Genesis 4 and the unregenerate Cain

[Our Lord's God]

Excuse me but I believe you stated I was misrepresenting Calvinism and called my claim a strawman

It was not and you were wrong on this

But now you are confounding salvation and faith

they are not the same

God saves

man believes

God does not believe for anyone


they are two different things not to be confounded as one

Acts 16:30–31 (KJV 1900) — 30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? 31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

it is what must I do to be saved

The answer is not nothing just wait for God to give you faith

no its (you) believe on the lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved

What the Bible says:
30 and after he brought them out, he said, “Lords, what must I do to be saved?”
They said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.”

Paul answers that he must do something to be saved.

What Calvinists somehow manage to see:
30 and after he brought them out, he said, “Lords, what must I do to be saved?”
They said, “You can't do anything to be saved. Salvation is the monergistic work of God."

 

[PeanutGallery]

No one but Christ was ever without sin. But then, what's your point, and why don't you answer my questions?

OK; now it is established that we all sin:

You are misinterpreting the scripture. Paul saying he was "serving the law of sin with the flesh" is not equated with "walking in the flesh." ...

So your flesh does not please God, then why did God put you in it? Can you figure it out? 2 Cor. 10:2-3

So far we've covered:
a) Christian 'walking in the flesh'; 2Cor 10:3
b) Christian not 'walking after the flesh'; Rom 8:1
c) Christian 'serving sin in the flesh'; Rom 7:25

Which of the three is pleasing to God?
Rom 6:12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof.

 

[fltom]

What the Bible says:
30 and after he brought them out, he said, “Lords, what must I do to be saved?”
They said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.”

Paul answers that he must do something to be saved.

What Calvinists somehow manage to see:
30 and after he brought them out, he said, “Lords, what must I do to be saved?”
They said, “You can't do anything to be saved. Salvation is the monergistic work of God."

Yep it's not biblical

obviously so

 

[tdidymas]

You have not been reading

It appears to me you're the one not reading. None of these scriptures say faith is before regeneration.

1 Corinthians 4:15 (KJV 1900) — 15 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.

Paul begot the Corinthian through the gospel

Heb. 12:9, John 1:13, and Ja. 1:18 says that God begat us. Do you think Paul is literally saying he begat them? Is this what you think?

Here is how

1 Corinthians 15:1–11 (KJV 1900) — 1 Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; 2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. 3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: 5 And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: 6 After that, he was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. 7 After that, he was seen of James; then of all the apostles. 8 And last of all he was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time. 9 For I am the least of the apostles, that am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 10 But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me. 11 Therefore whether it were I or they, so we preach, and so ye believed.

add to that

1 Peter 1:18–23 (KJV 1900) — 18 Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; 19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: 20 Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you, 21 Who by him do believe in God, that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God. 22 Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently: 23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

None of these scriptures say that belief comes before regeneration. God regenerated us through the word of God, then we believed it.

and

James 1:18 (KJV 1900) — 18 Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.

God begat us of His own will, not from our so-called free-will faith which you advocate. John concurs in John 1:13.

and it is not by unbelief for

Hebrews 4:2 (KJV 1900) — 2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.

So we are regenerated through faith in the gospel

It doesn't say that. It says that they didn't profit, not "weren't regenerated." You are obviously reading into the scripture your agenda.

There are no verses which state faith is a gift God irresistibly gives to some but withholds from others

Faith is man response to spiritual truth

Romans 10:17 (KJV 1900) — 17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Additionally how can what requires an act of your will be given you

Faith is an act of the heart/spirit, not an act of natural will. According to 1 Cor. 2:14, a man must be spiritual before he can act on spiritual truth favorably. Otherwise, he thinks it foolish or wrong. God must bring a person to spiritual mindedness before he can act favorably to the gospel.

John in his epistle is extolling the marks of one born again he believes Jeesus is the Christ. He is not speaking about how one comes to faith

This may be seen throughout 1John

1 John 3:9
Whosoever is born of God doth not commit sin; for his seed remaineth in him: and he cannot sin, because he is born of God.

1 John 4:7
Beloved, let us love one another: for love is of God; and every one that loveth is born of God, and knoweth God.

1 John 5:1
Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: and every one that loveth him that begat loveth him also that is begotten of him.

1 John 5:4
For whatsoever is born of God overcometh the world: and this is the victory that overcometh the world, even our faith.

1 John 5:18
We know that whosoever is born of God sinneth not; but he that is begotten of God keepeth himself, and that wicked one toucheth him not.

LOL, you think one can BELIEVE that Jesus is the Christ (namely his own Christ), and not have FAITH in Him? Nonsense!

Well you are flat out wrong on John 5:25

there were no physical resurrections in Jesus day

It is the spiritually dead spoken of

No, you're wrong and taking scripture out of context. It says in 5:28 that those in the graves will hear His voice, and in 5:29 those people shall be resurrected. The context is resurrection, so 5:25 is literal and physical resurrection.

further in John 20:31

One believes before one has life

John 20:31 (KJV 1900) — 31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.


The very opposite of what you stated

It doesn't say faith comes before regeneration. You are assuming a chronology that isn't there.

and as for Eph 2:5

Ephesians 2:5 (KJV 1900) — 5 Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved

it says nothing at all about being made alive so as to believe

Yet only those alive believe (1 Jn. 5:1), since no one dead believes.

Rather it associates being made alive - regeneration with being saved by grace

We know however that is through faith

Ephesians 2:8 (KJV 1900) — 8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:

And what is the "it" the verse is talking about? It's all 3 - grace, being saved, and faith. All of it is the gift of God. And notice that faith is last, not first.

regarding which I think it was you who commented on the word through (gr-dia)

No, that wasn't me.

Its gloss is through, because of, by

It is in the genitive case

III. of means, instrument, agency: by means of, through, with.
1. w. gen. of the thing:—a. to denote means or instrument


William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature : A Translation and Adaption of the Fourth Revised and Augmented Edition of Walter Bauer’s Griechisch-Deutsches Worterbuch Zu Den Schrift En Des Neuen Testaments Und Der Ubrigen Urchristlichen Literatur (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979), 180.


III. of the Means or Instrument by which anything is effected; because what is done by means of a person or thing seems to pass as it were through the same

Joseph Henry Thayer, A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Being Grimm’s Wilke's Clavis Novi Testamenti (New York: Harper & Brothers., 1889), 133.

4. dia (διά, 1223), “by, by means of,” when followed by the genitive case, is instrumental, e.g., 2 Pet. 3:6, RV, “by which means” (KJV, “whereby”).

W. E. Vine, Merrill F. Unger, and William White Jr., Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and New Testament Words (Nashville, TN: T. Nelson, 1996), 398.

I don't have a context for this.

 

[tdidymas]

Excuse me but I believe you stated I was misrepresenting Calvinism and called my claim a strawman

It was not and you were wrong on this

But now you are confounding salvation and faith

they are not the same

God saves

man believes

God does not believe for anyone


they are two different things not to be confounded as one

Acts 16:30–31 (KJV 1900) — 30 And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? 31 And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

it is what must I do to be saved

The answer is not nothing just wait for God to give you faith

no its (you) believe on the lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved

I never said that, because I never said I was a Calvinist. I've read very little on the subject, as I am only interested in what the Bible says.
Therefore I don't understand this response. I think you are confusing me with someone else.

 

[tdidymas]

OK; now it is established that we all sin:


So far we've covered:
a) Christian 'walking in the flesh'; 2Cor 10:3
b) Christian not 'walking after the flesh'; Rom 8:1
c) Christian 'serving sin in the flesh'; Rom 7:25

Which of the three is pleasing to God?
Rom 6:12 Let not sin therefore reign in your mortal body, that ye should obey it in the lusts thereof.

I know the scriptures you cited, but it looks to me like you're trying to trap me somehow. Stop assuming you know what I believe when you really don't know, except for what I've posted. It appears you are reading into what I wrote things that are not there. We all know what pleases God and what doesn't. But let me ask you a question here, and will you answer it:

Do you think we can please God and displease Him at the same time?

 

[PeanutGallery]

I know the scriptures you cited, but it looks to me like you're trying to trap me somehow.
...
Do you think we can please God and displease Him at the same time?

Have you been trying to trap me?
Every person on this earth has a flesh, it is called our body; this same flesh is also corrupt due to the curse of Adam's sin.
When we mind the things of the Spirit while being in this cursed flesh, we please God; when we mind the things of this world while being in this cursed flesh, we do not please God.
One day, this corruptible body will put on incorruption, until then:
Gal 5:16 This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.
Gal 5:17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.

 

[fltom]

I never said that, because I never said I was a Calvinist. I've read very little on the subject, as I am only interested in what the Bible says.
Therefore I don't understand this response. I think you are confusing me with someone else.

This is not you?

Tdidymas
No one said man has NO CAPACITY for belief, so your statement is a straw man. The fact is, by himself apart from the grace of God raising up his spirit in Christ, he DOES NOT believe UNTO RIGHTEOUSNESS.

they were your words

And they speak of man having to be raised spiritually that is be regenerated before he can believe

and

Like I said, I don't care what other people say, I care what the Bible says. Salvation is all of grace, not grace plus man's reasoning. I'm not talking about reasoning, I'm talking about what God does to a person's spirit, according to how I read scripture.

 

[fltom]

It appears to me you're the one not reading. None of these scriptures say faith is before regeneration.

If you know what regeneration is they all do

Regeneration imparts life

So when you read of one physical alive going from death to life regeneration has occurred

Heb. 12:9, John 1:13, and Ja. 1:18 says that God begat us. Do you think Paul is literally saying he begat them? Is this what you think?

Only that he was instrumental

how was he instrumental

by preaching the gospel

None of these scriptures say that belief comes before regeneration. God regenerated us through the word of God, then we believed it.

Sorry The word of God held in unbelief does not profit

Hebrews 4:2 (KJV 1900) — 2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.


1 Peter 1:22–25 (KJV 1900) — 22 Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently: 23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. 24 For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away: 25 But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.

belief preceded the purification

God begat us of His own will, not from our so-called free-will faith which you advocate. John concurs in John 1:13.

If you are not a Calvinist what are you? Lutheran perhaps

You say the same things and use the same scriptures

Joh 1:13 simply notes it God who regenerates as man cannot regenerate himself

He regenerates those

John 1:12 (KJV 1900) — 12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:


who received Christ



(5) The “children of God.”—Those who are “begotten of God” are ipso facto “children of God” (tékna theoú, Jn 1:12; 11:52; 1 Jn 3:1, 2, 10; 5:2).1

1 R. Law, “Johannine, Theology, The,” ed. James Orr et al., The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia (Chicago: The Howard-Severance Company, 1915), 1703.



CHILDREN OF GOD. Persons in this category are only those who of the fallen race are regenerated as a result of faith in Christ1

1 Merrill F. Unger, “Children of God,” ed. R.K. Harrison, The New Unger’s Bible Dictionary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1988).



Children of God (tekna theou). In the full spiritual sense, not as mere offspring of God true of all men (Acts 17:28). Paul's phrase huioi theou (Galatians 3:26) for believers, used also by Jesus of the pure in heart (Matthew 5:9), does not occur in John's Gospel (but in Rev. 21:7). It is possible that John prefers ta tekna tou theou for the spiritual children of God whether Jew or Gentile (John 11:52) because of the community of nature (teknon from root tek-, to beget). But one cannot follow Westcott in insisting on "adoption" as Paul's reason for the use of huioi since Jesus uses huioi theou in Matthew 5:9. Clearly the idea of regeneration is involved here as in John 3:3.
Word Pictures in the New Testament.

Vincent agrees

Sons (τέκνα)

Rev., more correctly, children. Son is υἱός. Τέκνον, child (τίκτω, to bring forth), denotes a relation based on community of nature
Word Studies in the New Testament.

It doesn't say that. It says that they didn't profit, not "weren't regenerated." You are obviously reading into the scripture your agenda.

Seriously ?

Being regenerated is not profit?

Come on now

Faith is an act of the heart/spirit, not an act of natural will. According to 1 Cor. 2:14, a man must be spiritual before he can act on spiritual truth favorably. Otherwise, he thinks it foolish or wrong. God must bring a person to spiritual mindedness before he can act favorably to the gospel.

Faith involves the heart the mind and the will

Biblical Faith is entrusting yourself to Christ

that requires an act of the will

According to 1Cor 2:14 it is man apart from God's wisdom which comes by revelation

Given revelation God's wisdom man can believe

as Paul notes

Romans 10:14–17 (KJV 1900) — 14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? 15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things! 16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report? 17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

LOL, you think one can BELIEVE that Jesus is the Christ (namely his own Christ), and not have FAITH in Him? Nonsense!

One can believe facts but not have faith

If one will not commit to Christ belief will not profit

No, you're wrong and taking scripture out of context. It says in 5:28 that those in the graves will hear His voice, and in 5:29 those people shall be resurrected. The context is resurrection, so 5:25 is literal and physical resurrection.

Sorry but because John 5:28 is speaking of the physical resurection is no evidence John 5:25 is

There are a number of factors by which they differ

The physical resurrection in 5:28 is not stated to be now is John 5:25 the spiritual resurrection is

The only resurrection of men during Christs time is the spiritual resurrection regeneration

John 5:28 speaks of those in the grave John 5:25 does not

John 5:28 speaks of a general resurrection and judgment

John 5:25 speaks only of those who hear

John 5:28 is all in the grave



John 5:24–29 (KJV 1900) — 24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. 25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, 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. 26 For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself; 27 And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man. 28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, 29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.

It doesn't say faith comes before regeneration. You are assuming a chronology that isn't there.

Rather you fail to recognize what regeneration is

Regeneration is the impartation of spiritual life

Regeneration makes one a child of God

regeneration is a spiritual resurrection

A living man receiving life notes regeneration has transpired

One being a child of God

notes regeneration has occurred

One undersgoing a spiritrual resurrection hads been regenerated

Faith precedes having life

Faith precedes becoming a child of God

Faith precedes any spiritual resurrection

end pt1

 

[fltom]

end pt1

pt2

Yet only those alive believe (1 Jn. 5:1), since no one dead believes.

!@john only notes w2hat we can know about one regenerated

It does not address how one is regenerated

And what is the "it" the verse is talking about? It's all 3 - grace, being saved, and faith. All of it is the gift of God. And notice that faith is last, not first.

Gramatically it does not refer to faith

and this (not your faith, as Chrys. οὐδὲ ἡ πίστις, φησίν, ἐξ ὑμῶν: so Thdrt., al., Corn.-a-Iap., Beza, Est., Grot., Beng., all.;—this is precluded (not by the gender of τοῦτο, but) by the manifestly parallel clauses οὐκ ἐξ ὑμῶν and οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων, of which the latter would be irrelevant as asserted of πίστις, and the reference of ver. 9 must therefore be changed:—but, as Calv., Calov., Rück., Harl., Olsh., Mey., De W., Stier, al., ‘your salvation;’ τὸ σεσωσμένοι εἶναι, as Ellic.) not of yourselves, God’s (emphatic) is the gift (not, as E. V. ‘it is the gift of God’ (θεοῦ δῶρον),—τὸ δῶρον, viz. of your salvation: so that the expression is pregnant—q. d., ‘but it is a gift, and that gift is God’s.’ There is no occasion, as Lachm., Harl., and De W., to parenthesize these words: they form a contrast to οὐκ ἐξ ὑμ., and a quasi-parallel clause to ἵνα μή τις καυχήσ. below): not of works (for ἐξ ἔργων, see on Rom. 3:4, and Gal. 2:16), that no man should boast (on the proposition implied, see on Rom. 4:2.

1 Henry Alford, Alford’s Greek Testament: An Exegetical and Critical Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Guardian Press, 1976), 94.

But whether are we to understand, faith or salvation as being the gift of God? This question is answered by the Greek text: τῃ γαρ χαριτι εστε σεσωσμενοι δια της πιστεως· και τουτο ουκ εξ ὑμων· Θεου το δωρον, ουκ εξ εργων· ἰνα μη τις καυχησηται· “By this grace ye are saved through faith; and this (τουτο, this salvation) not of you; it is the gift of God, not of works: so that no one can boast.” “The relative τουτο, this, which is in the neuter gender, cannot stand for πιστις, faith, which is the feminine; but it has the whole sentence that goes before for its antecedent.” But it may be asked: Is not faith the gift of God? Yes, as to the grace by which it is produced; but the grace or power to believe, and the act of believing, are two different things. Without the grace or power to believe no man ever did or can believe; but with that power the act of faith is a man’s own. God never believes for any man, no more than he repents for him; the penitent, through this grace enabling him, believes for himself: nor does he believe necessarily, or impulsively when he has that power; the power to believe may be present long before it is exercised, else, why the solemn warnings with which we meet every where in the word of God, and threatenings against those who do not believe? Is not this a proof that such persons have the power but do not use it? They believe not, and therefore are not established. This, therefore, is the true state of the case: God gives the power, man uses the power thus given, and brings glory to God: without the power no man can believe; with it, any man may.1

1 Adam Clarke, The Holy Bible with a Commentary and Critical Notes (vol. 6, New Edition.; Bellingham, WA: Faithlife Corporation, 2014), 439.



And that not of yourselves. That is, salvation does not proceed from yourselves. The word rendered that—τοῦτο—is in the neuter gender, and the word faith—πίστις—is in the feminine. The word “that,” therefore, does not refer particularly to faith, as being the gift of God, but to the salvation by grace of which he had been speaking. This is the interpretation of the passage which is the most obvious, and which is now generally conceded to be the true one; see Bloomfield1

1 Albert Barnes, Notes on the New Testament: Ephesians, Philippians & Colossians (ed. Robert Frew; London: Blackie & Son, 1884–1885), 42.

But they commonly misintepret this text, and restrict the word ‘gift’ to faith alone. But Paul is only repeating his earlier statement in other words. He does not mean that faith is the gift of God, but that salvation is given to us by God … " (from, Calvin’s Commentaries 4:145

 

[tdidymas]

Have you been trying to trap me?
Every person on this earth has a flesh, it is called our body; this same flesh is also corrupt due to the curse of Adam's sin.
When we mind the things of the Spirit while being in this cursed flesh, we please God; when we mind the things of this world while being in this cursed flesh, we do not please God.
One day, this corruptible body will put on incorruption, until then:
Gal 5:16 This I say then, Walk in the Spirit, and ye shall not fulfil the lust of the flesh.
Gal 5:17 For the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, and the Spirit against the flesh: and these are contrary the one to the other: so that ye cannot do the things that ye would.

No trap from my end. You're harping on Rom. 7:25 as if Paul walked in the flesh (that is, obeying the sinful nature) when he clearly said he didn't. My point is that you are misinterpreting it.

 

[tdidymas]

This is not you?


they were your words

And they speak of man having to be raised spiritually that is be regenerated before he can believe

and

I quoted scripture that indicates the process I cited. So regeneration is God's decision, not man's, according to John 1:13. So if you think otherwise, you need to explain those scriptures, instead of pitting other scriptures against it. I explained clearly that the verses you cited to support your agenda don't say what you claim.

 

[fltom]

I quoted scripture that indicates the process I cited. So regeneration is God's decision, not man's, according to John 1:13. So if you think otherwise, you need to explain those scriptures, instead of pitting other scriptures against it. I explained clearly that the verses you cited to support your agenda don't say what you claim.

You are skipping the point

The point is whether man can believe without being regenerated

God saves regenerates those who believe

and we have an example of the unregenerate believing in the parable of the Sower at Mat 13:18-23

In any case you did claim the unregenerate man is unable to believe as I stated

 

[PeanutGallery]

No trap from my end. You're harping on Rom. 7:25 as if Paul walked in the flesh (that is, obeying the sinful nature) when he clearly said he didn't. My point is that you are misinterpreting it.

The flesh serving the law of sin is not "obeying the sinful nature"?
Rom 7:25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

 

[tdidymas]

If you know what regeneration is they all do

Regeneration imparts life

So when you read of one physical alive going from death to life regeneration has occurred

Pt. 1

This statement is obvious, but your claim about it is false. Those scriptures do NOT say that faith is before regeneration. But they do say WHO has life, that is, those WHO believe, so they are statements of identity, not of process. They say who it is who has life, they do not say "this is how to obtain life."

Ok, so one verse of scripture in Acts ("believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved") might be interpreted that way on the surface, taking the statement out of the context of the wider context of scripture, and putting it by itself, as if it was the pinnacle of doctrine. But that is not a correct way of interpreting scripture. Therefore, since there are many verses that speak of God acting in grace upon us "when we were helpless," (that is, helpless to do anything including deciding to believe and obey), this verse in Acts must be interpreted as only a command and a hope offered, and not a doctrine of process.

But the doctrine of process must be taken from verses that are clearly that, namely Eph. 2:5.

Only that he was instrumental

how was he instrumental

by preaching the gospel

We're not talking about the instruments of the process, but of the process itself, so that's a side issue. The crux is what does God do and when to an individual, and what does the individual do and when.

Sorry The word of God held in unbelief does not profit

Hebrews 4:2 (KJV 1900) — 2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.

This is obvious from the verse, which does not say that belief precedes regeneration. It's simply a statement of fact, that unbelief does not profit a person. It's an implication of the command to believe. And according to 1 Cor. 2:24, only those who are spiritual (that is, whom God has made spiritual) become willing to believe.

1 Peter 1:22–25 (KJV 1900) — 22 Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently: 23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. 24 For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away: 25 But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.

belief preceded the purification

Now you are convoluting sanctification with justification?

If you are not a Calvinist what are you? Lutheran perhaps

I'm a Christian who loves the word of God. Your question makes me think that you want to label me so that you can judge me. Did I ever label you?

You say the same things and use the same scriptures

Joh 1:13 simply notes it God who regenerates as man cannot regenerate himself

He regenerates those

John 1:12 (KJV 1900) — 12 But as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name:


who received Christ

I do that because you have been avoiding them. Do you think that when you repeat yourself and claim that I haven't answered your questions, that I can't do the same?

Yet, your explanation leaves much to be desired. You claim that an unregenerated natural man can actually believe the gospel, when Paul clearly states in 1 Cor. 2:14 that he "cannot" properly assess it, because it is a spiritual matter.

Your idea paints a picture of any person in his natural sinful condition can BY HIMSELF, WITHOUT ANY PRESSURE FROM GOD, believe in the gospel preached, that it is his decision and his decision alone, as if his will was completely neutral and detached from anything else. Am I correct in my assessment of your idea? (please answer yes or no).

(5) The “children of God.”—Those who are “begotten of God” are ipso facto “children of God” (tékna theoú, Jn 1:12; 11:52; 1 Jn 3:1, 2, 10; 5:2).1

1 R. Law, “Johannine, Theology, The,” ed. James Orr et al., The International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia (Chicago: The Howard-Severance Company, 1915), 1703.



CHILDREN OF GOD. Persons in this category are only those who of the fallen race are regenerated as a result of faith in Christ1

1 Merrill F. Unger, “Children of God,” ed. R.K. Harrison, The New Unger’s Bible Dictionary (Chicago: Moody Press, 1988).



Children of God (tekna theou). In the full spiritual sense, not as mere offspring of God true of all men (Acts 17:28). Paul's phrase huioi theou (Galatians 3:26) for believers, used also by Jesus of the pure in heart (Matthew 5:9), does not occur in John's Gospel (but in Rev. 21:7). It is possible that John prefers ta tekna tou theou for the spiritual children of God whether Jew or Gentile (John 11:52) because of the community of nature (teknon from root tek-, to beget). But one cannot follow Westcott in insisting on "adoption" as Paul's reason for the use of huioi since Jesus uses huioi theou in Matthew 5:9. Clearly the idea of regeneration is involved here as in John 3:3.
Word Pictures in the New Testament.

Vincent agrees

Sons (τέκνα)

Rev., more correctly, children. Son is υἱός. Τέκνον, child (τίκτω, to bring forth), denotes a relation based on community of nature
Word Studies in the New Testament.

It doesn't say that. It says that they didn't profit, not "weren't regenerated." You are obviously reading into the scripture your agenda.

Seriously ?

Being regenerated is not profit?

Come on now

Why isn't it obvious to you, that those who don't believe are not regenerated? It appears to me that you're stuck on your agenda, and can't read the obvious conclusions of scripture. Paul wrote that not all Israel is Israel. Do you know what that means?

Faith involves the heart the mind and the will

Biblical Faith is entrusting yourself to Christ

that requires an act of the will

According to 1Cor 2:14 it is man apart from God's wisdom which comes by revelation

Given revelation God's wisdom man can believe

Key words you write here. To KNOW God is to LOVE God. Do you agree with this assessment?
And therefore whoever doesn't love God doesn't know Him, and so doesn't believe in Him. Do you agree?
So then, if God reveals Himself, grants wisdom from above, makes a person spiritual enough to correctly assess the gospel (1 Cor. 2:14), then what's the difference between that and regeneration? If a person is a "spiritual man," then why cannot we say that God has "raised us up to the heavenly places in Christ," IOW, born again? Don't you believe that God is able to do that in an instant as an unregenerate person happens to hear the gospel being preached, thereby gifting him with the faith that justifies? Isn't this regeneration?

Then, if God gave revelation and wisdom to believe, then regeneration comes before THE EXERCISE of faith. So in essence, I'm saying that a person DECIDES to believe, because they have been ENABLED to believe, by virtue of regeneration, which is God revealing Himself through the gospel of Christ to an individual.

as Paul notes

Romans 10:14–17 (KJV 1900) — 14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? 15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things! 16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report? 17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.



One can believe facts but not have faith

If one will not commit to Christ belief will not profit

I'm saying there is a difference between the beliefs of an unregenerate person and of a regenerate person. One is based on natural reasoning and is of the flesh. The other is based on wisdom from above and is spiritual. This is what 1 Cor. ch. 1 and 2 are all about. Do you agree with this assessment?

 

[tdidymas]

Pt. 2:

.

Sorry but because John 5:28 is speaking of the physical resurection is no evidence John 5:25 is

There are a number of factors by which they differ

The physical resurrection in 5:28 is not stated to be now is John 5:25 the spiritual resurrection is

The only resurrection of men during Christs time is the spiritual resurrection regeneration

John 5:28 speaks of those in the grave John 5:25 does not

John 5:28 speaks of a general resurrection and judgment

John 5:25 speaks only of those who hear

John 5:28 is all in the grave

Spiritual "resurrection" is not a resurrection, according to how I read scripture. A person starting out their existence dead in transgressions can be brought to life, but it's not a RE-surrection. I don't think there is any scripture that says being born again is a spiritual resurrection. Those who use that idea are speculating, such as those who claim that Rev. 20:5 is a spiritual resurrection, which it is not.

Some people claim that Rom. 7:9 indicates spiritual death and resurrection for individuals, but I disagree with that assessment, because Paul is making an analogy there about the workings of his conscience. He could be relating how Adam was our representative, and putting himself in Adam's place, or he could be talking about when he was a child, and his sin wasn't known until he knew the commandments. Either way, a doctrine of spiritual resurrection cannot be correctly inferred from this one verse, as there are many verses contrary to it.

​

John 5:24–29 (KJV 1900) — 24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. 25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, 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. 26 For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself; 27 And hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man. 28 Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, 29 And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation.



Rather you fail to recognize what regeneration is

Regeneration is the impartation of spiritual life

Regeneration makes one a child of God

regeneration is a spiritual resurrection

Your assessment of what I think is wrong. And the context of this passage is real eternal life and resurrection.

A living man receiving life notes regeneration has transpired

This statement indicates that you put a lot of stock in subjective experience. But in fact, a person might not detect with his flesh that anything has happened, and might not know at all that he has been regenerated. All he might know is that God is true, Jesus is true, and the gospel is true. Therefore, your statement is pure conjecture.

One being a child of God

notes regeneration has occurred

I disagree. A person who KNOWS he is a child of God knows he has been regenerated. Many people who first come into the faith do not know they are children of God.

One undersgoing a spiritrual resurrection hads been regenerated

Faith precedes having life

Faith precedes becoming a child of God

Faith precedes any spiritual resurrection

end pt1

Again, I disagree with your conclusions.

 

[tdidymas]

The flesh serving the law of sin is not "obeying the sinful nature"?
Rom 7:25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

Not according to Rom. 8:4 which is the same context. The chapter divisions are not inspired, so Paul is continuing his argument and has not changed the subject. He clearly states that he does not obey the sinful nature. Therefore, there is a major difference in the 2 phrases.

 

[fltom]

Pt. 2:

.










Spiritual "resurrection" is not a resurrection, according to how I read scripture.

Then the problem is how you read scripture

The believer is stated to be raised up with Christ

Ephesians 2:6 (KJV 1900) — 6 And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:

Colossians 2:12 (KJV 1900) — 12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.

but let us note

The word resurrection does not appear in John 5:25

what is noted however is a passing from death to life

see comments below

A person starting out their existence dead in transgressions can be brought to life, but it's not a RE-surrection. I don't think there is any scripture that says being born again is a spiritual resurrection. Those who use that idea are speculating, such as those who claim that Rev. 20:5 is a spiritual resurrection, which it is not.

Some people claim that Rom. 7:9 indicates spiritual death and resurrection for individuals, but I disagree with that assessment, because Paul is making an analogy there about the workings of his conscience. He could be relating how Adam was our representative, and putting himself in Adam's place, or he could be talking about when he was a child, and his sin wasn't known until he knew the commandments. Either way, a doctrine of spiritual resurrection cannot be correctly inferred from this one verse, as there are many verses contrary to it.


Your assessment of what I think is wrong. And the context of this passage is real eternal life and resurrection.

This statement indicates that you put a lot of stock in subjective experience. But in fact, a person might not detect with his flesh that anything has happened, and might not know at all that he has been regenerated. All he might know is that God is true, Jesus is true, and the gospel is true. Therefore, your statement is pure conjecture.

I disagree. A person who KNOWS he is a child of God knows he has been regenerated. Many people who first come into the faith do not know they are children of God.

Again, I disagree with your conclusions.

Yet you did not address the points i raised

such as the fact there was no physical resurrection that Christ could point to as being now is

John 5:25 (KJV 1900) — 25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, 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.

so what physical resurrection was available in that day

but as I noted the word resurrection does not even appear in John 5:25

but it does speak of a passing from death to life

and this verse also shows a passing from death to life

John 5:24 (KJV 1900) — 24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.

just as we see in verse 25

you cannot deny that a passing from death to life may in fact be a spiritual reality

We also see fact those who believe are given life

John 20:31 (KJV 1900) — 31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

only a dead person needs life

so what he have is a spiritual passing from death to life


the man who reads is physically alive

yet he receives life when he believes

not physical life for he already lives

it is spiritual life

which is what regeneration supplies

 

[PeanutGallery]

Not according to Rom. 8:4 which is the same context. The chapter divisions are not inspired, so Paul is continuing his argument and has not changed the subject. He clearly states that he does not obey the sinful nature. Therefore, there is a major difference in the 2 phrases.

OK; Rom 7:25 is partially true: Paul does not serve with the flesh the law of sin?

Rom 7:25 I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin.

 

[tdidymas]

pt2

!@john only notes w2hat we can know about one regenerated

It does not address how one is regenerated

It is interesting how you agree with me on the assessment of this verse, but in many verses you cited, you don't come to the same conclusion. I get the idea it's because you're reading your agenda into it, wherein you claim those verses say faith comes before regeneration, even though they don't say it. In this case, I'm trying to point out that there are NT scriptures that indicate regeneration comes first. For example Titus 3:5.

Gramatically it does not refer to faith

and this (not your faith, as Chrys. οὐδὲ ἡ πίστις, φησίν, ἐξ ὑμῶν: so Thdrt., al., Corn.-a-Iap., Beza, Est., Grot., Beng., all.;—this is precluded (not by the gender of τοῦτο, but) by the manifestly parallel clauses οὐκ ἐξ ὑμῶν and οὐκ ἐξ ἔργων, of which the latter would be irrelevant as asserted of πίστις, and the reference of ver. 9 must therefore be changed:—but, as Calv., Calov., Rück., Harl., Olsh., Mey., De W., Stier, al., ‘your salvation;’ τὸ σεσωσμένοι εἶναι, as Ellic.) not of yourselves, God’s (emphatic) is the gift (not, as E. V. ‘it is the gift of God’ (θεοῦ δῶρον),—τὸ δῶρον, viz. of your salvation: so that the expression is pregnant—q. d., ‘but it is a gift, and that gift is God’s.’ There is no occasion, as Lachm., Harl., and De W., to parenthesize these words: they form a contrast to οὐκ ἐξ ὑμ., and a quasi-parallel clause to ἵνα μή τις καυχήσ. below): not of works (for ἐξ ἔργων, see on Rom. 3:4, and Gal. 2:16), that no man should boast (on the proposition implied, see on Rom. 4:2.

1 Henry Alford, Alford’s Greek Testament: An Exegetical and Critical Commentary (Grand Rapids, MI: Guardian Press, 1976), 94.

But whether are we to understand, faith or salvation as being the gift of God? This question is answered by the Greek text: τῃ γαρ χαριτι εστε σεσωσμενοι δια της πιστεως· και τουτο ουκ εξ ὑμων· Θεου το δωρον, ουκ εξ εργων· ἰνα μη τις καυχησηται· “By this grace ye are saved through faith; and this (τουτο, this salvation) not of you; it is the gift of God, not of works: so that no one can boast.” “The relative τουτο, this, which is in the neuter gender, cannot stand for πιστις, faith, which is the feminine; but it has the whole sentence that goes before for its antecedent.” But it may be asked: Is not faith the gift of God? Yes, as to the grace by which it is produced; but the grace or power to believe, and the act of believing, are two different things. Without the grace or power to believe no man ever did or can believe; but with that power the act of faith is a man’s own. God never believes for any man, no more than he repents for him; the penitent, through this grace enabling him, believes for himself: nor does he believe necessarily, or impulsively when he has that power; the power to believe may be present long before it is exercised, else, why the solemn warnings with which we meet every where in the word of God, and threatenings against those who do not believe? Is not this a proof that such persons have the power but do not use it? They believe not, and therefore are not established. This, therefore, is the true state of the case: God gives the power, man uses the power thus given, and brings glory to God: without the power no man can believe; with it, any man may.1

1 Adam Clarke, The Holy Bible with a Commentary and Critical Notes (vol. 6, New Edition.; Bellingham, WA: Faithlife Corporation, 2014), 439.



And that not of yourselves. That is, salvation does not proceed from yourselves. The word rendered that—τοῦτο—is in the neuter gender, and the word faith—πίστις—is in the feminine. The word “that,” therefore, does not refer particularly to faith, as being the gift of God, but to the salvation by grace of which he had been speaking. This is the interpretation of the passage which is the most obvious, and which is now generally conceded to be the true one; see Bloomfield1

1 Albert Barnes, Notes on the New Testament: Ephesians, Philippians & Colossians (ed. Robert Frew; London: Blackie & Son, 1884–1885), 42.

But they commonly misintepret this text, and restrict the word ‘gift’ to faith alone. But Paul is only repeating his earlier statement in other words. He does not mean that faith is the gift of God, but that salvation is given to us by God … " (from, Calvin’s Commentaries 4:145

Firstly, your last statement is irrelevant, because I did no such of a thing. But you quote this as an exaggeration against my argument.

Then also, you have your favorite commentators who are slanted to your interpretation. But even some commentators I favor say the same thing, that "that" refers not to faith, but salvation. So even if that is grammatically correct, so what? I'm saying the IT in "it is not of yourself" is not only the salvation referred to, but also the grace and the faith, because all of it comes together. You cannot separate out faith as a distinct action that happens by itself, as if it's the cause of God regenerating you, and still be consistent with all of NT scripture.

I say that faith in Christ is not of ourselves (it's part of God's gracious gift), because it comes to us with the revelation of God and wisdom from above, which is communicated to us (that is, our spirit) from the Holy Spirit. So I think there is a distinction between conviction and regeneration, wherein the one who comes to believe gets both, but the one who remains an unbeliever can be convicted (or not), but not regenerated. Still, that doesn't solve the controversy.

Note two commentary sources I sometimes reference:

Commentary on Ephesians 2:8-10 | Monergism

by John EadieVerse 8(Ephesians 2:8.) τῇ γὰρ χάριτί ἐστε σεσωσμένοι διὰ τῆς πίστεως—“For by grace ye have been saved, through your faith.” The particle γάρ

www.monergism.com

Ephesians 2:8 Commentaries: For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;

biblehub.com

From this we see that there are differing opinions on what is the gift and what isn't in this verse, and it depends on your bias, apparently.