Signs a person is regenerated.

[Thatgirloncfforums]

That was like a said just an example and a far from perfect one.

To receive God's free gift of Eternal life, one must first understand how to receive this free gift. They must understand what God requires of a person to receive His free gift of Eternal Life.

Is freewill the same as understanding? I'm not sure it is. Everyone has freewill by virtue of their humanity, even those who are intellectually impaired or immature.

God does not force this gift on to anyone, that would be like the rescuer tying the rope on whether you want it or not.

God has tied the rope on everyone regardless, if we think about the rope as being his humanity. Everyone is united to Christ, through the Incarnation. That's why and how everyone will be resurrected on the Last Day.

No God is offering the free gift, we must understand how to receive it. That is the purpose of The Gospel of John, it was written to tell people how to receive God's free gift of Eternal Life. John 20:30,31

Even if we reject God's free gift of the rope, we are still going to be raised up out of the pit (death, hell, ect).

And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.

Yep.

When you speak of being appreciative to the rescuer all that is after you have been rescued. That is not the focus of the illustration. The focus is that you are in a well do you take the rope (representing God's free gift of Eternal Life) and get out or not and stay in.

I don't have a choice. I will get out. My choice is in how I respond to being out. Will I embrace my new found life or will I bring the pit with me?

It is the same with receiving God's free gift of Eternal Life. Do unbelievers trust in The Messiah for God's free gift of Eternal Life (and become born again) or not.

No. They do not trust.

If not and they stay an unbeliever and will eventually be a person, who eventually ends up being judged (for their works) at the great white throne and then, sent to the lake of fire.

The Lake of Fire is not the pit though. It's the fire of God himself. At least that's what I've learned from Eastern Orthodoxy.

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

He doesn’t.


But God, being rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, even when we were dead in our transgressions, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved),
— Ephesians 2:4-5

I'm not sure how Eph 2 contradicts Hammster's point?

 

[d taylor]

Is freewill the same as understanding? I'm not sure it is. Everyone has freewill by virtue of their humanity, even those who are intellectually impaired or immature.


God has tied the rope on everyone regardless, if we think about the rope as being his humanity. Everyone is united to Christ, through the Incarnation. That's why and how everyone will be resurrected on the Last Day.


Even if we reject God's free gift of the rope, we are still going to be raised up out of the pit (death, hell, ect).


Yep.


I don't have a choice. I will get out. My choice is in how I respond to being out. Will I embrace my new found life or will I bring the pit with me?



No. They do not trust.


The Lake of Fire is not the pit though. It's the fire of God himself. At least that's what I've learned from Eastern Orthodoxy.

We are fairly far apart on/in many areas just not sure there can be any more said.

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

We are fairly far apart on/in many areas just not sure there can be any more said.

Ok. Happy Thanksgiving.

 

[ViaCrucis]

The decision to be baptized is pleasing to God. It must be done in the Spirit.

Most Christians were baptized as infants.

It's not about the sinful human will, it's about God's grace. It's about the Gospel.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Hammster]

I'm not sure how Eph 2 contradicts Hammster's point?

Well, I posted it, so it doesn’t.

 

[Hammster]

Most Christians were baptized as infants.

It's not about the sinful human will, it's about God's grace. It's about the Gospel.

-CryptoLutheran

If you are going to ignore my point, there is not much else to say.

 

[ViaCrucis]

If you are going to ignore my point, there is not much else to say.

No, I'm pretty sure I'm addressing the meat and potatoes of your point: You view baptism as something we do, in faith, and thus it pleases God.

And I'm saying that's backward. Baptism is something God does, to give us faith, and He imputes the full and perfect righteousness of His Son through faith, by His grace. And that's why baptismal regeneration is true: because the Word of God is there with the water (Ephesians 5:26), the Word which gives faith (Romans 10:17). So we are born again "of water and the Spirit" (John 3:5); saved not by works of righteousness which we've done, but rather having received "the washing of regeneration and the renewal of the Holy Spirit" (Titus 3:5)

Baptism isn't something we do.
Baptism is something done to us.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Thatgirloncfforums]

Well, I posted it, so it doesn’t.

 

[Hammster]

No, I'm pretty sure I'm addressing the meat and potatoes of your point: You view baptism as something we do, in faith, and thus it pleases God.

And I'm saying that's backward. Baptism is something God does, to give us faith, and He imputes the full and perfect righteousness of His Son through faith, by His grace. And that's why baptismal regeneration is true: because the Word of God is there with the water (Ephesians 5:26), the Word which gives faith (Romans 10:17). So we are born again "of water and the Spirit" (John 3:5); saved not by works of righteousness which we've done, but rather having received "the washing of regeneration and the renewal of the Holy Spirit" (Titus 3:5)

Baptism isn't something we do.
Baptism is something done to us.

-CryptoLutheran

No, my point was that deciding to be baptized is pleasing to God. That’s why I said so. You have ignored that and focused on the baptism.

 

[ViaCrucis]

No, my point was that deciding to be baptized is pleasing to God. That’s why I said so. You have ignored that and focused on the baptism.

Okay, so what makes the "decision" to be baptized of any worth or merit before God?

What difference does it make if a person receives baptism as an infant of eight days old or if they receive it as an elderly man who is eighty-eight years old?

If your answer is that infants can't be baptized, and that only adults can be baptized after they already believe, then we return back to my point, and the focus is once again on Baptism itself.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Hammster]

Okay, so what makes the "decision" to be baptized of any worth or merit before God?

What difference does it make if a person receives baptism as an infant of eight days old or if they receive it as an elderly man who is eighty-eight years old?

If your answer is that infants can't be baptized, and that only adults can be baptized after they already believe, then we return back to my point, and the focus is once again on Baptism itself.

-CryptoLutheran

My point is that deciding to be baptized is pleasing (I feel I keep having to italicize words because you keep changing the point) to God.

 

[d taylor]

Ok. Happy Thanksgiving.

You also have, a happy thanksgiving day

 

[ViaCrucis]

My point is that deciding to be baptized is pleasing (I feel I keep having to italicize words because you keep changing the point) to God.

And so does the decision for parents to bring their children to the baptismal font. Because Jesus told His Church to baptize, so of course God is pleased when people are baptized. Whether it's a person being baptized as an adult convert, or a person being baptized as an infant convert.

God's will is that His Church baptize--and so God is pleased in this. Because through Baptism we are born again, in accordance with Christ's explicit word and promise--His Gospel.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Hammster]

And so does the decision for parents to bring their children to the baptismal font. Because Jesus told His Church to baptize, so of course God is pleased when people are baptized. Whether it's a person being baptized as an adult convert, or a person being baptized as an infant convert.

God's will is that His Church baptize--and so God is pleased in this. Because through Baptism we are born again, in accordance with Christ's explicit word and promise--His Gospel.

-CryptoLutheran

Since you are ignoring my argument, I can’t see any reason to continue.

 

[ViaCrucis]

Since you are ignoring my argument, I can’t see any reason to continue.

I'm really trying man. I am trying to understand and engage with what you're saying--I'm not intentionally being obtuse, or combative, or misconstrue you. I'm legitimately and very sincerely making an effort to engage and meaningfully address what you're saying.

You're saying that God is pleased, He finds it pleasing, when a person decides to be baptized.

I guess what I'm missing is what I'm supposed to disagree with in this sentiment. Yeah, God is pleased when a person decides to be baptized, and God is pleased when parents decide to have their children baptized.

What am I missing here? Again, not arguing just to argue, not trying to misconstrue you. What is it that you are saying that I'm not processing here properly?

Or, how about this: God is pleased when a person decides to receive baptism, as opposed to what? Is there an unspoken implication going on here? E.g. God is pleased when a person decides to be baptized, as opposed to deciding not to be baptized? E.g. God is pleased when a person decides to be baptized, as opposed to someone else (i.e. one's parents) deciding to baptize them?

Because I agree entirely with the first example.
But I disagree entirely with the second example, and regard it wholly unbiblical in its sentiment and its orientation of faith toward God.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Hammster]

I'm really trying man. I am trying to understand and engage with what you're saying--I'm not intentionally being obtuse, or combative, or misconstrue you. I'm legitimately and very sincerely making an effort to engage and meaningfully address what you're saying.

You're saying that God is pleased, He finds it pleasing, when a person decides to be baptized.

I guess what I'm missing is what I'm supposed to disagree with in this sentiment. Yeah, God is pleased when a person decides to be baptized, and God is pleased when parents decide to have their children baptized.

What am I missing here? Again, not arguing just to argue, not trying to misconstrue you. What is it that you are saying that I'm not processing here properly?

Or, how about this: God is pleased when a person decides to receive baptism, as opposed to what? Is there an unspoken implication going on here? E.g. God is pleased when a person decides to be baptized, as opposed to deciding not to be baptized? E.g. God is pleased when a person decides to be baptized, as opposed to someone else (i.e. one's parents) deciding to baptize them?

Because I agree entirely with the first example.
But I disagree entirely with the second example, and regard it wholly unbiblical in its sentiment and its orientation of faith toward God.

-CryptoLutheran

The problem is that you keep focusing on baptism, which according to you is when we are regenerated. However, if an adult makes a decision to be baptized, that decision is pleasing to God. Since we cannot please God in the flesh, that decision must be made in the Spirit. Hence, the person who decides to be baptized is already born again.

To be clear, I’m not discussing the act of baptism, but rather an adult deciding to be baptized.

 

[ViaCrucis]

The problem is that you keep focusing on baptism, which according to you is when we are regenerated. However, if an adult makes a decision to be baptized, that decision is pleasing to God. Since we cannot please God in the flesh, that decision must be made in the Spirit. Hence, the person who decides to be baptized is already born again.

To be clear, I’m not discussing the act of baptism, but rather an adult deciding to be baptized.

No one ever said that regeneration can't happen outside of the baptismal font. I wasn't baptized until I was 17 years old, but I've been a believing Christian since I was in diapers.

I don't think I lacked regeneration before receiving Holy Baptism. Nor do Lutherans teach this.

That doesn't change the fact that the ordinary means of God's work of regeneration is Holy Baptism. It doesn't change the fact that Baptism remains Baptism and accomplishes the things which Scripture says God sets it out to accomplish. His word does not return unto Him null and void.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[Hammster]

No one ever said that regeneration can't happen outside of the baptismal font. I wasn't baptized until I was 17 years old, but I've been a believing Christian since I was in diapers.

I don't think I lacked regeneration before receiving Holy Baptism. Nor do Lutherans teach this.

That doesn't change the fact that the ordinary means of God's work of regeneration is Holy Baptism. It doesn't change the fact that Baptism remains Baptism and accomplishes the things which Scripture says God sets it out to accomplish. His word does not return unto Him null and void.

-CryptoLutheran

According to your first post to me, you said that regeneration occurred during baptism. Obviously you can’t be consistent in your view.

 

[ViaCrucis]

According to your first post to me, you said that regeneration occurred during baptism. Obviously you can’t be consistent in your view.

No, my position is consistent.

God works and creates faith in us through Word and Sacrament. Wherever God's word is, there God works and creates faith.

That's why the Apostle says of Baptism that it is a washing of "water with the word" (Ephesians 5:26). He also calls it the "washing of regeneration" in Titus 3:5.

-CryptoLutheran