Regeneration before or after saving faith

[BBAS 64]

Yet Abraham did not follow the Law of Moses, and nor was he circumcised when God made him righteous for his faith in the gospel of Jesus Christ. The Law would not be given for another 430 years after Abraham was made righteous, and we who have righteousness because of faith in gospel follow the pattern of Abraham.

[Rom 4:11-13, 16-17 NASB] 11 and he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while uncircumcised, so that he might be the father of all who believe without being circumcised, that righteousness might be credited to them, 12 and the father of circumcision to those who not only are of the circumcision, but who also follow in the steps of the faith of our father Abraham which he had while uncircumcised. 13 For the promise to Abraham or to his descendants that he would be heir of the world was not through the Law, but through the righteousness of faith. ... 16 For this reason [it is] by faith, in order that [it may be] in accordance with grace, so that the promise will be guaranteed to all the descendants, not only to those who are of the Law, but also to those who are of the faith of Abraham, who is the father of us all, 17 (as it is written, "A FATHER OF MANY NATIONS HAVE I MADE YOU") in the presence of Him whom he believed, [even] God, who gives life to the dead and calls into being that which does not exist.​

Good Day, Gup

Abraham the first person justified by God was a gentile.

In Him,

Bill

 

[Gup20]

Good Day, Gup

Abraham the first person justified by God was a gentile.

In Him,

Bill

What should really bake your noodle is what role circumcision plays in the pattern for modern-day salvation.

[Deu 30:6 NASB] 6 "Moreover the LORD your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your descendants, to love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, so that you may live.

[Rom 2:28-29 NASB] 28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. 29 But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God.

[Col 2:11 NASB] 11 and in Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ;

​

Circumcision is the foreshadow or forerunner for the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. It is directly related to the topic of this thread.

[Rom 7:22, 25 NASB] 22 For I joyfully concur with the law of God in the inner man, ... 25 Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin.

[Rom 8:10 NASB] 10 If Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin, yet the spirit is alive because of righteousness.​

When you think about it, circumcision is a pretty accurate word picture of the living inner man surrounded by the dead in sin outer flesh. One day that outer flesh will be cut away and the living inner man will be free of it.

So when we look at Romans 4 where it says Abraham was made righeous while uncircumcised, and we know that circumcision is the foreshadow for the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, we can confidently conclude that faith and righteousness come before the indwelling of the Holy Spirit (or regeneration as this thread calls it).

[Eph 1:13-14 NASB] 13 In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation--having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14 who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of [God's own] possession, to the praise of His glory.

[Rom 4:11-13 NASB] 11 and he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while uncircumcised, so that he might be the father of all who believe without being circumcised, that righteousness might be credited to them, 12 and the father of circumcision to those who not only are of the circumcision, but who also follow in the steps of the faith of our father Abraham which he had while uncircumcised. 13 For the promise to Abraham or to his descendants that he would be heir of the world was not through the Law, but through the righteousness of faith.​

Circumcision was the seal of the righteousness of faith. Now, circumcision of the heart - or the indwelling of the Holy Spirit - takes the place of physical circumcision in the pattern as the seal of the righteousness obtained through faith. We follow the same pattern now that Abraham followed.

 

[BBAS 64]

What should really bake your noodle is what role circumcision plays in the pattern for modern-day salvation.

[Deu 30:6 NASB] 6 "Moreover the LORD your God will circumcise your heart and the heart of your descendants, to love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul, so that you may live.

[Rom 2:28-29 NASB] 28 For he is not a Jew who is one outwardly, nor is circumcision that which is outward in the flesh. 29 But he is a Jew who is one inwardly; and circumcision is that which is of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the letter; and his praise is not from men, but from God.

[Col 2:11 NASB] 11 and in Him you were also circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, in the removal of the body of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ;

​

Circumcision is the foreshadow or forerunner for the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. It is directly related to the topic of this thread.

[Rom 7:22, 25 NASB] 22 For I joyfully concur with the law of God in the inner man, ... 25 Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin.

[Rom 8:10 NASB] 10 If Christ is in you, though the body is dead because of sin, yet the spirit is alive because of righteousness.​

When you think about it, circumcision is a pretty accurate word picture of the living inner man surrounded by the dead in sin outer flesh. One day that outer flesh will be cut away and the living inner man will be free of it.

So when we look at Romans 4 where it says Abraham was made righeous while uncircumcised, and we know that circumcision is the foreshadow for the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, we can confidently conclude that faith and righteousness come before the indwelling of the Holy Spirit (or regeneration as this thread calls it).

[Eph 1:13-14 NASB] 13 In Him, you also, after listening to the message of truth, the gospel of your salvation--having also believed, you were sealed in Him with the Holy Spirit of promise, 14 who is given as a pledge of our inheritance, with a view to the redemption of [God's own] possession, to the praise of His glory.

[Rom 4:11-13 NASB] 11 and he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while uncircumcised, so that he might be the father of all who believe without being circumcised, that righteousness might be credited to them, 12 and the father of circumcision to those who not only are of the circumcision, but who also follow in the steps of the faith of our father Abraham which he had while uncircumcised. 13 For the promise to Abraham or to his descendants that he would be heir of the world was not through the Law, but through the righteousness of faith.​

Circumcision was the seal of the righteousness of faith. Now, circumcision of the heart - or the indwelling of the Holy Spirit - takes the place of physical circumcision in the pattern as the seal of the righteousness obtained through faith. We follow the same pattern now that Abraham followed.

Good Day, Gup


EZE11

And I will give them one heart, and a new spirit I will put within them. I will remove the heart of stone from their flesh and give them a heart of flesh, that they may walk in my statutes and keep my rules and obey them. And they shall be my people, and I will be their God

The circumcision of the heart by God has a direct effect on us and our lives.

That circumcision is done by God for his purposes, and to His Glory.
We are His as a result, and He is our God He is the primary effective cause.

In Him,

Bill

 

[Al Touthentop]

What should really bake your noodle is what role circumcision plays in the pattern for modern-day salvation.

​

Circumcision is the foreshadow or forerunner for the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. It is directly related to the topic of this thread.


Circumcision was the seal of the righteousness of faith. Now, circumcision of the heart - or the indwelling of the Holy Spirit - takes the place of physical circumcision in the pattern as the seal of the righteousness obtained through faith. We follow the same pattern now that Abraham followed.

Which circumcision today is baptism.

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:

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.

 

[Gup20]

Which circumcision today is baptism.

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:

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.

Can I put off baptism of the flesh for as long as He puts off resurrection of the flesh or do you think baptism is a pre-requisite for righteousness? If so, do you think resurrection is also a pre-requisite for salvation?

 

[BBAS 64]

Which circumcision today is baptism.

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:

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.

Good Day,


Circumcision and Baptism

“In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, having been buried with him in baptism” (vv. 11–12).

- Colossians 2:8–15

 

[Al Touthentop]

Good Day,


Circumcision and Baptism

“In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, having been buried with him in baptism” (vv. 11–12).

- Colossians 2:8–15

I have no interest in Calvin's opinion on this. Baptism washes away sins as Jesus and his holy apostles taught and as Paul writes there. It IS regeneration, prescribed by God.

 

[Al Touthentop]

Can I put off baptism of the flesh for as long as He puts off resurrection of the flesh or do you think baptism is a pre-requisite for righteousness? If so, do you think resurrection is also a pre-requisite for salvation?

Baptism is not of the flesh as Peter explains and as Jesus taught. It is the means by which we receive remission of sins and are buried with Christ and resurrected, the very definition of being born again.

 

[BBAS 64]

I have no interest in Calvin's opinion on this. Baptism washes away sins as Jesus and his holy apostles taught and as Paul writes there. It IS regeneration, prescribed by God.

Good Day, Al

It's OK I can see you are only interested in your own.


In Him,

Bill

 

[Hammster]

Which circumcision today is baptism.

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:

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.

If today’s circumcision is baptism, then we know it’s not required for regeneration or justification.


Is this blessing then on the circumcised, or on the uncircumcised also? For we say, “Faith was credited to Abraham as righteousness.” How then was it credited? While he was circumcised, or uncircumcised? Not while circumcised, but while uncircumcised; and he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while uncircumcised, so that he might be the father of all who believe without being circumcised, that righteousness might be credited to them, and the father of circumcision to those who not only are of the circumcision, but who also follow in the steps of the faith of our father Abraham which he had while uncircumcised.
— Romans 4:9-12

 

[Gup20]

Baptism is not of the flesh as Peter explains and as Jesus taught. It is the means by which we receive remission of sins and are buried with Christ and resurrected, the very definition of being born again.

So we do not need to be physically baptized, but just baptized in the spirit? I'm curious is this baptism pre-requisite to righteousness or does it come after?

 

[Al Touthentop]

If today’s circumcision is baptism, then we know it’s not required for regeneration or justification.

Except Jesus said it was.

5 Jesus answered, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

 

[Al Touthentop]

Good Day, Al

It's OK I can see you are only interested in your own.


In Him,

Bill

If by my own, you mean that I take the scriptures as being authoritative, then you are correct.

 

[Gup20]

Except Jesus said it was.

5 Jesus answered, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

Born of water is physical birth from the womb (a literal bag of waters).
Born of spirit is salvation.

 

[Hammster]

Except Jesus said it was.

5 Jesus answered, “Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

I don’t see Him mentioning Baptism. Plus, we have the clear words of Paul.

 

[Al Touthentop]

Born of water is physical birth from the womb (a literal bag of waters).
Born of spirit is salvation.

No it isn't. Were this talking about amniotic fluid, Jesus would be saying that only people who survived birth would be saved. That would mean that babies who die in the womb are going to hell.

But we also know he wasn't talking about a man's first birth because the topic was being born "again" and he's responding to Nicodemus who asks if a man can go back into the womb. The topic of a man's first birth is excluded by this context.

 

[Al Touthentop]

I don’t see Him mentioning Baptism. Plus, we have the clear words of Paul.

We do have the clear words of Paul in Romans six saying that indeed baptism is our second birth. John gives us clear notification in twenty second verse of the same chapter that Jesus was indeed talking about baptism.

 

[BBAS 64]

If by my own, you mean that I take the scriptures as being authoritative, then you are correct.

Good Day, Al

What would make you think you would be at odds with Calvin's historical view on the Authority of Scripture?

You are borrowing from the views held before you and on that reality you can not escape.

Reading Scripture with Luther and Calvin | Gospel Reformation Network

Deuteronomy 29:29 is among Moses’ last words to Israel before his death and before Israel’s entrance into the Promised Land. He exhorts Israel to heed what God has spoken to them, “The secret things belong to the LORD our God, but the things that are revealed belong to us and to our children forever, that we may do all the words of this law.” Moses, Calvin observes, “condemn[s the]…audacity and excessive curiosity” of those who “would desire to be God’s counselors, and to penetrate into the deepest recesses of heaven.”[1] To do so is folly. “If we pass our bounds by being more inquisitive than is lawful for us, we enter into a maze.”[2
In Him,

Bill

 

[bling]

Good Day,Bling

Here is some more information to consider I do recall hearing DA Carson addressing the error that Barnes and Roberson had made and he did follow along the same lines as Hendrikson in the matter.

A.T. Robertson, the great American Greek scholar, specifically denied
Any connection between touto and faith on the basis of the difference in genders in his Word Pictures in the New Testament. His comments, however, are derived more from theology than grammar, as has been pointed out.

As William Hendrikson rightly observed: That offered by A. T. Robertson. Commenting on this passage in his Word Pictures in the New Testament, Vol. IV, p. 525, he states, Grace is God's part, faith ours. He adds that since in the original the demonstrative this (and this not of yourselves) is neuter and does not correspond with the gender of the word faith, which is feminine. It does not refer to the latter but to the act of being saved by grace conditioned on faith on our part. Even more clearly in Gram. N.T., p. 704, he states categorically, In Eph. 2:8 . . . there is no reference to dia; pivstew" [through faith] in tou'to [this], but rather to the idea of salvation in the clause before.

Without any hesitancy I answer, Robertson, to whom the entire world of New Testament scholarship is heavily indebted, does not express himself felicitously in this instance. This is true first because in a context in which the apostle places such tremendous stress on the fact that from start to finish man owes his salvation to God, to him alone, it would have been very strange, indeed, for him to say, Grace is God's part, faith ours. True though it be that both the responsibility of believing and also its activity are ours, for God does not believe for us, nevertheless, in the present context (verses 5-10) one rather expects emphasis on the fact that both in its initiation and in its continuation faith is entirely dependent on God, and so is our complete salvation.

Also, Robertson, a grammarian famous in his field, knew that in the original the demonstrative (this), though neuter, by no means always corresponds in gender with its antecedent. That he knew this is shown by the fact that on the indicated page of his Grammar (p.704) he points out that in general the demonstrative agrees with its substantive in gender and number. When he says in general, he must mean, not always but most of the time.

Hence, he should have considered more seriously the possibility that, in view of the context, the exception to the rule, an exception by no means rare, applies here. He should have made allowance for it. Finally, he should have justified the departure from the rule that unless there is a compelling reason to do otherwise the antecedent should be looked for in the immediate vicinity of the pronoun or adjective that refers to it.

In Him,

Bill

There are some grammar exceptions made in scripture sometime it seems for emphasis and some seem to be in error, but for Paul to do it in Eph. 2:8 would be poor communication on Paul’s part which I have not seen him do anywhere else, can you give another example? The “this” being neuter fits salvation nicely, so to say: Paul was referring to “faith” (feminine) would be very misleading on Paul’s part, but if salvation had not been in the context it might be a good option.

I agree you cannot use this one verse to show “salvation is God’s part and faith is man’s part”, since the source of the faith is not discussed.

As I showed without using the Greek the posterity of “working for faith” as something contrary and needing no warning with: There is also the verse right after Eph. 2:8 which is Eph 2:8… “it is the gift of God— 9 not by works, so that no one can boast.” If “faith” was the gift then Paul is saying do not “work” to get it, but that is contrary to the way “faith” is described: “Working to get faith” is not a possibility anyone would even consider, but Paul does tell us we cannot “work to gain salvation”, so that does fit. Taking something on “faith” is the opposite of trying to gain something through hard work, which everyone knows.

Your author seems to think: “If the person is needing to extend “faith” toward God than he has done something “worthy of something”, which is not true.

All mature adults have “a” God given faith and can place that faith in things, people and even false gods, it is only when this God given faith is directed toward a benevolent creator that it results in a saving faith. But putting your trust (faith) in a benevolent Creator is something the lowliest mature adult on earth can do, so it is not something “glorious” in men’s eyes and really is looked upon as giving up on self, quitting, wimping out, and surrendering to the enemy. It is a very humbling activity to just trust in the possible charity of your enemy (who you hate) to surrender to your enemy hoping His Love is great enough to extend undeserved charity and not destroy you for your previous war crimes. Surrendering does not mean you want to join up with this enemy you still hate, but will after being showered with gifts.

 

[Al Touthentop]

Good Day, Al

What would make you think you would be at odds with Calvin's historical view on the Authority of Scripture?

You are borrowing from the views held before you and on that reality you can not escape.

In Him,

Bill

I am at odds with Calvin's views on a lot of things, notably in this case the reason for and effectiveness of baptism, which he rejects. The scripture is quite clear that Jesus taught it, commanded that it be done and for the reasons the apostles and disciples said, and he himself said. Were it an empty ritual or mere sign, Jesus would not have taught it. Baptism is from God.

Wherever Jesus was taught, baptism was included. There isn't a single conversion we read about in scripture that didn't include baptism.