Monergistic Regeneration

[Big Drew]

Hello Reformed Brothers and Sisters...I was hoping some of you could be of assistance.

A few days ago I finished reading What Is Reformed Theology by R.C. Sproul...I found it to be a very informative book, as it answered many of the questions I've had about the Reformed faith...and it helped to put away many of the misconceptions I have had.

One thing though, that left me more confused than before I read the book was the idea of monergistic regeneration...

To give you a little background...I was raised in the Episcopal Church and converted to Pentecostalism when I was 19, after having what I refer to as a born-again experience. Since then I've been Pentecostal, and have no doubt that this is what I am...mostly in the sense that I believe the spiritual gifts as described in 1 Corinthians 12-14 are still available in the modern church. Much of my beliefs are Wesleyan, as is the case with most of my Pentecostal brethren...please note that I'm speaking of Classical Pentecostalism and not of the more modern movements like Word of Faith, which I believe to be in error...but over the last couple of years I've become very interested in studying the varying beliefs within Christendom...the latest being Reformed theology.

I can agree with Sproul and the Reformed that regeneration begins with God, but I don't understand the thought that we do nothing...It's not that I believe we can save ourselves...but I do believe that when God calls we must answer.

Could any of you help me to understand this a little clearer?

Thanks.

 

[mlqurgw]

Hello Reformed Brothers and Sisters...I was hoping some of you could be of assistance.

A few days ago I finished reading What Is Reformed Theology by R.C. Sproul...I found it to be a very informative book, as it answered many of the questions I've had about the Reformed faith...and it helped to put away many of the misconceptions I have had.

One thing though, that left me more confused than before I read the book was the idea of monergistic regeneration...

To give you a little background...I was raised in the Episcopal Church and converted to Pentecostalism when I was 19, after having what I refer to as a born-again experience. Since then I've been Pentecostal, and have no doubt that this is what I am...mostly in the sense that I believe the spiritual gifts as described in 1 Corinthians 12-14 are still available in the modern church. Much of my beliefs are Wesleyan, as is the case with most of my Pentecostal brethren...please note that I'm speaking of Classical Pentecostalism and not of the more modern movements like Word of Faith, which I believe to be in error...but over the last couple of years I've become very interested in studying the varying beliefs within Christendom...the latest being Reformed theology.

I can agree with Sproul and the Reformed that regeneration begins with God, but I don't understand the thought that we do nothing...It's not that I believe we can save ourselves...but I do believe that when God calls we must answer.

Could any of you help me to understand this a little clearer?

Thanks.

I will try but I tend to make the water more muddy than clear.

Given the doctrine of the sinner by nature being dead in trespasses and sin it follows that life must forst be given to the sinner before he can believe. Eph. 2:1 Faith follows regeneration because a dead man can do nothing. When God calls the elect sinner by the preaching of the Gospel in the power of the Spirit the sinner hears the Gospel by the power of God. He may have heard it many times before but never had it reach his dead heart. When, by the Spirit, the Gospel reached his heart it is because he has already been given life and the result is always faith. That is how faith is the gift of God. God gives life to the dead sinner and that results in faith. Faith is the result of regeneration not the cause of it. No sinner who has been made to know his need of Christ will refuse to run to Him begging mercy. I, as an elect redeemed sinner made to know my sin, willingly chose Christ. I chose Him because I knew I had no other choice. That differs with Weselyan theology in that Wesleyan theology holds to preveinient grace wherby the Spirit calls but doesn't actually apply the Word of the Gospel to the heart by giving life. Wesleyan theology holds to life because of faith. Hope that helps.

 

[Big Drew]

I will try but I tend to make the water more muddy than clear.

Given the doctrine of the sinner by nature being dead in trespasses and sin it follows that life must forst be given to the sinner before he can believe. Eph. 2:1 Faith follows regeneration because a dead man can do nothing. When God calls the elect sinner by the preaching of the Gospel in the power of the Spirit the sinner hears the Gospel by the power of God. He may have heard it many times before but never had it reach his dead heart. When, by the Spirit, the Gospel reached his heart it is because he has already been given life and the result is always faith. That is how faith is the gift of God. God gives life to the dead sinner and that results in faith. Faith is the result of regeneration not the cause of it. No sinner who has been made to know his need of Christ will refuse to run to Him begging mercy. I, as an elect redeemed sinner made to know my sin, willingly chose Christ. I chose Him because I knew I had no other choice. That differs with Weselyan theology in that Wesleyan theology holds to preveinient grace wherby the Spirit calls but doesn't actually apply the Word of the Gospel to the heart by giving life. Wesleyan theology holds to life because of faith. Hope that helps.

Thanks for the reply.

This is about what Sproul said in the book...I guess what I'm having a hard time with is the idea of not having a choice...but then that goes back to the elect...which I struggle with...I see a very good case that God chooses whom he will save, but on the other hand, there's a good case made that Christ's atonement is available for all.

I'm really struggling with this...I must admit that no other belief system has made me question my own more than this one.

 

[AMR]

Thanks for the reply.

This is about what Sproul said in the book...I guess what I'm having a hard time with is the idea of not having a choice...but then that goes back to the elect...which I struggle with...I see a very good case that God chooses whom he will save, but on the other hand, there's a good case made that Christ's atonement is available for all.

I'm really struggling with this...I must admit that no other belief system has made me question my own more than this one.

The choosing of God's chosen people occurs from eternity without consideration of the merit of the one's so chosen. In other words, God does not look down the corridor of time and see who will choose and then rubber stamp that choice. Instead God chooses according to His own good counsel and pleasure without first looking into the future. Those so chosen will inevitably come to faith by the regenerative power of the Spirit through the ordinary means of hearing of the gospel.

We often see written that the atonement was “sufficient for all, but efficient for the elect. The phrase leads to speculation without warrant. So we find folks speculating that, well, God could have saved everyone, etc., versus looking at exactly what God actually did, what Christ did and accomplished. This slippery slope leads to further speculation on the possibilities of the atonement versus its actualities.

The plain truth is that even if Christ died only for AMR, and I had committed but one single sin, His death must have been of infinite worth.

Why?

Because Christ's death must propitiate and expiate AMR's sin before God who is infinitely holy and whose holiness is infinite.

The sin offering to be given to God is defined by the character of God. Since God is holy and AMR has sinned against an infinitely holy God, the sacrifice of the Mediator sent by God must be one that is infinitely given, an infinite sacrifice. What sort of Mediator can accomplish such a feat? Only one who is infinite, only one who is God--Jesus Christ, God incarnate.

Thus we have in Christ's atonement an infinite sacrifice of infinite worth in satisfying the justice of God for those whom were given to Him...even if those given to our Lord was but a single individual sinner.

AMR

 

[mlqurgw]

Thanks for the reply.

This is about what Sproul said in the book...I guess what I'm having a hard time with is the idea of not having a choice...but then that goes back to the elect...which I struggle with...I see a very good case that God chooses whom he will save, but on the other hand, there's a good case made that Christ's atonement is available for all.

I'm really struggling with this...I must admit that no other belief system has made me question my own more than this one.

Perhaps you need to look at election in a little bit different light. God is not obligated to save anyone. But He chose to glorify Himself in mercy. Ex. 33:18-19. We made our choice in our father Adam but God, in mercy, chose to save some. It is amazing that He chose to save any of us. Those whom He didn't elect get what they not only deserve but what they have worked all their lives for. God simply leaves them to their wills.

The atonement of Christ is available for all who need and want it. The reprobate neither needs or wants it. The elect are made to see their need of it and want it because they need it.

 

[Big Drew]

Thanks for the replies guys.

Another question on this subject...I post on another board that's kind of a melting pot of various religions...mostly the various Christian denominations are represented...but there are Jews, Hindus, Mormons and others there as well...

One of the posters is Reformed and described her regeneration as she did nothing...I believe she said she was sitting in a church service one day and just knew that she was saved, saying no prayer or anything of the sort.

This struck me as odd...in terms of my own salvation experience, it was an extremely spiritual and emotional moment that was completely life changing...I did know as the pastor was preaching that the Holy Spirit was convicting my heart, and I knew at that moment that I was a sinner in need of a Saviour...at the end of the service the pastor had an altar call, and spiritually I wanted nothing more than to be at the altar, but physically I could not move...it was like the ultimate battle of the spirit and flesh...some people I was with walked to the altar with me and I couldn't get the words out fast enough at how sorry I was for being a sinner...everyone's conversion is somewhat different, at least what I've witnessed...but they've all been the same in the sense of the revelation that the person is in need of a Saviour and all they want to do is pray and seek the face of God.

Do most Reformed have an experience like this person? Where they just have the revelation but don't acknowledge it except inwardly...or is this a special case?

 

[kenrapoza]

As you said, our experiences will differ greatly. Some Christians can recall the exact moment of their salvation experience. Others can't really remember exactly when it happened, only that thay have been regenerated and that they now rest completely in God's grace. Many people (Sproul is also one) will distinguish between "salvation" and a "salvation experience". This is not to say that they don't often go together, but what we perceive as experiences in time are often unreliable. Although it is interesting that elsewhere, RC Sproul describes his own dramatic conversion experience, much like yourself.

But the main takeaway from your question would be that God normally uses the means of gospel preaching to deliver regeneration to the dead sinner. The Holy Spirit accomplishes regeneration in our hearts, but our faith must have content. In other words, we must put our faith in Christ, not just blind faith in faith or something like that. We must hear the gospel of Christ in order to believe in Christ, here I'm thinking of Rom. 10:14-15. The way you described your friend's experience does seem a bit odd in the sense that faith and repentance always accompany regeneration. I would think that the first response would be prayer and praise.

 

[Big Drew]

As you said, our experiences will differ greatly. Some Christians can recall the exact moment of their salvation experience. Others can't really remember exactly when it happened, only that thay have been regenerated and that they now rest completely in God's grace. Many people (Sproul is also one) will distinguish between "salvation" and a "salvation experience". This is not to say that they don't often go together, but what we perceive as experiences in time are often unreliable. Although it is interesting that elsewhere, RC Sproul describes his own dramatic conversion experience, much like yourself.

But the main takeaway from your question would be that God normally uses the means of gospel preaching to deliver regeneration to the dead sinner. The Holy Spirit accomplishes regeneration in our hearts, but our faith must have content. In other words, we must put our faith in Christ, not just blind faith in faith or something like that. We must hear the gospel of Christ in order to believe in Christ, here I'm thinking of Rom. 10:14-15. The way you described your friend's experience does seem a bit odd in the sense that faith and repentance always accompany regeneration. I would think that the first response would be prayer and praise.

I agree with you that people must hear the Gospel, and that faith and repentance accompany regeneration...this lady is completely against what she refers to as Emotionalism...so perhaps that's why she doesn't mention what followed her regeneration, IDK...I've never known anyone to give the testimony of their salvation and leave out that they repented though...

 

[JoeRich75]

God acts fist in our lives and we respond by repentance.

 

[heymikey80]

First -- it's critical to note that Regeneration is not salvation. It's not. Regeneration's a saving grace. It's not salvation itself.

Calvinism stresses this again & again: salvation is a process which involves a number of saving graces, each of which is distinctly described in the New Testament and organized by the New Testament.

"Monergistic Regeneration" is not at all the same as "Monergistic salvation". Obviously there's a massive impact on Calvinism that God initiates, and people respond. That's a general situation throughout salvation. But in Regeneration, the response is ... what? Breathing? Living? Well that's not Regeneration, but what comes after Regeneration.

 

[James1979]

How can we say that Christ's atonement is made available for all but in actuality it will only apply to the lives of the elect? In a sense Christ purchased the whole human race, one to be their Savior (for the elect) and the other to be their Judge (for the non-elect)

 

[kenrapoza]

Christ as judge is an office rooted in Creation and Natural Law, it is not redemptive. He will declare those who believe in Him as justified and those who do not as standing upon their own merits and being "in Adam". Christ does not have to "purchase" people in order to judge them, he is already their judge by virtue of the fact that he is their creator whom they have rejected. When Christ purchases, or redeems a people, He pays the debt of their sins and rescues them from the wrath of God - much as one was redeemed, or "bought back" from slavery.

 

[James1979]

Well of course you're right about Christ doesn't need to buy them to be their judge but Christ does indeed buy them as they partake of some of the blessing, very similar to the nation of Israel as they were purchased as well. 2 Peter 2:1 mentions about those who deny Christ bought them.

 

[heymikey80]

Well, actually Philippians 2 does say Christ becomes their judge. That is, something about the Crucifixion brings the Father to set Christ as judge over all. Something about His deservedness to ascend as judge because of His humiliation -- the Father has put all judgment in Christ's hands.