Is this regeneration?

fltom said:
Actually it is faith which places a man in Christ

Ephesians 1:13 (KJV 1900) — 13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,

One is not in Christ previous to faith.
Click to expand...
No mention of conversion. The verse explicitly states "sealed," and NOT "converted," "regenerated," or "saved."

This is another example among many of you looking squarely at the words of scripture while trying to convince everyone the proof-texted verse says something it clearly does not state, and this is done in an overtly deliberate effort to assert, defend, and convince of others of Pelagian Provisionism. Do not expect me to ignore it or collaborate with it. There is no mention of regeneration in Eph. 1:13. This op is about the prospect of regeneration in Colossians 2:11 and nothing else. Off topic in your own op.


Third or fourth time I've said this.
 
Josheb said:
No mention of conversion. The verse explicitly states "sealed," and NOT "converted," "regenerated," or "saved."

This is another example among many of you looking squarely at the words of scripture while trying to convince everyone the proof-texted verse says something it clearly does not state, and this is done in an overtly deliberate effort to assert, defend, and convince of others of Pelagian Provisionism. Do not expect me to ignore it or collaborate with it. There is no mention of regeneration in Eph. 1:13. This op is about the prospect of regeneration in Colossians 2:11 and nothing else. Off topic in your own op.


Third or fourth time I've said this.
Click to expand...
In Christ was the relevant phrase

Why did you ignore it

Reformedguy granted that circumcision in Col 2:11 was regeneration


Colossians 2:11 (KJV 1900) — 11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:

If circumcision is regeneration as some Calvinist have affirmed, it is in Christ.

There is but one way that one gets to be in Christ

Ephesians 1:13 (KJV 1900) — 13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,

Your comment about no regeneration in Eph 1:13 was rather silly as the verse was posted to show how one gets to be in Christ

It was a sikple sylogism

1 it was granted circumcision here refers to regeneration and according to scripture it is in Christ

2 One gets in Christ through faith

The conclusion is obvious given what was granted regeneration is in Christ

And that aligns with scripture which informs

Ephesians 1:3 (KJV 1900) — 3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:

all heavenly blessing are in Christ.
 
Josheb said:
No, it depends on the Greek. There's no "by" there.
Click to expand...
The Greek does not help you

The Greek iva is an adverbial conjunction of purpose

One believes that one might have life

Those translations reflect the idea incorporated in the conjunction IVA




Josheb said:
And this SHOULD be a place where you respond immediately and directly with, "Ah, yes, I see you are correct, Josh. I will adjust my thinking and my posting accordingly and in a manner consistent with the manuscript evidence and NOT post canonical doctrines made by men."
Click to expand...
Why would I do that when you have no idea of what the Greek is saying

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.

iva

in final sense to denote purpose, aim, or goal in order that, that.

William Arndt, F. Wilbur Gingrich, Frederick W. Danker, 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), 376.



Josheb said:
But I will bet that is not what happens.

This has become another example among many where information is used selectively and eisegetically to prove already-existing biases. Do not expect me to ignore it or collaborate with it. At best the verse is correlative and not causative. There is no causal "by" there.
Click to expand...
Of course not. You do not know Greek and are trying to correct Greek exegetes

And your correction is driven by doctrinal bias.
 
Josheb said:
This op is about Colossians 2:11 and not John 20:31. The goalposts have been moved and my op-replies ignored. It is not rational for any of us to enjoin discourse with any poster who does either. Get back to Colossians 2:11 and finish that discussion before moving to other verses and other tangents.

Second or third time I've asked.
Click to expand...
I don't blame you if you do not want to talk about John 20:31.

Given as you note regeneration is making alive again of the spirit

and the verse notes one believes in order that one might have life
 
fltom said:
Wrong again

in order that definitely point to causation



You reverted to being a jerk again

seems you can't deal with the Greek or the way in which it is translated by many translation






Bye

It's just too bad there exists both lexical and translation evidence which refutes your claim regarding John 20:31,

but your doctrinal biases prevent you from seeing truth

In any case, the op was written to address previous claims by Calvinists that in a number of verses circumcision of the heart refers to regeneration.

Your disagreement with that only strengthens my case against those Calvinists.
Click to expand...
Tell him he denies scripture, Tom.
 
fltom said:
Eph 1:13 was not quoted to mention regeneration but to show how one gets to be in Christ

Read again

In Christ was the relevant phrase

Why did you ignore it

Reformedguy granted that circumcision in Col 2:11 was regeneration


Colossians 2:11 (KJV 1900) — 11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:

If circumcision is regeneration as some Calvinist have affirmed, it is in Christ.

There is but one way that one gets to be in Christ

Ephesians 1:13 (KJV 1900) — 13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,

Your comment about no regeneration in Eph 1:13 was rather silly as the verse was posted to show how one gets to be in Christ

It was a simple syllogism

1 it was granted circumcision here refers to regeneration and according to scripture it is in Christ

2 One gets in Christ through faith

The conclusion is obvious given what was granted regeneration is in Christ

And that aligns with scripture which informs

Ephesians 1:3 (KJV 1900) — 3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:

all heavenly blessing are in Christ.






Did you forget the aim of Eph 1:13?

You took it as some sort of argument mentioning regeneration when its sole purpose was to expound upon the "in Christ" phrase

What you stated in regard to col 2:11 does not deal with the point of Eph 1:13


Examine the syllogism again

1 it was granted circumcision here refers to regeneration and according to scripture it is in Christ

2 One gets in Christ through faith

The conclusion is obvious given what was granted regeneration is in Christ

And that aligns with scripture which informs

Ephesians 1:3 (KJV 1900) — 3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:

all heavenly blessing are in Christ.

And if you can point out an error with it













Again discussing Col 2:11 is not discussing Eph 1:13

Now if you want to grant that one becomes in Christ through faith in him then fine

then you have your choice of arguments to address

You can deal with what was granted and then try to prove my conclusion wrong

or you can deal with the argument that all heavenly blessings are in Christ as per scripture

Ephesians 1:3 (KJV 1900) — 3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:

and try to argue regeneration is not a heavenly blessing because otherwise faith must precede regeneration

You will fail in either and calling me a troll will not save you from that failure
Click to expand...
Tell him he's denying scripture, Tom.
 
fltom said:
The scriptural arguments presented are sufficient to establish my points
Click to expand...
Right, so tell him he's denying Scripture, Tom. Go ahead make it known to everyone that disagreeing with you is denying scripture. C'mon, you know you believe that's the truth.

Why shrink back from that now?
 
Howie said:
Right, so tell him he's denying Scripture, Tom. Go ahead make it known to everyone that disagreeing with you is denying scripture. C'mon, you know you believe that's the truth.

Why shrink back from that now?
Click to expand...
How about you trying to help him out, then?
 
Josheb said:
Then you were off-topic in your own op.

AGAIN​
Click to expand...
Not at all as in Christ (in whom) is a key phrase which appears in both verses

But I do not blame you for not wanting to discuss it


Reformedguy granted that circumcision in Col 2:11 was regeneration


Colossians 2:11 (KJV 1900) — 11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:

If circumcision is regeneration as some Calvinist have affirmed, it is in Christ.

There is but one way that one gets to be in Christ

Ephesians 1:13 (KJV 1900) — 13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,

Your comment about no regeneration in Eph 1:13 was rather silly as the verse was posted to show how one gets to be in Christ

It was a simple syllogism

1 it was granted circumcision here refers to regeneration and according to scripture it is in Christ

2 One gets in Christ through faith

The conclusion is obvious given what was granted regeneration is in Christ

And that aligns with scripture which informs

Ephesians 1:3 (KJV 1900) — 3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:

All heavenly blessing are in Christ.

So whether you agree or disagree with Col 2:11 speaking of regeneration., the fact regeneration is a heavenly blessing still places faith before it
 
Josheb said:
Yes, ALL.


This is one of your other standard operating procedures. An op is posted specifying one singular proof-texted verse, or one specified topic (usually a quote mined misrepresentation of some Calvinists) and within a page or two of posts entirely different scriptures and points are argued AND there is an absolute refusal to return to the original verse or point. Thread after thread is a masquerade! They are all red herrings hiding the unstated intent to Cal-rag.

You can say, "Reformedguy granted that circumcision in Col 2:11 was regeneration," as often as you like but response will be no different than it already has been. Here, I'll even help you....

Reformedguy granted that circumcision in Col 2:11 was regeneration.
Reformedguy granted that circumcision in Col 2:11 was regeneration.
Reformedguy granted that circumcision in Col 2:11 was regeneration.
Reformedguy granted that circumcision in Col 2:11 was regeneration.
Reformedguy granted that circumcision in Col 2:11 was regeneration.
Reformedguy granted that circumcision in Col 2:11 was regeneration.
Reformedguy granted that circumcision in Col 2:11 was regeneration.
Reformedguy granted that circumcision in Col 2:11 was regeneration.
Reformedguy granted that circumcision in Col 2:11 was regeneration.
Reformedguy granted that circumcision in Col 2:11 was regeneration.
Reformedguy granted that circumcision in Col 2:11 was regeneration.
Reformedguy granted that circumcision in Col 2:11 was regeneration.
Reformedguy granted that circumcision in Col 2:11 was regeneration.
Reformedguy granted that circumcision in Col 2:11 was regeneration.
Reformedguy granted that circumcision in Col 2:11 was regeneration.
Reformedguy granted that circumcision in Col 2:11 was regeneration.
Reformedguy granted that circumcision in Col 2:11 was regeneration.
Reformedguy granted that circumcision in Col 2:11 was regeneration.
Reformedguy granted that circumcision in Col 2:11 was regeneration.


  • Take it up with him.
  • Address what I posted.
  • Reformedguy commended my op-reply ? (check out the like at the bottom of Post #70.
.

That is just sad. and delusional. The phrase "in Christ" does NOT occur in Colossians 2:11. I just check 34 different translations and not a single one of them contain the phrase "in Christ." Why has such an undeniable falsehood been posted in defense of going off-topic, staying off-topic, and refusing to return to the topic of this op? There is only one mention of "in Christ" in the entire chapter of Colossians 2 and it is in verse 5, not verse 11.


Neither the title nor the opening post ask anything about "in Christ." The one, single,solitary lone question asked in this op is, "Is this [Col. 2:11] regeneration...... what say ye Calvinists?" You are off topic in your own op and willfully refusing to return to the regeneration of Colossians 2:11 (or lack thereof).


You are a troll.
Click to expand...
@fltom people are wise to you.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top