Is Baptismal Regeneration False?

JAL said:

The metaphysical error is that God is not a Spirit (and yes, I am a Trinitarian). He is a physical being, and ALL the biblical data points in that direction.
.

Click to expand...

Not this Biblical data though. Matt.12:28; John 4:24.

"But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for such the Father seeks to worship him. God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth."

I will not accept the contention that the Triune God is merely 'wind'.
.

ExTiff said:

Not this Biblical data though. Matt.12:28; John 4:24.

"But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for such the Father seeks to worship him. God is spirit, and those who worship him must worship in spirit and truth."

I will not accept the contention that the Triune God is merely 'wind'.
.

Click to expand...

Um...Incorrect. I linked to another thread where I showed that the English word 'spirit' is a mistranslation of the text. Based on such proofs, the text should be read like this (it's placing God in the genre of invisible substances that move and thus in the category of wind/breath).

"But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in Wind/Breath and truth, for such the Father seeks to worship him. God is Wind/Breath, and those who worship him must worship in Wind/Breath and truth."

BABerean2 said:

Did Paul think water baptism was important?

1Co 1:17 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of no effect.


Did John the Baptist know the difference between water baptism, and the baptism of the Holy Spirit?

Luk 3:16 John answered, saying to all, "I indeed baptize you with water; but One mightier than I is coming, whose sandal strap I am not worthy to loose. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.


Who is the master teacher, based on the words of Christ?

Joh 14:26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you.


When is a person "regenerated" by receiving the Holy Spirit? Is it when they are water baptized?

Eph 1:13 In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise,


Can a person be a follower of Christ and not have the Holy
Spirit?

Rom 8:9 But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you. Now if anyone does not have the Spirit of Christ, he is not His.


1Jn 2:27 But the anointing which you have received from Him abides in you, and you do not need that anyone teach you; but as the same anointing teaches you concerning all things, and is true, and is not a lie, and just as it has taught you, you will abide in Him.


Are you saying that babies were "regenerated" by giving them the Holy Spirit during water baptism, by the early Church leaders?

.

Click to expand...

No, saving faith comes BEFORE water baptism, and water baptism isn't necessary for salvation.
The passage clearly states that salvation is by faith alone (3:16). GOD supplies the Water and Wind of initial saving faith (He sprinkles you from above, just as Ezekiel promised). The Third Person had to convict you for you get saved, right? He did this when the gospel was preached to you. Only you didn't REALIZE He entered you at that moment (indetectably) as Water and Wind. LATER, it is possible to get an additional cleansing through water baptism (another outpouring of Water), but that is not required for salvation (you can get those same outpourings via prayer as Luke 11:13 suggests), and moreover today's water baptisms don't likely contain divine Water anyway.

According to verse 8, you heard that Wind blowing when the gospel was preached to you, for example God may have released Himself as breath/wind from the preacher's mouth into your body (see John 20:22) and thus hearing the sound of the preaching is a way of hearing the Wind blow.

In fact the Water and Wind could have entered you at ANY time, even BEFORE the preaching. God can enter you any number of ways, including your food, and you wouldn't even realize it.

On Pentecost the sound of the blowing Wind HAPPENED to be quite loud. "They heard the sound of a rushing mighty wind...And they were all filled with the Holy [Wind]" (Pnuma).

ExTiff said:

I will not accept the contention that the Triune God is merely 'wind'.
.

Click to expand...

He's a person and Triune. He is physical, just like your soul is self-evidently physical.
He isn't ordinary, non-living wind.
I don't much care what you're willing to accept. I'm more interested in what Scripture has to say about it. Earlier I linked to a thread where I gave my proof.

JAL said:

God can enter you any number of ways, including your food, and you wouldn't even realize it.

Click to expand...

Your claim above sounds like something a pagan witch doctor would come up with.

It also contains a bit of Pantheism.


Joh_4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

.

BABerean2 said:

Did Paul think water baptism was important?

Click to expand...

One is not saved by water baptism. But having one of the EARLY APOSTLES baptize you (or his delegates) was valuable, liken it to the apostles laying hands on you. That wasn't something to take lightly.

1Co 1:17 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of no effect.

Click to expand...

Correct. Water baptism is not required, for anyone to be saved.

Did John the Baptist know the difference between water baptism, and the baptism of the Holy Spirit?

Luk 3:16 John answered, saying to all, "I indeed baptize you with water; but One mightier than I is coming, whose sandal strap I am not worthy to loose. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.

Click to expand...

Corect. The rite of baptism might provide some cleansing Water, but need not be the source of the prophetic anointings common in Acts. On Penecost we see Wind and Fire, more so than Water. "He will baptize you with the Holy Wind [Pneuma], and with Fire" (Mat 3). That was fulfilled on Pentecost.

Who is the master teacher, based on the words of Christ?

Joh 14:26 But the Helper, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in My name, He will teach you all things, and bring to your remembrance all things that I said to you.

Click to expand...

Correct. The Third Person, whose name is the Holy Breath/Wind is our teacher.

When is a person "regenerated" by receiving the Holy Spirit? Is it when they are water baptized?
Eph 1:13 In Him you also trusted, after you heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation; in whom also, having believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise,

Click to expand...

Correct. Initial regeneration/sanctification is at saving faith, before water baptism. But regeneration/sanctification is a process (unending), and additional outpourings of Water and Wind can come at any time, during prayer, during preaching, and even during water baptism, if God deigns.

Are you saying that babies were "regenerated" by giving them the Holy Spirit during water baptism, by the early Church leaders?

Click to expand...

You've heard of revival, right? God can send outpourings at any time. Remember that John was filled with the Holy Breath from his mother's womb. So yes, it is POSSIBLE that infants were baptismally regenerated in the early church. But I wouldn't count on it today. If I had kids, I wouldn't have them baptized. Never. I just don't see any real apostles today. I would just pray for my kids to be saved.

I wouldn't counsel anyone to get baptized today. Waste of time in my opinion, worse than that, I see it as a 2000-year old outmoded ceremonialism offensive to God. It's anachronistic, much like if the church tried to institute animal sacrifices. God is not a God of rituals. For the APOSTLES, it was not a mere ritual. It was real contact with God, via the Living Water.

He doesn't LIKE rituals. Therefore before you do a ritual, you need to be sure that God has AUTHORIZED it FOR YOU. If today's leaders were authorized, you would KNOW IT (can't discuss this here).

BABerean2 said:

Your claim above sounds like something a pagan witch doctor would come up with.

It also contains a bit of Pantheism.


Joh_4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

.

Click to expand...

Did you read my proofs? If you're not willing to see the biblical evidence, I can't help you.

The church father Tertuallian (200 AD) was the first known person to use the word Trinity. He may have coined the term. The point is that he insisted that God is physical, and he was furious with all the theologians who were trying to misconstrue Him as spirit. Did you know that?

Pantheism says that we are all God. Clearly, that's not my view.

JAL said:

The church father Tertuallian (200 AD) was the first known person to use the word Trinity. He may have coined the term. The point is that he insisted that God is physical, and he was furious with all the theologians who were trying to misconstrue Him as spirit. Did you know that?

Click to expand...

The Early Church Fathers were not the Apostles of Christ.
Their writings are not the inspired Word of God.
We know this fact, because they did not always agree.

.

JAL said:

Um...Incorrect. I linked to another thread where I showed that the English word 'spirit' is a mistranslation of the text. Based on such proofs, the text should be read like this (it's placing God in the genre of invisible substances that move and thus in the category of wind/breath).

"But the hour is coming, and now is, when the true worshipers will worship the Father in Wind/Breath and truth, for such the Father seeks to worship him. God is Wind/Breath, and those who worship him must worship in Wind/Breath and truth."

Click to expand...

. . . Incorrect! "So certain you are", "that is why you fail". Pneuma is the same Greek word for both wind and spirit. They are interchangeable but God is not 'wind'. It is a metaphor, not a physical description of an invisible spirit which 'no one has seen'. 1 John 4:12.

πνεῦμα
STRONG’S NUMBER: g4151
Dictionary Definition g4151. πνεῦμα pneuma; from 4154; a current of air, i.e. breath (blast) or a breeze; by analogy or figuratively, a spirit, i.e. (human) the rational soul, (by implication) vital principle, mental disposition, etc., or (superhuman) an angel, demon, or (divine) God, Christ's spirit, the Holy Spirit: — ghost, life, spirit(-ual, -ually), mind. Compare 5590.
AV (385) - Spirit 111, Holy Ghost 89, Spirit (of God) 13, Spirit (of the Lord) 5, (My) Spirit 3, Spirit (of truth) 3, Spirit (of Christ) 2, human (spirit) 49, (evil) spirit 47, spirit (general) 26, spirit 8, (Jesus' own) spirit 6, (Jesus' own) ghost 2...
.

ExTiff said:

. . . Incorrect! "So certain you are", "that is why you fail". Pneuma is the same Greek word for both wind and spirit. They are interchangeable but God is not 'wind'. It is a metaphor, not a physical description of an invisible spirit which 'no one has seen'. 1 John 4:12.

πνεῦμα
STRONG’S NUMBER: g4151
Dictionary Definition g4151. πνεῦμα pneuma; from 4154; a current of air, i.e. breath (blast) or a breeze; by analogy or figuratively, a spirit, i.e. (human) the rational soul, (by implication) vital principle, mental disposition, etc., or (superhuman) an angel, demon, or (divine) God, Christ's spirit, the Holy Spirit: — ghost, life, spirit(-ual, -ually), mind. Compare 5590.
AV (385) - Spirit 111, Holy Ghost 89, Spirit (of God) 13, Spirit (of the Lord) 5, (My) Spirit 3, Spirit (of truth) 3, Spirit (of Christ) 2, human (spirit) 49, (evil) spirit 47, spirit (general) 26, spirit 8, (Jesus' own) spirit 6, (Jesus' own) ghost 2...
.

Click to expand...

Metaphor? Wind is a metaphor for the third person? Many say Wind, at John 3:8, is a metaphor for the Third Person. That's ridiculous, right? You do realize that the Greek word for wind is Pneuma?

Totally ludicrous. How can Pneuma be a metaphor for the Holy Pneuma? It's the same Greek word!

A metaphor is the usage of a DIFFERENT word to describe something. When it's the same word, it's NOT a metaphor. Examples:
- A boat is not a metaphor for a boat.
- A car is not a metaphor for a car.
- A pencil is not a metaphor for a pencil.

So thanks for proving my point. The blowing Wind at John 3:8 is NOT A METAPHOR.

According to John 3:8, this Wind blows WHEREVER IT WANTS TO GO. Does ordinary wind do that?

All that colored blue and red text is annoying. I had to go back and repair my post #146

BABerean2 said:

The Early Church Fathers were not the Apostles of Christ.
Their writings are not the inspired Word of God.
We know this fact, because they did not always agree.

.

Click to expand...

Sure. But here's the problem.
You only have two feasible choices for Pneuma:
(1) It means immaterial (non-physical) Spirit/Ghost.
(2) It means physical Wind/Breath.
How do we decide? You can't rely on men. You have to read the Scripture for yourself, right? Fine.
What clues does Scripture provide on this issue?
(A) Does the word 'immaterial' exist ANYWHERE in Scripture? No. That word came from GREEK PHILOSOPHY.
(B) Does the Scripture mention Wind/Breath in the context of the Third Person? John 3:8 is a good example but there are plenty more. Some of my favorites include John 20:22 and Acts 2:2.

So BASED ON THE BIBLICAL DATA, does the exegesis point to option #1 or #2? The choice is obvious.

I'm not saying this proof is apodictic. But the point is that if God is Spirit, you can't get that from exegesis, you'd have to get it by direct revelation, because exegesis points to Wind/Breath.

Is God trying to confuse us? If God is Spirit, why does exegesis point to Wind/Breath?

JAL said:

How do we decide? You can't rely on men. You have to read the Scripture for yourself, right? Fine.

Click to expand...

That same word "pneuma" was used by Christ, and recorded by the Apostle John in John 14:26.
Did they know which it meant?

That same word "pneuma" is found along with the word "water" in Luke 3:16.
Did John the Baptist and Dr. Luke know which it meant?

That same word "pneuma" is found in Ephesians 1:13.
Did the Apostle Paul know which word to use?

.

BABerean2 said:

That same word "pneuma" was used by Christ, and recorded by the Apostle John in John 14:26.
Did they know which it meant?

That same word "pneuma" is found along with the word "water" in Luke 3:16.
Did John the Baptist and Dr. Luke know which it meant?

That same word "pneuma" is found in Ephesians 1:13.
Did the Apostle Paul know which word to use?

.

Click to expand...

What argument are you making here? I didn't follow.

JAL said:

He's a person and Triune. He is physical, just like your soul is self-evidently physical.
He isn't ordinary, non-living wind.
I don't much care what you're willing to accept. I'm more interested in what Scripture has to say about it. Earlier I linked to a thread where I gave my proof.

Click to expand...

(1) The Trinity is not a 'He'. They are not even a 'We'. 'They' are not even a 'They', just 'God'. The Living God. The God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.
(2) God is not 'Physical'. God made everything physical that exists, "All that is, both seen and unseen". God did not make himself though.
(3) My 'soul' is myself, both body and spirit. My spirit will return to God, who gave it me, when my body has returned to the earth from whence it came. Eccl.12:7.
(4) I care what you are willing to accept because I am interested in what scripture has to say about "those who sit in darkness" Luke 1:79.
(5) Proof shpoof.

ExTiff said:

(1) The Trinity is not a 'He'. They are not even a 'We'. They are just 'God'.
(2) God is not 'Physical'. God made everything physical that exists, "All that is, both seen and unseen". God did not make himself though.
(3) My 'soul' is myself, both body and spirit. My spirit will return to God, who gave it me, when my body has returned to the earth from whence it came. Eccl.12:7.
(4) I care what you are willing to accept because I am interested in what scripture has to say about "those who sit in darkness" Luke 1:79.
(5) Proof shpoof.

Click to expand...

The problem is that conclusion #2 doesn't fit the biblical data. If you think it does, it's deceptoin by Greek philosophy.

So why do you think God is non-physical? Does scripture use the word 'non-physical' anywhere?

You do realize the absurdity of that claim, right? Meaning, if God were non-physical, He couldn't actually DO anything. He couldn't pick up a pencil,as it would slip right through his hands!

Why would you subscribe to an absurd concept? Are you a follower of Greek philosophy? Isn't it better to be a follower of Scripture?

JAL said:

The problem is that conclusion #2 doesn't fit the biblical data. If you think it does, it's deceptoin by Greek philosophy.

So why do you think God is non-physical? Does scripture use the word 'non-physical' anywhere?

You do realize the absurdity of that claim, right? Meaning, if God were non-physical, He couldn't actually DO anything. He couldn't pick up a pencil,as it would slip right through his hands!

Why would you subscribe to an absurd concept? Are you a follower of Greek philosophy? Isn't it better to be a follower of Scripture?

Click to expand...

So it seems you are saying God 'created' Himself. As if God is something that can be made.

Do you realize the absurdity of your claim, right? Meaning, do you think God made the universe out of 'stuff' in some kind of 'workshop'?

Your crude anthropomorphism staggers me.

Your following of scripture seems more like one lemming folowing the one in front, without having any idea where that is going to lead them.
.

ExTiff said:

So it seems you are saying God 'created' Himself. As if God is something that can be made.

Do you realize the absurdity of your claim, right? Meaning, do you think God made the universe out of 'stuff' in some kind of 'workshop'?

Your crude anthropomorphism staggers me.

Your following of scripture seems more like one lemming folowing the one in front, without having any idea where that is going to lead them.

Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you mean by God creating Himself. And I'm not sure what you mean by workshop. You're putting words in my mouth.

I often find people resort to cheap debating tactics when they can't prove their position from Scripture.

Do you realize the absurdity of your claim, right? Meaning, do you think God made the universe out of 'stuff'...

Click to expand...

"And the Lord God formed man FROM THE DUST OF THE EARTH..." Seems you think Scripture is absurd.

Several noted evangelical bible scholars acknowledge that:
(1) Genesis says that God formed the earth out of raw material, and it's not clear where that material came from.
(2) Therefore there is no clear evidence of creation ex nihilo in Scripture (I'll admit some look to Heb 11 for proof, but that's pretty weak, and I seem to recall Calvin admitting it's weak).
(3) The original raw material was liquid referred to in Genesis as 'waters'.
As I recall Calvin was an advocate of #3 at least.
The ISBE (composed by 200 evangelical scholars) can be cited for points 1 and 2 (can't recall if #3 was mentioned).

JAL said:

Metaphor? Wind is a metaphor for the third person? Many say Wind, at John 3:8, is a metaphor for the Third Person. That's ridiculous, right? You do realize that the Greek word for wind is Pneuma?

Totally ludicrous. How can Pneuma be a metaphor for the Holy Pneuma? It's the same Greek word!

A metaphor is the usage of a DIFFERENT word to describe something. When it's the same word, it's NOT a metaphor. Examples:
- A boat is not a metaphor for a boat.
- A car is not a metaphor for a car.
- A pencil is not a metaphor for a pencil.

So thanks for proving my point. The blowing Wind at John 3:8 is NOT A METAPHOR.

According to John 3:8, this Wind blows WHEREVER IT WANTS TO GO. Does ordinary wind do that?

Click to expand...

metaphor
Dictionary result for metaphor
/ˈmɛtəfə,ˈmɛtəfɔː/
noun
noun: metaphor; plural noun: metaphors

1. a figure of speech in which a word or phrase is applied to an object or action to which it is not literally applicable.
   "when we speak of gene maps and gene mapping, we use a cartographic metaphor"
   synonyms: figure of speech, figurative expression, image, trope, allegory, parable, analogy, comparison, symbol, emblem, word painting, word picture;
   literaryconceit
   • a thing regarded as representative or symbolic of something else.
     "the amounts of money being lost by the company were enough to make it a metaphor for an industry that was teetering"

THUS: God has been 'seen' by no one. John 1:18; 1 John 4:12. Wind being generally not itself seen is a metaphor for God, who has been 'seen' by no one.
The Holy Spirit is unseen, as are all things associated with the eternal Spirit of God. 2 Cor.4:18. In this case 'look for' is a metaphor. We could not physically 'look for' something metaphysical, which cannot be seen.
.

JAL said:

I'm not sure what you mean by God creating Himself. And I'm not sure what you mean by workshop. You're putting words in my mouth.

I often find people resort to cheap debating tactics when they can't prove their position from Scripture.


"And the Lord God formed man FROM THE DUST OF THE EARTH..." Seems you think Scripture is absurd.

Several noted evangelical bible scholars acknowledge that:
(1) Genesis says that God formed the earth out of raw material, and it's not clear where that material came from.
(2) Therefore there is no clear evidence of creation ex nihilo in Scripture (I'll admit some look to Heb 11 for proof, but that's pretty weak, and I seem to recall Calvin admitting it's weak).
(3) The original raw material was liquid referred to in Genesis as 'waters'.
As I recall Calvin was an advocate of #3 at least.
The ISBE (composed by 200 evangelical scholars) can be cited for points 1 and 2 (can't recall if #3 was mentioned).

Click to expand...

"And the Lord God formed man FROM THE DUST OF THE EARTH..." Seems you think Scripture is absurd.

Click to expand...

Not at all. It is a metaphor. God is still doing it. You and I are but dust, and to dust we shall return. God did not grovel on the gound making mud pies with his hands when he made you or I. No! What makes you think God would have to have resorted to such physical activity with Adam? God made an entire universe by just 'speaking' it into existence. If God could do that, then I have no problem seeing the 'making of Adam' in a purely metaphorical sense. i.e. God brought the human race into physical existence, (without assuming God made Adam out of literal mud pies). Genesis Ch.1-5 is a story of beginnings, not a pottery making manual.

All this is so 'off thread' that a rabbit could run on it, -- or a lemming.
.