripture for that? Moses and Elijah appeared with Jesus at the transfiguration.

They were not born from above.

Got scripture for that? Moses and Elijah appeared with Jesus at the transfiguration.

They didn't even know the Gospel yet.

According to Paul the gospel had been preached to Abraham and, according to Peter, David understood the resurrection kingdom.

that's why Jesus when He descended, preached to the Spirits in prison (Hades).

And yet a host of OT individuals understood much of the gospel before they died.

So this is not just a legality issue, but it's also a practical matter.

I agree. The problem is way too many problems exist in the case presented thus far.

Nicodemus had the same problem. I believe that he was lacking in understanding because he wasn't born again.

Nicodemus was saved before he knew he was saved. Is ignorance is evidence of nothing more than a temporal condition, not an eternal one.

Can you agree without using any labels that before Pentecost a believers regeneration was lacking in a few different ways?

No. Mostly because...... you have not defined your terms . A difference in degree is not a difference inkind and you've failed to address that matter, too.

7) Faith does not come from the flesh.

The OT saints had faith, faith in God's Son, and that faith was salvific.

8) I don't understand your question. All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. Anyone made perfect is in Christ. OT saints included. Whether by Promise, or actual.

Then, based on those statements, anyone in the OT that was dispositionally saved was in Christ.

9) Peter is drawing parallels between the flood and God's judgment.

Yes, and the key point was a salvifically clean conscience.

10) If I believed that regeneration and born from above were synonymous, that would indeed be a valid point of contention.

Many, many posts ago I pointed to the Greek that showed both could be rendered as new birth.

 

[Dave]

@Josheb, my two monkeys and a yoyo need a break today, maybe for the weekend too. It's going to be a busy weekend. I'll probably get back Monday.

Dave

 

[Josheb]

All this because I said that we're saved by faith? Unless, by "through faith" in Ephesians 2:8-10 you were suggesting a process of sorts, it's not in conflict with what I said. In that context, "by faith" and "through faith" both mean the same thing.

Well, perhaps I did not adequately understand, or perhaps you weren't sufficiently clear but any position that says faith causes salvation is incorrect. Faith is correlative, not causal. God, and God alone is the cause of an individual's salvation.

Even in it's smallest context, Romans 10:9 is a true statement. It doesn't need more context to be true............

The truth of Romans 10:9 is not in dispute. I dispute any interpretation of that verse that makes the faith of the unregenerate sinner causal to that sinner's salvation. That verse is not written to unregenerate sinners. That verse is not about unregenerate sinners and it most definitely not about an unregenerate sinfully-enslaved non-believer. That verse cannot be applied to people about whom it was not specifically written.

What does it say? Faith in Jesus = saved.

No, what it "says" is those to whom the verse was written who already had God-gifted faith in Jesus will be saved. It does not say anyone and everyone who believes in Jesus will be saved and it most definitely does not state faith causes salvation. The "you" in that verse is already saved people. If the verse was reduced to its barest truth it would simply say the saved will be saved. I know that sound redundant to many but once the audience affiliation is established it cannot be denied that Paul is writing to already saved people. The saved to whom he was writing will be saved if they confess Jesus and believe with their heart God raised from the grave.

One thing I did not previously address is this: the verse, the larger three-chapter narrative is primarily eschatological, not soteriological. As a general rule the eschatological is also soteriological in some way (literal, figuratively, allegorically, etc.) but the reverse is not always true. A verse about being saved from some soon-pending judgement is primarily about that person or group not getting killed in the judgment, but those events are typically foreshadows of salvation from sin and the wrath consequent to sin. Soteriology is about salvation from sin. Mouch of New Testament eschatology is about salvation from the pending destruction of Israel and old order Judaism. People getting saved from the flattening of Jerusalem does not mean they got saved from sin.

In Romans 9-11 Paul is writing about the future of Israel, and not just any Israel, but the Israel that is Israel, not the Israel that is not Israel (Didn't I post an op in here about the identity of Israel? Maybe it was another forum. I'll try to track it down and link it to this discussion).

Romans 10:9 that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved.

Romans 10:9 that if you [the brethren] confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you [the brethren] will be saved. I've already exegeted the text to show it was written to and about Christians, not non-believers. Paul identified his audience at the beginning of the epistle. He identified his audience, those to whom his words applied, throughout the epistle. At the beginning of chapter 10 he again identifies the "you" of his epistle. That "you" is "the brethren."

Romans 10:1-13
Brethren, my heart's desire and my prayer to God for them is for their salvation. For I testify about them that they have a zeal for God, but not in accordance with knowledge. For not knowing about God's righteousness and seeking to establish their own, they did not subject themselves to the righteousness of God. For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. For Moses writes that the man who practices the righteousness which is based on law shall live by that righteousness. But the righteousness based on faith speaks as follows: "Do not say in your heart, 'Who will ascend into heaven?' (that is, to bring Christ down), or 'Who will descend into the abyss?' (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead)." But what does it say? "The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart" - that is, the word of faith which we are preaching, that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation. For the Scripture says, "Whoever believes in him will not be disappointed." For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, abounding in riches for all who call on Him; for "Whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved."

Paul did NOT write, If they confess with their mouth Jesus as Lord and believe in their heart that God raised him from the dead, they will be saved.

He said you.

And the "you" in that verse is the brethren, not non-believers. The brethren are already saved from sin. They were not yet saved from either the destruction of Israel in the immensely surrounding persecution of Christians that preceded and followed the flattening of Roman-occupied Israel, or their own death and visit with the grave. If they, the brethren, believed then they, the brethren, would be saved.

Nothing that you wrote overturns that simple truth.

The verse is true. What you added to the verse may not be true. Faith does not cause salvation. The confession and belief of the verse is not a confession and belief of non-Christians. The verse is true, but your posts may not be true.

Paul quoting Deuteronomy doesn't change anything.

Never said it did. What I did say is the fact Paul is quoting from Deuteronomy informs the correct understanding of the verse. What I did say is you failed to mention Paul was quoting Deuteronomy 30 so your interpretation of the verse is lacking a thorough exegesis. What I said was both the Romans 10 text and the Deuteronomy 30 text were said to a group of people already living within a God-initiated Christological covenant relationship and you did not mention that in your rendering of the verse.

That is what I said.

That does not overturn the truth of the verse, but it does show your interpretation of the verse is not the truth of the verse..

In Deuteronomy they are told that they already have God's command in their mouths and hearts.

Correct. That means Paul cannot be writing about a group of people who do not already have God's commands in their mouths and heats. In other words, it is not people without the word already written within them that are confessing Jesus is Lord and has been raised from the dead. It is those in whom the word already dwells.

It is near them. Paul applies that idea to faith in Christ.

Incorrect. Go back and re-read the WHOLE passage and notice the word BRETHREN in the first verse. Read the entire passage keeping in mind Pau is writing to the brethren and Paul is writing about the brethren. The "you" in verse 10 is the brethren. Go back and re-read it, think consciously and conscientiously about the fact Paul explicitly states, "Brethren....."

They would be declared righteous. But remember, Romans was written after the cross. OT saints still had to wait for it to actually happen for all the benefits to apply to them.

You have not proved that is relevant and you most certainly haven't proven that is causal. You have not defined gennethe anothen or paliggenesia correctly (the previous effort was admirable but incorrect). Yes, the OT saints did still have to wait for the resurrection and the sending of the Holy Spirit but that does not mean they were not born anew from above. It simply means their new birth was not as complete as the post-Calvary and post-Pentecost believer.

The fact is our new birth and regeneration is not complete, either . We have not been raised incorruptible and immortal. If 2 Corinthians 5:8 is to be read exactly as written, then they've gone further in their salvation then you or I . They, the OT saints, have been made complete in the Church and, being out of the body, they ae with the Lord.

Yes, I know Romans was written to believers, and I know not all Israel is Israel, and I know about the Promised "Seed". In fact, I quoted that passage in this thread already as one of the four verses to build from.

Good. Then you also know Romans 10:9 does not apply to anyone but the saints or, as Paul worded it at the beginning of chapter 10, the brethren. It applies only to the Israel that is Israel, those belonging to the promised seed of God.

Let's be clearer, though. Romans 10:9 was written to believers AND it was also written ABOUT believers. It was not written about non-believers.

Galatians 3:26-29 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus. And if you are Christ's, then you are Abraham's seed, and heirs according to the promise.

Right. Who is the "you" in that passage?

The Promise is realized by way of the baptism, which is realized by faith. That's what I said.

You can say as many times as you like but ad nauseam does not make anything correct. If you mean the promise of the Holy Spirit is realized in baptism then that is true, but it is not water baptism in which that promise is realized. It is in the baptism of the Holy Spirit that the promise of the Holy Spirit is realized. Apollos and the Acts 19 group of believers proves that fact.

Your argument is against something I don't believe. Regeneration before faith. Born again after faith.

Dave

You do not believe in regeneration before faith. I understand that. I have understood that from the beginning of this discussion. What I believe is immaterial. If your position has holes in its case then no one should believe it, not even you. Don't believe hole-filled arguments.

You took it upon yourself to confront what you do not believe. We're five pages full of posts into this discussion and it turns out your exegesis is lacking in several places. Your argument as a whole is lacking. You haven't defined your terms correctly (and have ignored the effort on my part to help you with that). You conflated a new heart with a new birth when the two are not identical. You argued the effects of the new birth and regeneration are synonymous with the new birth. You argued the OT saints couldn't be born again, or completely born again because Calvary hadn't yet happened but didn't explain how they could know and understand the gospel, the resurrection, the kingdom, and be deemed righteous without also being born anew from above.


So..... maybe it's best if you start over and give the effort to "confront" the premise the OT saints were born again another try. Consider the last five pages of posts a trial run. Take a little time and read through the thread and note the points I made. Write down your mistakes. Correct those mistakes in your second attempt. Give me lest to correct. Give me more with which to agree. I will give you credit and openly acknowledge every point you make that reconciles with well rendered scripture. Your use of Colossians 10:9 does not do that. You've taken what was written about the faith of those already born again and regenerate and tried to make that about the faith of the unregenerate.






You have committed one of the most commonly occurring mistakes in the monergism versus synergism debate. That mistake is taking verse written solely about believers and applying them to non-believers. It happens in nearly every thread in every soteriology board in every Christian forum. Noted theologians make this mistake. Preachers on the radio make this mistake. Some of them make it knowingly. Most, presumably, make it unwittingly because if they realized they'd made that mistake they wouldn't preach that way. Most of the epistolary is unavailable to the synergist unless s/he disregards the audience affiliations and the minute the audience affiliations are ignored the ensuing argument is meaningless because it is bad exegesis to ignore the audience. You will have to find verses that were written about the pagan's faith to make the case for faith precedes regeneration.

All the OT saints lived in a God initiated Christological covenant. There are no OT saints living outside that covenant. They may or may not have lived under the Law of Moses but that is not what makes them saints. It is their membership in the God-initiated Christological covenant that makes them saints.


Which is one of the reasons why I recommended you start this discussion by defining your terms...... correctly. A new heart is not synonymous with a new birth, or, if the two are identical then you have to prove that is the case before proceeding as if it is a given upon which you can build your case.

 

[Josheb]

@Josheb, my two monkeys and a yoyo need a break today, maybe for the weekend too. It's going to be a busy weekend. I'll probably get back Monday.

Dave

No worries. I'll be doing the father of the bride stuff. See you Monday and thank you again for hanging in here with me.