Cornelius

TomFL

Well-known member
Acts 10:1–2 —KJV
Ҧ There was a certain man in Caesarea called Cornelius, a centurion of the band called the Italian band,
A devout man, and one that feared God with all his house, which gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God alway.”

How is it this unregenerate man Cornelius supposedly afflicted with a total inability to respond to God in a positive manner

did in fact fear that is reverence God and prayed to him always ?

According to the Calvinist doctrine of Total inability He should have been a hater of God

and totally disposed against him
 

ReverendRV

Active member
Acts 10:1–2 —KJV
Ҧ There was a certain man in Caesarea called Cornelius, a centurion of the band called the Italian band,
A devout man, and one that feared God with all his house, which gave much alms to the people, and prayed to God alway.”

How is it this unregenerate man Cornelius supposedly afflicted with a total inability to respond to God in a positive manner

did in fact fear that is reverence God and prayed to him always ?

According to the Calvinist doctrine of Total inability He should have been a hater of God

and totally disposed against him
We can recognize a Tree by it's fruit; right? I see fruit here; A Devout man, one that Feared God with all his house, giving Alms to people and always Praying. When a Good tree has Good Fruit, why would you want to say the Tree is Unregenerate?

Man, you would be a great asset to us; if you would only just give an inch...
 

TomFL

Well-known member
We can recognize a Tree by it's fruit; right? I see fruit here; A Devout man, one that Feared God with all his house, giving Alms to people and always Praying. When a Good tree has Good Fruit, why would you want to say the Tree is Unregenerate?
Because a man cannot be regenerate apart from the Holy Spirit and the gospel

James 1:18 —KJV
“Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.”

1 Pet. 1:23 —ESV
“since you have been born again, not of perishable seed but of imperishable, through the living and abiding word of God;”

1 Cor. 4:15 —KJV
“For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.”
 

ReverendRV

Active member
Because a man cannot be regenerate apart from the Holy Spirit and the gospel

James 1:18 —KJV
“Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.”

1 Pet. 1:23 —ESV
“since you have been born again, not of perishable seed but of imperishable, through the living and abiding word of God;”

1 Cor. 4:15 —KJV
“For though ye have ten thousand instructors in Christ, yet have ye not many fathers: for in Christ Jesus I have begotten you through the gospel.”
There never was a Gospel of some sort before the Gospel of Jesus Christ? The Holy Spirit never come upon a Man before Jesus was born?

Anyway, how does your objection disqualify Cornelius' Fruit? Do you reckon it's really Thorns?

Come on in, the Water's fine...
 

ReverendRV

Active member
Cornelius was a Man of Two Covenant...

Man of two Covenants ~ by Reverend RV

Jeremiah 31:31 NLT; "The day is coming," says the LORD, "when I will make a new covenant with the people of Israel and Judah.

Before the days of Jeremiah, the last Covenant God made with Israel was the Davidic Covenant. I researched a Jewish Rabbi and he says the promised New Covenant hasn’t come yet; this means they are still waiting for a New Covenant to appear. The Old Testament has a ‘Typology’; symbolism which is explained to us in the New Testament of the Bible. During the Last Supper, Jesus led his Disciples through a Jewish ritual called a Seder. He went on to teach that the Wine of the Seder symbolizes the New Covenant established by his blood; we see that Jesus believed God’s New Covenant was ratified during his lifetime. The Seder ritual was reflective of a bloody Covenant that God had previously made with Israel; the Mosaic Covenant. The Jewish Passover involved the Sacrifices of innocent lambs; and on every door that a lamb’s blood was seen, those who took refuge inside were saved from God’s Wrath…

Jesus was born under the Law of Moses; just like the rest of us. You object, “That Covenant was made with the Jews and I am not a Jew.” The Bible says that those who do the things of the Law, show that the Law is written on their hearts; this includes everybody. Have you almost stole before? You didn’t steal it but thought about it; good job! Wait a minute; thou shall not Covet anything that belongs to someone else! Coveting is stealing in your heart! If God judged you by his standard, would you be innocent or guilty? Would you then go to Heaven or to Hell? The New Covenant is for people who do not want to go to an eternal fiery Hell. ~ Jesus was a man of Two Covenants, the old English word for Covenant is ‘Testament’; the Old Testament and the New Testament. Jesus kept the Old Covenant and since no one else has ever kept that Righteous Requirement, he shares his achievement with all who put their Faith in him as the risen Lord God and Savior. By Grace, you now have met the Righteous standard God requires in order to be pleasing in his sight! But the sad news is that Jesus had to suffer the penalty for our Sins; an honest trade, and God detests dishonest scales. Because Jesus was now responsible for your Sin, he was nailed to a Cross and shed his blood like an innocent lamb. The good news is that Jesus rose from the dead conquering Death and Hell for you! Read your Bible, find a Gospel Church; and praise the Lord!

Many things that Jesus said applied to keeping the Old Covenant, but other things he said applied to the New Covenant. The Gospels could easily be the last four books of the Old Testament because of Christ’s keeping the Law of Moses and because he refined that Law in ways that show us it’s easier to break than we think. ~ This overlapping is like a handshake; the Old fingers reach across the new hand and the New fingers reach across the Old hand. To understand the Gospels, read the Book of Galatians and the rest of the New Testament Epistles; this will help you know when Jesus is speaking about Law or about Grace…

Hebrews 8:13 NET; When he speaks of a new covenant, he makes the first obsolete. Now what is growing obsolete and aging is about to disappear.
 

TomFL

Well-known member
There never was a Gospel of some sort before the Gospel of Jesus Christ? The Holy Spirit never come upon a Man before Jesus was born?

Anyway, how does your objection disqualify Cornelius' Fruit? Do you reckon it's really Thorns?

Come on in, the Water's fine...
Thorns no

Realize however Cornelius had to hear the gospel before he could receive life and a purified heart

These thing are supplied in regeneration

Acts 15:8–9 —KJV
“And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;
And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.”

Acts 11:18 —KJV
“When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.”
 

ReverendRV

Active member
Thorns no

Realize however Cornelius had to hear the gospel before he could receive life and a purified heart

These thing are supplied in regeneration

Acts 15:8–9 —KJV
“And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us;
And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.”

Acts 11:18 —KJV
“When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.”
Since it is not thorns, Cornelius was Regenerate. Corneilus had to have heard a legitimate Gospel in order to avoid his Fruit actually being Thorns. Adam had the Proto Evangelium, since Cornelius had Fruit, he had a legitimate Gospel for his era too...

Or you must say that in the case of Cornelius "A Devout man, one that Feared God with all his house, giving Alms to people and always Praying" is not the fruit of the Vine of the Messiah; right? I know some people who think the Fruit of Charlie is actually Thorns...
 
Last edited:

TomFL

Well-known member
Since it is not thorns, Cornelius was Regenerate. Corneilus had to have heard a legitimate Gospel in order to avoid his Fruit actually being Thorns. Adam had the Proto Evangelium, since Cornelius had Fruit, he had a legitimate Gospel for his era too...

Or you must say that in the case of Cornelius "A Devout man, one that Feared God with all his house, giving Alms to people and always Praying" is not the fruit of the Vine of the Messiah; right? I know some people who think the Fruit of Charlie is actually Thorns...
Naw that is an assumption based upon a theology of total inability

The plain fact is Cornelius had yet to hear the gospel and believe did not have his heart purified by faith, and did not have life

That being so he could not have had regeneration which is life and a new i.e. purified heart
 

ReverendRV

Active member
Naw that is an assumption based upon a theology of total inability

The plain fact is Cornelius had yet to hear the gospel and believe did not have his heart purified by faith, and did not have life

That being so he could not have had regeneration which is life and a new i.e. purified heart
Let me ask you this; why is it an assumption based on Total Inability? How does the Lesson that a Tree is recognized by it's Fruit, at all related to the Doctrine of Total Inability? Isn't it true that if the Tree is made Good, the Tree will bear Good Fruit? I suppose that's the only way Total Inability could be related. Cornelius had Good Fruit; right? Since no one is born Saved, Cornelius was a Bad Tree for a while and bore Thorns; right? Since Cornelius bore Good Fruit, he had been made Good; right?

If you say that Cornelius' Fruit was not Good, then I think you have something to work with; but so far I think you've landed on the side that his Fruit is of his Good Tree, and of the Vine which is the promised Messiah. The plain fact is that if his Fruit is of God, he heard the available Gospel that the People had at time. If Cornelius had bad fruit that looked like Good fruit, then his Tree was not yet made Good through the Gospel of his Era. You can only choose one or the other, you've chosen that Cornelius bore the Fruit of a Good Tree. Trees are 'made' Good; right? Cornelius had to have heard a reliable Gospel and believed it. You're stuck on the apparent fact that at the time, there was no other name given under Heaven for which he 'must' be Saved; but you know Moses was Saved through the Good News of his Era, he mixed his Covenant with Faith...

I think that when we talk about anything, you try too hard to not accept what is self evident. All I know to do is Pray; and continue to show CARMites why they need to adjust their POVs...
 

TomFL

Well-known member
Let me ask you this; why is it an assumption based on Total Inability? How does the Lesson that a Tree is recognized by it's Fruit, at all related to the Doctrine of Total Inability? Isn't it true that if the Tree is made Good, the Tree will bear Good Fruit? I suppose that's the only way Total Inability could be related. Cornelius had Good Fruit; right? Since no one is born Saved, Cornelius was a Bad Tree for a while and bore Thorns; right? Since Cornelius bore Good Fruit, he had been made Good; right?

If you say that Cornelius' Fruit was not Good, then I think you have something to work with; but so far I think you've landed on the side that his Fruit is of his Good Tree, and of the Vine which is the promised Messiah. The plain fact is that if his Fruit is of God, he heard the available Gospel that the People had at time. If Cornelius had bad fruit that looked like Good fruit, then his Tree was not yet made Good through the Gospel of his Era. You can only choose one or the other, you've chosen that Cornelius bore the Fruit of a Good Tree. Trees are 'made' Good; right? Cornelius had to have heard a reliable Gospel and believed it. You're stuck on the apparent fact that at the time, there was no other name given under Heaven for which he 'must' be Saved; but you know Moses was Saved through the Good News of his Era, he mixed his Covenant with Faith...

I think that when we talk about anything, you try too hard to not accept what is self evident. All I know to do is Pray; and continue to show CARMites why they need to adjust their POVs...
Because total inability assumes man cannot respond to God in a positive manner that he is born a hater of God
Despite the good that Cornelius did he still needed a savior, he still was a sinner

What did the angel tell him according to Peter

Acts 11:13–14 —KJV
“And he shewed us how he had seen an angel in his house, which stood and said unto him, Send men to Joppa, and call for Simon, whose surname is Peter;
Who shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved.”

He still needed salvation

He still needed the gospel

He still needed life

He still required purification of his heart


These things were supplied to him according to Acts chapters 10,11,15
 

ReverendRV

Active member
Because total inability assumes man cannot respond to God in a positive manner that he is born a hater of God
Despite the good that Cornelius did he still needed a savior, he still was a sinner

What did the angel tell him according to Peter

Acts 11:13–14 —KJV
“And he shewed us how he had seen an angel in his house, which stood and said unto him, Send men to Joppa, and call for Simon, whose surname is Peter;
Who shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved.”

He still needed salvation

He still needed the gospel

He still needed life

He still required purification of his heart


These things were supplied to him according to Acts chapters 10,11,15
That's a good point. But Jesus went to Paradise and Preached to the Old Covenant Saints. Cornelius was on the crux of the New Covenant appearing, and did not need to wait until he died to hear the Gospel of Jesus Christ...

But back to the crucial point; Cornelius was bearing Good Fruit before he heard the Gospel of Jesus Christ; right?
 

TomFL

Well-known member
That's a good point. But Jesus went to Paradise and Preached to the Old Covenant Saints. Cornelius was on the crux of the New Covenant appearing, and did not need to wait and die to hear the Gospel of Jesus Christ...

But back to the crucial point; Cornelius was bearing Good Fruit before he heard the Gospel of Jesus Christ; right?
Cornelius did some relative good

Total inability has a difficult time accounting for this - the point of the op

But one cannot be saved based on their good works

so he was still in need of a savior and all that entails
 

ReverendRV

Active member
Cornelius did some relative good

Total inability has a difficult time accounting for this - the point of the op

But one cannot be saved based on their good works

so he was still in need of a savior and all that entails
I take that as you saying Cornelius was relatively Good when compared to other Centurions, and that you are saying Cornelius was not yet grafted into the True Vine, the Messiah, for his deeds to be TRUE Fruits of the Spirit; IE Works we were created for. So the Good that Cornelius did, was like Dirty Rags; right? At about three O'clock, an Angel appeared to Cornelius in a Vision. Professor Flowers says that the only Grace of God which is Required from God is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. In this case, his Calling was brought by a Messenger to the House of Cornelius; how beautiful his feet must have been! How could Cornelius hear unless someone was sent? This sending is also the Grace of God; especially in the case of Cornelius. I debate with Professor Flowers from time to time, and even though he doesn't like me to say it because I can't cite him, he agrees we're Totally Unable without the prevening Grace of God making a 'real' difference in our Salvation (that old Chestnut). Since God initiated a Vision, showing Cornelius the Prayers and Gifts to the Poor he had given, and learning these came up to God as an acceptable Offering, this means he was in Covenant with God already. Cornelius was a living hold-over from the Old Covenant, a transitional Saint; and that, through Faith. ~ Answer this; if Cornelius had died before he received the Vision, would he have gone to Paradise to hear Jesus preach the Good News to him there? If so, why? If not, why not?

I've presented a good reason that Cornelius was Regenerated before he believed the Gospel of Jesus Christ; IE the Fruits of the Spirit mentioned in Acts10:2. You've suggested that his Acts were less than Spiritual Fruit; just 'Relative good'. I've used a Verse showing that a Good Tree bears Good Fruit, and make a Tree Good and it will bear Good Fruit. These are Biblical reasons to support the position that Cornelius did already indeed have access to the True Vine; the Messiah. You've stated that Cornelius was only Relatively good, thus he was not a branch of the True Vine yet. ~ What Verses do you have that show us an Old Covenant Saint cannot bear Spiritual Fruit, or were never in the True Vine during their lives? ~ Other verses show us that only the Good Soil bears fruit. Did Cornelius bear thorns or Spiritual Fruit? It seems he bore Spiritual Fruit, thus his Soil must have been 'Good' already. Do you realize that you've backed off on your position that Cornelius bore Fruit instead of Thorns? You don't need to do this, there's only one reason you'd do that; you HAD to change your statement "Thorns, No". The reason for this is because there are only two options, Thorns or Fruit. Saying "Thorns, No" only leaves us with an option that the Deeds of Cornelius were Spiritual Fruit, because Relatively good Fruit has to be Categorized as Thorns due to it Falling short of the Glory of God; and because of the Law of Excluded Middle. Stating his Deeds are Relative good, Conflates your POV to 'Thorns, yes'...

Why would the Thorns of Cornelius come up to God and be accepted?
 
Last edited:

TomFL

Well-known member
I take that as you saying Cornelius was relatively Good when compared to other Centurions, and that you are saying Cornelius was not yet grafted into the True Vine, the Messiah, for his deeds to be TRUE Fruits of the Spirit; IE Works we were created for. So the Good that Cornelius did, was like Dirty Rags; right? At about three O'clock, an Angel appeared to Cornelius in a Vision. Professor Flowers says that the only Grace of God which is Required from God is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. In this case, his Calling was brought by a Messenger to the House of Cornelius; how beautiful his feet must have been! How could Cornelius hear unless someone was sent? This sending is also the Grace of God; especially in the case of Cornelius. I debate with Professor Flowers from time to time, and even though he doesn't like me to say it because I can't cite him, he agrees we're Totally Unable without the prevening Grace of God making a 'real' difference in our Salvation (that old Chestnut). Since God initiated a Vision, showing Cornelius the Prayers and Gifts to the Poor he had given, and learning these came up to God as an acceptable Offering, this means he was in Covenant with God already. Cornelius was a living hold-over from the Old Covenant, a transitional Saint; and that, through Faith. ~ Answer this; if Cornelius had died before he received the Vision, would he have gone to Paradise to hear Jesus preach the Good News to him there? If so, why? If not, why not?

I've presented a good reason that Cornelius was Regenerated before he believed the Gospel of Jesus Christ; IE the Fruits of the Spirit mentioned in Acts10:2. You've suggested that his Acts were less than Spiritual Fruit; just 'Relative good'. I've used a Verse showing that a Good Tree bears Good Fruit, and make a Tree Good and it will bear Good Fruit. These are Biblical reasons to support the position that Cornelius did already indeed have access to the True Vine; the Messiah. You've stated that Cornelius was only Relatively good, thus he was not a branch of the True Vine yet. ~ What Verses do you have that show us an Old Covenant Saint cannot bear Spiritual Fruit, or were never in the True Vine during their lives? ~ Other verses show us that only the Good Soil bears fruit. Did Cornelius bear thorns or Spiritual Fruit? It seems he bore Spiritual Fruit, thus his Soil must have been 'Good' already. Do you realize that you've backed off on your position that Cornelius bore Fruit instead of Thorns? You don't need to do this, there's only one reason you'd do that; you HAD to change your statement "Thorns, No". The reason for this is because there are only two options, Thorns or Fruit. Saying "Thorns, No" only leaves us with an option that the Deeds of Cornelius were Spiritual Fruit, because Relatively good Fruit has to be Categorized as Thorns due to it Falling short of the Glory of God; and because of the Law of Excluded Middle. Stating his Deeds are Relative good, Conflates your POV to 'Thorns, yes'...

Why would the Thorns of Cornelius come up to God and be accepted?
No I don't think you have good evidence for regeneration

If he was regenerated he already had life but that would be contrary to what we see in acts

His heart would have already been purified

Further back in the OT we see regeneration as a future promise i.e. Ezek 36:26

Ezek. 36:24–27 —KJV
“For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land.
¶ Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.
A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.
And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.”

you will see this is in associate with the indweling of the spirit.

That was not available until after Christ is glorified

John 7:38–39 —KJV
“He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.
(But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)”

and for those that believe on Christ

Cornelius did not qualify until Peter brought the gospel
 

ReverendRV

Active member
No I don't think you have good evidence for regeneration

If he was regenerated he already had life but that would be contrary to what we see in acts

His heart would have already been purified

Further back in the OT we see regeneration as a future promise i.e. Ezek 36:26

Ezek. 36:24–27 —KJV
“For I will take you from among the heathen, and gather you out of all countries, and will bring you into your own land.
¶ Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.
A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.
And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.”

you will see this is in associate with the indweling of the spirit.

That was not available until after Christ is glorified

John 7:38–39 —KJV
“He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.
(But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)”

and for those that believe on Christ

Cornelius did not qualify until Peter brought the gospel
We only get a new Heart under the New Covenant; but that's not a factor since Old Covenant Saints were Saved without new Hearts...

Or were they? ~ Something happened to them that's like receiving a new Heart; the Circumcision of the Heart. 'The LORD God will Circumcise your Hearts and your Descendant's Hearts, and you will Love God with all your Heart and all your Soul; that you will Live'. By saying 'Your' Hearts and 'Their' Hearts, this had to apply to the Old Testament Saints too, and their Hearts WERE Circumcised. Whether you believe their Hearts were Circumcised before or after their Faith, the Hearts of Moses, Elijah and King David were indeed Circumcised. Brother; Cornelius bore Spiritual Fruit because his Heart was Circumcised by Grace through Faith in the Gospel of his Era...

Could the reason Cornelius bore Good Fruit, be because his Heart had been Circumcised while an Old Covenant Saint?
 
Last edited:

TomFL

Well-known member
We only get a new Heart under the New Covenant; but that's not a factor since Old Covenant Saints were Saved without new Hearts..

Or were they? ~ Something happened to them that's like receiving a new Heart; the Circumcision of the Heart. 'The LORD God will Circumcise your Hearts and your Descendant's Hearts, and you will Love God with all your Heart and all your Soul; that you will Live'. By saying 'Your' Hearts and 'Their' Hearts, this had to apply to the Old Testament Saints too, and their Hearts WERE Circumcised. Whether you believe their Hearts were Circumcised before or after their Faith, the Hearts of Moses, Elijah and King David were indeed Circumcised. Brother; Cornelius bore Spiritual Fruit because his Heart was Circumcised by Grace through Faith in the Gospel of his Era...

Could the reason Cornelius bore Good Fruit, be because his Heart had been Circumcised?
If as you say we get a new heart only under the new covenant and regeneration supplies a new heart you have just proven old testament saints were not regenerate

Do you recall the op I posted on regeneration

REGENERATION
The term regeneration comes from a Greek word meaning “rebirth” or “new genesis.” The term signifies the renewal of the fallen creation through the redemptive work of Christ. The actual term “regeneration” is found only twice in Scripture, once for the renewal of all things (Mt 19:28; cf. Ac 3:21, “restoration of all things”) and once for the present inner spiritual renewal of believers. The same concept of renewal is expressed in the language of a new heart (e.g., Eze 36:26f), of a new birth (e.g., Jn 3:3, 7), of new persons through union with Christ in death and resurrection (e.g., Ro 6:4–8), and a new creation including persons (e.g., 2 Co 5:17) and the heavens and earth (e.g., Re 21:1). All of these concepts of renewal belong to the one great action of God in bringing eternal life and incorruptibility to fallen creation. The present new birth of individual believers is thus the beginning of the regeneration that will ultimately encompass the universe (heavens and earth).
personal regeneration
descriptions of ♦ new heart: De 30:6; Je 24:7; 31:33; Eze 11:19–20; 36:26–27 ♦ new birth: Jn 1:13; 3:3–8; Jam 1:18; 1 Pe 1:3, 23; 1 Jo 2:29; 3:9; 4:7; 5:1 ♦ spiritual death and resurrection: Ro 6:4–8; Ga 2:20; Eph 2:1, 5, 10; Col 2:12–13 ♦ new life: Eze 37:5, 14 ♦ new creation: 2 Co 5:17; Ga 6:15; Eph 4:22–24; Col 3:9–10; Tit 3:5: agent of—the Spirit: Eze 36:26, 27; Jn 3:5–8; Tit 3:5: instrument of—the Word: Jam 1:18; 1 Pe 1:23

The gospel is the instrument of regeneration

The Spirit the agent

Both New Testament realities

and you agreed with the op
 

ReverendRV

Active member
If as you say we get a new heart only under the new covenant and regeneration supplies a new heart you have just proven old testament saints were not regenerate

Do you recall the op I posted on regeneration

REGENERATION
The term regeneration comes from a Greek word meaning “rebirth” or “new genesis.” The term signifies the renewal of the fallen creation through the redemptive work of Christ. The actual term “regeneration” is found only twice in Scripture, once for the renewal of all things (Mt 19:28; cf. Ac 3:21, “restoration of all things”) and once for the present inner spiritual renewal of believers. The same concept of renewal is expressed in the language of a new heart (e.g., Eze 36:26f), of a new birth (e.g., Jn 3:3, 7), of new persons through union with Christ in death and resurrection (e.g., Ro 6:4–8), and a new creation including persons (e.g., 2 Co 5:17) and the heavens and earth (e.g., Re 21:1). All of these concepts of renewal belong to the one great action of God in bringing eternal life and incorruptibility to fallen creation. The present new birth of individual believers is thus the beginning of the regeneration that will ultimately encompass the universe (heavens and earth).
personal regeneration
descriptions of ♦ new heart: De 30:6; Je 24:7; 31:33; Eze 11:19–20; 36:26–27 ♦ new birth: Jn 1:13; 3:3–8; Jam 1:18; 1 Pe 1:3, 23; 1 Jo 2:29; 3:9; 4:7; 5:1 ♦ spiritual death and resurrection: Ro 6:4–8; Ga 2:20; Eph 2:1, 5, 10; Col 2:12–13 ♦ new life: Eze 37:5, 14 ♦ new creation: 2 Co 5:17; Ga 6:15; Eph 4:22–24; Col 3:9–10; Tit 3:5: agent of—the Spirit: Eze 36:26, 27; Jn 3:5–8; Tit 3:5: instrument of—the Word: Jam 1:18; 1 Pe 1:23

The gospel is the instrument of regeneration

The Spirit the agent

Both New Testament realities

and you agreed with the op
Circumcision of the Heart Conflates to receiving a New Heart; regarding their ability to Enable. I agree with your definition of Regeneration as a Compatibalist, that doesn't mean I think the definition is complete; you have to remember I'm not your average 5-Point Calvinist. You need to add the Circumcision of the Heart to your definition of Regeneration; "What matters is Circumcision of the Heart". This Spiritual Circumcision Enabled the Old Covenant Jews...

What did the Circumcision of the Heart do for the Jews?

Cornelius was Enabled to make Memorial Offerings to God, which the LORD accepted. Otherwise, Cornelius could only offer God Thorns and Thistles; which he would never accept...
 

TomFL

Well-known member
Circumcision of the Heart Conflates to receiving a New Heart; regarding their Enabling. I agree with your definition of Regeneration as a Compatibalist, that doesn't mean I think the definition is complete; you have to remember I'm not your average 5-Point Calvinist. You need to add the Circumcision of the Heart to your definition of Regeneration; "What matters is Circumcision of the Heart". This Spiritual Circumcision Enabled the Old Covenant Jews...

What did the Circumcision of the Heart do for the Jews?

Cornelius was Enabled to make Memorial Offerings to God, which the LORD accepted. Otherwise, Cornelius could only offer God Thorns and Thistles...

Ah there goes the assumption of total inability

Please produce scripture that states Otherwise, Cornelius could only offer God Thorns and Thistles... if God had not performed a divine act on him changing his heart
 

ReverendRV

Active member
Ah there goes the assumption of total inability

Please produce scripture that states Otherwise, Cornelius could only offer God Thorns and Thistles... if God had not performed a divine act on him changing his heart
Let me get back to that tomorrow; I'm getting weary. I'm not saying I'm unable to answer you here; I know you respect me. It's not an assumption since I said earlier that there are only two options concerning the Deeds of Cornelius. Because of the Law of Excluded Middle, they're either Spiritual Fruit or Thorns; that doesn't equal Assumption. I am also planning on writing a new Gospel Tract about Esau selling his Birthright, and using this as a Type for Jesus buying Federal Headship from Adam...

P.S. It would be helpful if you answered some of the questions I ask; like "What did the Circumcision of the Heart do for the Jews?" Or, "Could the reason Cornelius bore Good Fruit, be because his Heart had been Circumcised while an Old Covenant Saint?"

Etc...
 
Last edited:
Top