"Any text that puts "salvation" after faith and repentance, or after conversion, or after any act of the dead sinner, is not regeneration or the new birth, but some other kind or phase of salvation."
This is a hermeneutical proposition that both the Hardshells and the Reformed Baptists, who promote the "born again before faith" distortion, take TO the scriptures, for they certainly do not derive such a hermeneutic FROM the scriptures.
Why would they create this hermeneutical principle? Is it not because they have insisted, erroneously, that "regeneration" or the "new birth" must always precede faith and repentance? And, because "salvation" is always put AFTER faith and repentance in scripture?
But, I challenge all these Hyper Calvinists to cite one verse of scripture that shows that a man was saved before he believed in Christ or the gospel. Surely they can find at least one case, can they not?
Aug 8, 2008
Keach on Means
"This brings me to the next thing.
Fourthly, What are the Terms upon which Peace is offered and proclaimed?
The Terms on which Peace is proclaimed, run thus, viz.
1. That whosoever it is that believeth, shall be saved: True, if Faith was not the Gift of God, but the Condition agreed on, as required of the Creature by his own power to act and exercise, it would not only be hard, but impossible, because Faith must be wrought in our (Page 165) Hearts by the same Power that raised Christ from the Dead; but he that calls dead Lazarus to rise from the Dead, is able to quicken, and by his commanding Voice, to raise the Soul, dead in Sins and Trespasses: The Gospel in the Hand of the Spirit is a mighty Instrument of Christ's Power in the begetting or working of Faith in poor Sinners."
"The Proclamation runs to him that thirsts: Oh, every one that thirsteth come to the Waters, &c. Jesus stood up and cried, If any Man thirst, let him come to me and drink: This thirsting may refer to thirsting after Happiness, desiring to be saved; yet others think it is a Thirst begotten in the Soul by the Spirit; from the sight and sense of the Excellencies that Sinners see in Christ, and the Necessity of him, they desire and thirst after him, Faith draws Virtue from Christ, but the Branch cannot draw Sap from the Root, until it is grafted into the Stock; Faith is the Fruit of the Spirit, therefore the Seed must be first sown in our Hearts: And this originally proceeds from our federal Union with Christ, in the Covenant of Peace. And Secondly, by our Mystical Union with him by the Spirit; for it is hereby Faith is wrought; Can any thing but evil Fruit grow out of a wild and evil Stock, and Root? all Works before Grace, are Dead Works, and profit us not.
3. The Terms are to look to Christ; Look to me and be saved, all ye Ends of the Earth: This is all one with Believing; the Israelites that were stung with Fiery Serpents, were to look to (Page 166) the Brazen Serpent; so Christ is lifted up, that whosoever looketh to him, or that believeth on him, should not perish, but have Everlasting Life.
2. This Proclamation is not so Universal, but that it wholly dependeth upon God's Sovereign Pleasure, who shall reap the Benefit of it: 'Tis sent to one Nation, and not to another; God is not obliged to send it to all Kingdoms and Nations, nor to all in that Nation whither he is pleased to send it; but if Christ died for all, I mean in the stead of all, to satisfy Divine Justice for every individual Person, then he would be Unjust in not sending the Gospel to them all—But he must Call all, and be sure he would give all the lesser Gifts, as well as the greater, viz. the Gospel and (Page 168) Faith, &c. to all, as well as his Son to die for them all, and not let them perish in their Sins and Unbelief, for whom Christ died; for without Faith all Adult Persons must perish; And how shall they believe on him whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a Preacher?
3. This Proclamation offers Free Pardon of all Sins, both past, present, and to come, to all that believe in Jesus Christ: And therefore a final Deliverance from the Curse of the Law, and the Wrath of God, Rom. 8.1.
4. Free Justification by Christ alone, is therein offered also.
5. With a Supply of all Grace to the End, to all them that are in Jesus Christ, Phil. 4.19.
6. It proclaims God to be our Father, and we his Sons and Daughters, upon receiving Jesus Christ.
7. Moreover, where any Elect Sinners are, or dwell, thither the Proclamation shall, and must go, to bring them all into the Bonds of the Covenant.
8. And also whosoever receive this welcome News, shall be saved from Hell, and be Crowned with Glory in Heaven for ever and ever.
9. O Bless God for the Gospel! for the News of Peace, and you Sinners see that you attend upon the Preaching of the Word of Reconciliation, for this way he has ordained to work Faith in you: O! Cry to him to pour out his Spirit and help you to believe; never rest until you have got a Heart, a Will to take of the Water of Life. (Page 169)
10. Terror. But tremble you that reject these Tidings, this Grace, for such that finally do so, shall never have a share of that Peace Christ hath made by his Blood, for on such the Wrath of God abides, and will for ever.—Moreover, he will also make it appear, that Man's Destruction is of themselves, though their help is only in him. Dread, least God gives you up to blindness of Mind, and hardness of Heart; nay, leave you also to Temporal Plagues and Judgments, as he dealt by the Jews of old.
11. Comfort. Moreover, here is Comfort to Believers who have heard, and do know the Joyful Sound.
1. They have Interest in this Peace, and have a Title to Heaven by Christ's Righteousness alone.
2. It is also a sign they were beloved from Everlasting, because drawn to Christ, or were Elected before time, because called in time; therefore let all such praise the Holy God. To whom be Glory now and forever, Amen.
SERMON VII - "Showing the Nature of the Proclamation of the Gospel,
and the Terms thereof."
Fourthly, What are the Terms upon which Peace is offered and proclaimed?
The Terms on which Peace is proclaimed, run thus, viz.
1. That whosoever it is that believeth, shall be saved: True, if Faith was not the Gift of God, but the Condition agreed on, as required of the Creature by his own power to act and exercise, it would not only be hard, but impossible, because Faith must be wrought in our (Page 165) Hearts by the same Power that raised Christ from the Dead; but he that calls dead Lazarus to rise from the Dead, is able to quicken, and by his commanding Voice, to raise the Soul, dead in Sins and Trespasses: The Gospel in the Hand of the Spirit is a mighty Instrument of Christ's Power in the begetting or working of Faith in poor Sinners."
"The Proclamation runs to him that thirsts: Oh, every one that thirsteth come to the Waters, &c. Jesus stood up and cried, If any Man thirst, let him come to me and drink: This thirsting may refer to thirsting after Happiness, desiring to be saved; yet others think it is a Thirst begotten in the Soul by the Spirit; from the sight and sense of the Excellencies that Sinners see in Christ, and the Necessity of him, they desire and thirst after him, Faith draws Virtue from Christ, but the Branch cannot draw Sap from the Root, until it is grafted into the Stock; Faith is the Fruit of the Spirit, therefore the Seed must be first sown in our Hearts: And this originally proceeds from our federal Union with Christ, in the Covenant of Peace. And Secondly, by our Mystical Union with him by the Spirit; for it is hereby Faith is wrought; Can any thing but evil Fruit grow out of a wild and evil Stock, and Root? all Works before Grace, are Dead Works, and profit us not.
3. The Terms are to look to Christ; Look to me and be saved, all ye Ends of the Earth: This is all one with Believing; the Israelites that were stung with Fiery Serpents, were to look to (Page 166) the Brazen Serpent; so Christ is lifted up, that whosoever looketh to him, or that believeth on him, should not perish, but have Everlasting Life.
2. This Proclamation is not so Universal, but that it wholly dependeth upon God's Sovereign Pleasure, who shall reap the Benefit of it: 'Tis sent to one Nation, and not to another; God is not obliged to send it to all Kingdoms and Nations, nor to all in that Nation whither he is pleased to send it; but if Christ died for all, I mean in the stead of all, to satisfy Divine Justice for every individual Person, then he would be Unjust in not sending the Gospel to them all—But he must Call all, and be sure he would give all the lesser Gifts, as well as the greater, viz. the Gospel and (Page 168) Faith, &c. to all, as well as his Son to die for them all, and not let them perish in their Sins and Unbelief, for whom Christ died; for without Faith all Adult Persons must perish; And how shall they believe on him whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a Preacher?
3. This Proclamation offers Free Pardon of all Sins, both past, present, and to come, to all that believe in Jesus Christ: And therefore a final Deliverance from the Curse of the Law, and the Wrath of God, Rom. 8.1.
4. Free Justification by Christ alone, is therein offered also.
5. With a Supply of all Grace to the End, to all them that are in Jesus Christ, Phil. 4.19.
6. It proclaims God to be our Father, and we his Sons and Daughters, upon receiving Jesus Christ.
7. Moreover, where any Elect Sinners are, or dwell, thither the Proclamation shall, and must go, to bring them all into the Bonds of the Covenant.
8. And also whosoever receive this welcome News, shall be saved from Hell, and be Crowned with Glory in Heaven for ever and ever.
9. O Bless God for the Gospel! for the News of Peace, and you Sinners see that you attend upon the Preaching of the Word of Reconciliation, for this way he has ordained to work Faith in you: O! Cry to him to pour out his Spirit and help you to believe; never rest until you have got a Heart, a Will to take of the Water of Life. (Page 169)
10. Terror. But tremble you that reject these Tidings, this Grace, for such that finally do so, shall never have a share of that Peace Christ hath made by his Blood, for on such the Wrath of God abides, and will for ever.—Moreover, he will also make it appear, that Man's Destruction is of themselves, though their help is only in him. Dread, least God gives you up to blindness of Mind, and hardness of Heart; nay, leave you also to Temporal Plagues and Judgments, as he dealt by the Jews of old.
11. Comfort. Moreover, here is Comfort to Believers who have heard, and do know the Joyful Sound.
1. They have Interest in this Peace, and have a Title to Heaven by Christ's Righteousness alone.
2. It is also a sign they were beloved from Everlasting, because drawn to Christ, or were Elected before time, because called in time; therefore let all such praise the Holy God. To whom be Glory now and forever, Amen.
SERMON VII - "Showing the Nature of the Proclamation of the Gospel,
and the Terms thereof."
Page 155
"My Brethren, observe, that the Salvation by Christ was antecedent to our Faith, and both were to be performed for us by our Surety; that is, he was as much obliged to give us Faith, or by his Spirit to apply his Blood, as to pour it forth upon the Cross for us; though he has ordained the Preaching of the Gospel as an Instrument in and by the Spirit, to work it in our Souls.
Secondly, This Proclamation, it is an Universal Proclamation.
1. Peace and glad Tidings is to be preached or proclaimed to all the World; Go ye therefore into all the World, and Preach the Gospel to every Creature. What is this Gospel? why Peace by Jesus Christ, or that God is reconciled, his Justice satisfied, and his Wrath appeased by the Sacrifice and Obedience of his Son, that being the meritorious, or procuring Cause thereof, and Christ requires them, commanded them to believe this? Believe what? Why that God in Christ, through his Death, was reconciled to us when we were Ungodly; not that God will be reconciled, and appeased, if we Repent, Believe, are Regenerated, and Baptized, &c. That which remains to be done, (which he will also begin and perform for all the Elect) is the Sinners believing what Jesus Christ hath done; 'tis to receive the Atonement, or to stretch out the Hand of Faith; to receive the Pardon procured by Christ's Blood; not that any Sinner can believe, until the Spirit as a Vital Agent, infuses Grace into him; the Seed must be sown before the Fruit can appear:
We pray you be ye reconciled, &c. that is, we pray you to receive the Atonement Christ hath made, or believe the Record God hath given of his Son; i. e. believe there is Life in him, that God is satisfied in him, and reconciled in him: if this, my Brethren, be not the Nature of the Gospel, or of this Blessed Proclamation, I profess, I know not what it is.
http://www.mountzionpbc.org/books/The%20Covenant%20of%20Peace%20opened%201698.htm
"Paul was certain of a crown of life, yet knew it was his duty to press
towards “the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ
Jesus,” and “to keep down his body” (Phil. 3:14). He strove as strenuously against sin, as if salvation could be merited by so doing; so that his election took him not off from a diligent care in use of means, in order to his attaining to eternal happiness."
http://www.bereabaptistchurch.org/banner/PDFs/October2002.pdf
More Ordo Salutis Problems
The following are some interesting thoughts on the "ordo salutis" controversy.
"Calvin said ". . . justifying grace is not separate from regeneration although these are distinct things." (Institutes, Bk. 4, chap. 2, sec. 2)"
"Further Observations on the Order of Justification and Regeneration"
"All those who stand in the tradition of the Reformation believe that justification and regeneration are closely related and that one cannot and will not be present without the other. However, there has been some sharp disagreement as to their logical order, if not their temporal order.
There is no question about Calvin's placing justification before regeneration in the order of logic (see Institutes, Bk. 3, chap. 11, secs. 6,11). G.C. Berkouwer also acknowledges this in his Faith and Justification, pages 29, 30.
The systematic Calvinists of the seventeenth century, however, reversed Calvin's order and put regeneration before justification. This was the result of moving the doctrine of an arbitrary predestination to the center and starting point of their theological thinking.
There are several grave difficulties with this order of salvation:
1. It reduces the great regenerating work of the Holy Spirit to a secret act of divine grace which is subconscious in whom it is inwrought. Wesley's insistence on a very conscious experience of renewal by the Holy Spirit helped to correct the arid intellectualism and incipient antinomianism in this idea of a secret, subconscious regeneration.
2. It tends to elevate regeneration over justification.
3. It turns Paul's doctrine of the justification of the ungodly (Rom. 4:5) into justification of the reborn. This is a Romanizing tendency and bears a remarkable resemblance to the decree of Trent which says that "if they [men] were not born again in Christ, they would never be justified" — "Decree Concerning Justification," chap. 3.4. It has regenerating grace creating immediately —i.e., apart from the means of grace, which is the preached Word of God. According to the words of Jesus in John 3, the uplifting of Christ is the means of the new birth. Peter declares that the new birth is accomplished by the Word of God (1 Peter 1:23). The Holy Spirit comes to men only in and with (but not apart from) the preaching of the gospel. What is the justification, therefore, for saying that the Holy Spirit regenerates men even before and quite apart from hearing the gospel?
5. The claim that men already possess eternal life before they are justified (see Clark's comment on John 5:24) turns the work of justification by faith into an empty formality. Clearly, if a man is unjustified (i.e., prior to his justification), he is condemned, and the wrath of God abides on him until the moment he is justified in the verdict of the Judge. Justification itself is the verdict of life (see Rom. 5:18). In his Apology of the Augsburg Confession Melanchthon is quite right when he keeps referring to justification as "justification unto life eternal." John 5:24 is not saying that a man has eternal life before he hears and believes but that, as a believer, he will not come into judgment (condemnation at the last day) because he has already, by faith, passed from death unto life. Just as there is no personal justification without faith, so there is no personal salvation and possession of eternal life without faith. And there is no faith without hearing the Word of God (Rom. 10:17).
Dr. Clark asks how it can be that dead men can hear the Word of God. But Jesus declares, "The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live" (John 5:25). True, our Lord is speaking in the context of the physical resurrection, but even this illustrates the resurrection to spiritual life by the Word of God. Calvinism is to be faulted when it proposes that God's grace imparts eternal life apart from the means of grace in the preaching of the gospel. For further discussion on this matter of regeneration and human freedom, see the article, "The Legal and Moral Aspects of Salvation" (Part 3), in this issue of Present Truth Magazine. —Ed.
http://www.presenttruthmag.com/archive/XXVII/27-3.htm
Well, did he not "hit the nail on the head"? Can we not say "amen"?
"Calvin said ". . . justifying grace is not separate from regeneration although these are distinct things." (Institutes, Bk. 4, chap. 2, sec. 2)"
"Further Observations on the Order of Justification and Regeneration"
"All those who stand in the tradition of the Reformation believe that justification and regeneration are closely related and that one cannot and will not be present without the other. However, there has been some sharp disagreement as to their logical order, if not their temporal order.
There is no question about Calvin's placing justification before regeneration in the order of logic (see Institutes, Bk. 3, chap. 11, secs. 6,11). G.C. Berkouwer also acknowledges this in his Faith and Justification, pages 29, 30.
The systematic Calvinists of the seventeenth century, however, reversed Calvin's order and put regeneration before justification. This was the result of moving the doctrine of an arbitrary predestination to the center and starting point of their theological thinking.
There are several grave difficulties with this order of salvation:
1. It reduces the great regenerating work of the Holy Spirit to a secret act of divine grace which is subconscious in whom it is inwrought. Wesley's insistence on a very conscious experience of renewal by the Holy Spirit helped to correct the arid intellectualism and incipient antinomianism in this idea of a secret, subconscious regeneration.
2. It tends to elevate regeneration over justification.
3. It turns Paul's doctrine of the justification of the ungodly (Rom. 4:5) into justification of the reborn. This is a Romanizing tendency and bears a remarkable resemblance to the decree of Trent which says that "if they [men] were not born again in Christ, they would never be justified" — "Decree Concerning Justification," chap. 3.4. It has regenerating grace creating immediately —i.e., apart from the means of grace, which is the preached Word of God. According to the words of Jesus in John 3, the uplifting of Christ is the means of the new birth. Peter declares that the new birth is accomplished by the Word of God (1 Peter 1:23). The Holy Spirit comes to men only in and with (but not apart from) the preaching of the gospel. What is the justification, therefore, for saying that the Holy Spirit regenerates men even before and quite apart from hearing the gospel?
5. The claim that men already possess eternal life before they are justified (see Clark's comment on John 5:24) turns the work of justification by faith into an empty formality. Clearly, if a man is unjustified (i.e., prior to his justification), he is condemned, and the wrath of God abides on him until the moment he is justified in the verdict of the Judge. Justification itself is the verdict of life (see Rom. 5:18). In his Apology of the Augsburg Confession Melanchthon is quite right when he keeps referring to justification as "justification unto life eternal." John 5:24 is not saying that a man has eternal life before he hears and believes but that, as a believer, he will not come into judgment (condemnation at the last day) because he has already, by faith, passed from death unto life. Just as there is no personal justification without faith, so there is no personal salvation and possession of eternal life without faith. And there is no faith without hearing the Word of God (Rom. 10:17).
Dr. Clark asks how it can be that dead men can hear the Word of God. But Jesus declares, "The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live" (John 5:25). True, our Lord is speaking in the context of the physical resurrection, but even this illustrates the resurrection to spiritual life by the Word of God. Calvinism is to be faulted when it proposes that God's grace imparts eternal life apart from the means of grace in the preaching of the gospel. For further discussion on this matter of regeneration and human freedom, see the article, "The Legal and Moral Aspects of Salvation" (Part 3), in this issue of Present Truth Magazine. —Ed.
http://www.presenttruthmag.com/archive/XXVII/27-3.htm
Well, did he not "hit the nail on the head"? Can we not say "amen"?
Repent & Be Converted
"Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord." (Acts 3: 19)
What do the Hardshells and the "Reformed" camp do with these words? How do they deal with them when they teach that a sinner must be regenerated and born again BEFORE he repents, or is converted, or receives remission of sins?
Is the "conversion" here not the same as the new birth or regeneration? Did not our Baptist forefathers believe it to be so? All except the Hardshells?
How does the Hardshell and Reformed "ordo salutis" compare with that given by the apostle? He has this order - repent, conversion, forgiveness. But, can we imagine a sinner who is "regenerated" but who has not yet repented, been converted, justified, and forgiven? I cannot, nor could the bible writers, nor our Baptist forefathers. Only the Hardshell and Reformed brethren can have a man "born again" but not yet converted and forgiven of sin!
What do the Hardshells and the "Reformed" camp do with these words? How do they deal with them when they teach that a sinner must be regenerated and born again BEFORE he repents, or is converted, or receives remission of sins?
Is the "conversion" here not the same as the new birth or regeneration? Did not our Baptist forefathers believe it to be so? All except the Hardshells?
How does the Hardshell and Reformed "ordo salutis" compare with that given by the apostle? He has this order - repent, conversion, forgiveness. But, can we imagine a sinner who is "regenerated" but who has not yet repented, been converted, justified, and forgiven? I cannot, nor could the bible writers, nor our Baptist forefathers. Only the Hardshell and Reformed brethren can have a man "born again" but not yet converted and forgiven of sin!
Two Begettings?
If I understand the "reformed view" of the "ordo salutis," a sinner goes through certain well defined stages or steps in his salvation, rebirth, or conversion experience. First, a man is "regenerated" or "born again." This being completed and an accomplished fact, the man next, either "immediately" ('instantly'), or a "a few seconds later" (Wayne Grudem), or perhaps several years later, but nonetheless, still "later," the man believes and repents, post facto, after he has been fully regenerated. Then, after he has believed and repented, or been converted, he is then justified, joined to Christ, sanctified and washed, and forgiven of sin.
Now, these same people, who promote this order, and insist that this order is crucial, will nevertheless come back and say - "this is simply logical order, not temporal or chronological order."
Well, if there is really no temporal or chronological order, then why insist on an order? Is it not silly for a man to say that one must be first born again before faith, and then say, "well, really, it is not before in actuality"? Only in theory? Then what was the whole purpose of insisting on a logical order if there were no temporal or chronological order? If in actuality, or in actual occurrence, regeneration comes with faith and repentance, then why make all this "noise" about insisting that one must come first? Really, the Arminians laugh at those Calvinists like White who attempt to fool people in this manner.
Now, this "ordo polutis" of the Hardshell and Reformed brethren, creates a number of incongruities, many of which I have already recently pointed out. Notice the strict ordo given above. Is there not more than one "begetting"? Notice how a man is begotten to life and then this life begets faith. Is that not two births?
Now, these same people, who promote this order, and insist that this order is crucial, will nevertheless come back and say - "this is simply logical order, not temporal or chronological order."
Well, if there is really no temporal or chronological order, then why insist on an order? Is it not silly for a man to say that one must be first born again before faith, and then say, "well, really, it is not before in actuality"? Only in theory? Then what was the whole purpose of insisting on a logical order if there were no temporal or chronological order? If in actuality, or in actual occurrence, regeneration comes with faith and repentance, then why make all this "noise" about insisting that one must come first? Really, the Arminians laugh at those Calvinists like White who attempt to fool people in this manner.
Now, this "ordo polutis" of the Hardshell and Reformed brethren, creates a number of incongruities, many of which I have already recently pointed out. Notice the strict ordo given above. Is there not more than one "begetting"? Notice how a man is begotten to life and then this life begets faith. Is that not two births?
Hardshell Proof Texts
Several of my friendly readers have emailed me over the past several months and encouraged me to address some of the scriptures used by those who promote the Hybrid, Reformed, or Hardshell view of "pre-faith regeneration."
One of the series I have planned for the book (Vol. II) will be called "Hardshell Proof Texts." In this series I have all the scriptures listed that have been used by the Hardshells to prove their aberrant views. I still have a couple chapters on the "Great Commission" to complete. And, I also planned to go directly into "Hardshells and Missions" as the next series. But, I now plan to go ahead and begin my series on "Hardshell Proof Texts" and try to complete the two chapters on the "Great Commission" after that, together with the other series planned for vol. II and other volumes.
The same scriptures and arguments used by the Hardshells to prove regeneration apart from faith, and without the gospel as a means, are the same scriptures and arguments used by the "Reformed" camp, men like James White, Wayne Grudem, etc., who promote the "born again before faith" heresy.
So, stay tuned as, Lord willing, I begin this series. I suppose my chats with my Arminian and Hyper Calvinist brothers will have to take a "back seat" while I work on this series. I do have lots of the work done in drafts, but it will still take a good bit of editing and enlarging. So, those of you who have been waiting for this series, hold on!
Stephen
One of the series I have planned for the book (Vol. II) will be called "Hardshell Proof Texts." In this series I have all the scriptures listed that have been used by the Hardshells to prove their aberrant views. I still have a couple chapters on the "Great Commission" to complete. And, I also planned to go directly into "Hardshells and Missions" as the next series. But, I now plan to go ahead and begin my series on "Hardshell Proof Texts" and try to complete the two chapters on the "Great Commission" after that, together with the other series planned for vol. II and other volumes.
The same scriptures and arguments used by the Hardshells to prove regeneration apart from faith, and without the gospel as a means, are the same scriptures and arguments used by the "Reformed" camp, men like James White, Wayne Grudem, etc., who promote the "born again before faith" heresy.
So, stay tuned as, Lord willing, I begin this series. I suppose my chats with my Arminian and Hyper Calvinist brothers will have to take a "back seat" while I work on this series. I do have lots of the work done in drafts, but it will still take a good bit of editing and enlarging. So, those of you who have been waiting for this series, hold on!
Stephen
Aug 7, 2008
Sinful Regeneration?
"Everything that does not come from faith is sin." (Romans 14: 24b NIV)
If "regeneration" and "salvation" and "new birth" all come before faith, then is it not a sinful "regeneration," "salvation," or "new birth"? Based upon this verse? This false view of regeneration before faith, certainly does not have a "salvation" that comes "from" faith, correct? Yet, Paul makes a universal statement, does he not?
Does he not say that "everything" ('whatsoever') that is not "from faith" is sinful? Would this not make the "regeneration" that supposedly comes before faith, to be a sinful "regeneration"?
Consider also a point I made a few weeks back in a separate posting. According to the "reformed" and "Hardshell" view of "regeneration," the purpose of "regeneration" is to give the sinner an "ability" to do good, repent, believe, etc. But, yet, in this "regeneration," there is no faith a part of it, for this comes later as fruit or an after-effect. This is inconsistent and unbiblical. Here is why.
"Without faith it is impossible to please God." (Hebrews 11: 6). But, the "reformed" and "Hardshell" view is that men get this "ability," not from faith, but from "regeneration," a "regeneration" that does not include faith.
If "ability" is given in "regeneration," then so is faith, for without faith it is impossible to please God.
Reformed or Hardshell view correctly says - "without regeneration it is impossible to please God."
But, the Bible also says - "without faith it is impossible to please God."
Conclusion? Faith is a part of regeneration, being the very "ability" that the Hardshells and Hypers talk about. By their view, a man in "regeneration" has "ability" to please God but he has of yet no faith!
"Oh consistency, thou art a jewel"!
If "regeneration" and "salvation" and "new birth" all come before faith, then is it not a sinful "regeneration," "salvation," or "new birth"? Based upon this verse? This false view of regeneration before faith, certainly does not have a "salvation" that comes "from" faith, correct? Yet, Paul makes a universal statement, does he not?
Does he not say that "everything" ('whatsoever') that is not "from faith" is sinful? Would this not make the "regeneration" that supposedly comes before faith, to be a sinful "regeneration"?
Consider also a point I made a few weeks back in a separate posting. According to the "reformed" and "Hardshell" view of "regeneration," the purpose of "regeneration" is to give the sinner an "ability" to do good, repent, believe, etc. But, yet, in this "regeneration," there is no faith a part of it, for this comes later as fruit or an after-effect. This is inconsistent and unbiblical. Here is why.
"Without faith it is impossible to please God." (Hebrews 11: 6). But, the "reformed" and "Hardshell" view is that men get this "ability," not from faith, but from "regeneration," a "regeneration" that does not include faith.
If "ability" is given in "regeneration," then so is faith, for without faith it is impossible to please God.
Reformed or Hardshell view correctly says - "without regeneration it is impossible to please God."
But, the Bible also says - "without faith it is impossible to please God."
Conclusion? Faith is a part of regeneration, being the very "ability" that the Hardshells and Hypers talk about. By their view, a man in "regeneration" has "ability" to please God but he has of yet no faith!
"Oh consistency, thou art a jewel"!
Neo-Hardshellism
It has been quite a shock to discover so many Hyper Calvinists among Baptists outside of the Hardshell Baptist denomination. Once I left the Hardshell Baptists, I thought I had left it for good. Sadly, I have found more Hyperism and Hardshellism among Southern Baptists, those who generally identify with the "Founders Movement," or with "Reformed" doctrine.
Everywhere I turn I find these neo-Hardshells everywhere! I find men like MacArthur, Piper, White, Cook, Grudem, etc., all preaching that men are first born again and later come to faith.
I just listened to a sermon by Wayne Grudem where he spouted neo-Hardshellism, a sermon I hope to critique, in the near future. I have also listened to a debate between Gene Cook (Baptist) and Bruce Reeves of the "Church of Christ" denomination. You can listen to the debate here.
http://www.w65stchurchofchrist.org/DebatePage.html
Bruce Reeves, like Dave Hunt did against James White, showed how Cook was full of contradiction in his debate with Reeves. Cook would say that men are saved and justified "by faith," that is, after the exercise of faith, but yet he was "born again" or "regenerated" before faith. It was a glaring contradiction and one that gave Calvinism a "black eye," I am sure, to many who listened to this debate.
I also just had some discussion with Steve Camp on this same issue. Steve was writing that men are saved and justified and forgiven of sin after regeneration, but he is possessed of spiritual life before he is a believer, or is justified, or is saved!
This same Bruce Reeves listened to my debate on the same subject with Campbellite debater, Pat Donahue, and challenged me to debate. I told him that I was too busy to do so in the foreseeable future. You can listen to the debate here at Pat's site.
http://www.bibledebates.info/
All this hyperism among Southern Baptists makes me want to enlarge my book on the "Hardshell Baptist Cult" to include writings against the "Reformed" view of "regeneration."
This is why I appreciate men like Brother Ross who has spent his life fighting this heresy of "regeneration apart from faith." I too will spend the remaining days of my life fighting this heresy. It is not historic Calvinism among Baptists, but is a hybrid view.
I have a steady challenge for any Hardshell to come forward and debate Hardshellism. I also have now a standing challenge to men like White to come forward and defend their abberant views on the new birth. Will they choose to ignore the challenges from Ross and myself? Oh yes, men like White want to debate the Arminians, but will they come forward and debate a Confessional Calvinist?
More to come.
Everywhere I turn I find these neo-Hardshells everywhere! I find men like MacArthur, Piper, White, Cook, Grudem, etc., all preaching that men are first born again and later come to faith.
I just listened to a sermon by Wayne Grudem where he spouted neo-Hardshellism, a sermon I hope to critique, in the near future. I have also listened to a debate between Gene Cook (Baptist) and Bruce Reeves of the "Church of Christ" denomination. You can listen to the debate here.
http://www.w65stchurchofchrist.org/DebatePage.html
Bruce Reeves, like Dave Hunt did against James White, showed how Cook was full of contradiction in his debate with Reeves. Cook would say that men are saved and justified "by faith," that is, after the exercise of faith, but yet he was "born again" or "regenerated" before faith. It was a glaring contradiction and one that gave Calvinism a "black eye," I am sure, to many who listened to this debate.
I also just had some discussion with Steve Camp on this same issue. Steve was writing that men are saved and justified and forgiven of sin after regeneration, but he is possessed of spiritual life before he is a believer, or is justified, or is saved!
This same Bruce Reeves listened to my debate on the same subject with Campbellite debater, Pat Donahue, and challenged me to debate. I told him that I was too busy to do so in the foreseeable future. You can listen to the debate here at Pat's site.
http://www.bibledebates.info/
All this hyperism among Southern Baptists makes me want to enlarge my book on the "Hardshell Baptist Cult" to include writings against the "Reformed" view of "regeneration."
This is why I appreciate men like Brother Ross who has spent his life fighting this heresy of "regeneration apart from faith." I too will spend the remaining days of my life fighting this heresy. It is not historic Calvinism among Baptists, but is a hybrid view.
I have a steady challenge for any Hardshell to come forward and debate Hardshellism. I also have now a standing challenge to men like White to come forward and defend their abberant views on the new birth. Will they choose to ignore the challenges from Ross and myself? Oh yes, men like White want to debate the Arminians, but will they come forward and debate a Confessional Calvinist?
More to come.
God Gives All A Chance?
My Arminian friend at
http://classicalarminianism.blogspot.com/
has written some things against Calvinism and its teaching on divine election and the atonement. I want to share what he wrote and the comment I left him.
Dear Brother Billy:
You wrote:
"How could God hold anyone responsible for not trusting in Christ Jesus when Christ Jesus was in no way whatsoever an option for him or her?"
Again, will you explain how those who died without hearing the gospel of Christ had an option to be saved?
God bless,
Stephen
Benjamin Keach, the great Baptist theologian of the 17th century, and signer of the second London Baptist Confession of Faith, wrote the following:
"Brethren, the Gift of Christ for us, i. e. his laying down his Life is far the greater Gift; and will he do this, and not give the Gospel to many Nations, nor Faith to believe and receive him, and yet died for them all? See how Paul argues, Rom. 5.10. Chap. 8.32."
That answers the argumentation of the Arminians, does it not?
Look at Romans 8: 32! If Christ died for a man, then God will not fail to give to that man all that is needed for salvation. But, is the gospel not needed for salvation?
(The Display of Glorious Grace: or The Covenant of Peace Opened. In Fourteen Sermons)
http://www.mountzionpbc.org/books/The%20Covenant%20of%20Peace%20opened%201698.htm
http://classicalarminianism.blogspot.com/
has written some things against Calvinism and its teaching on divine election and the atonement. I want to share what he wrote and the comment I left him.
Dear Brother Billy:
You wrote:
"How could God hold anyone responsible for not trusting in Christ Jesus when Christ Jesus was in no way whatsoever an option for him or her?"
Again, will you explain how those who died without hearing the gospel of Christ had an option to be saved?
God bless,
Stephen
Benjamin Keach, the great Baptist theologian of the 17th century, and signer of the second London Baptist Confession of Faith, wrote the following:
"Brethren, the Gift of Christ for us, i. e. his laying down his Life is far the greater Gift; and will he do this, and not give the Gospel to many Nations, nor Faith to believe and receive him, and yet died for them all? See how Paul argues, Rom. 5.10. Chap. 8.32."
That answers the argumentation of the Arminians, does it not?
Look at Romans 8: 32! If Christ died for a man, then God will not fail to give to that man all that is needed for salvation. But, is the gospel not needed for salvation?
(The Display of Glorious Grace: or The Covenant of Peace Opened. In Fourteen Sermons)
http://www.mountzionpbc.org/books/The%20Covenant%20of%20Peace%20opened%201698.htm
Aug 6, 2008
Justified By Faith?
One thing puzzles me about the "born again before faith" view of the Hardshells and Reformed Baptists and Hyper Calvinists and that concerns the relationship between that heretical view and of the bible doctrine of "justification by faith" (that is supposedly believed by many of the Hypers with the exception of the Hardshells).
For instance, the "Reformed" view, that says the new birth occurs prior to faith and repentance, will nevertheless, put "justification" and "pardon (or forgiveness) of sins" after faith and repentance.
Are we to believe that a man is born again but he has no faith nor a penitent heart? Are we to believe that a man is born again but not yet united to Christ by faith? And, not yet justified and forgiven of sins?
Such are the consequences of believing in the Reformed "ordo salutis." They have created a mess for themselves with it. The truth is this - when a man is born again, he is a believer and a penitent, and he is also justified, sealed, forgiven, and united to Christ. All these things do not happen in sequence but all simultaneously.
The Reformed camp say, out of one side of their mouths, that one is born again before faith, and then say out of the other side, that one is not joined to Christ, justified, and forgiven until after faith.
For instance, the "Reformed" view, that says the new birth occurs prior to faith and repentance, will nevertheless, put "justification" and "pardon (or forgiveness) of sins" after faith and repentance.
Are we to believe that a man is born again but he has no faith nor a penitent heart? Are we to believe that a man is born again but not yet united to Christ by faith? And, not yet justified and forgiven of sins?
Such are the consequences of believing in the Reformed "ordo salutis." They have created a mess for themselves with it. The truth is this - when a man is born again, he is a believer and a penitent, and he is also justified, sealed, forgiven, and united to Christ. All these things do not happen in sequence but all simultaneously.
The Reformed camp say, out of one side of their mouths, that one is born again before faith, and then say out of the other side, that one is not joined to Christ, justified, and forgiven until after faith.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)