When does regeneration takes place?

[glad4mercy]

I'd like to be part of this discussion as well. The question we have to answer is whether or not the prodigal son was saved, lost his salvation and then was saved again. That is what Gadgeteer believes largely because of verses like these:

Luke 15:24 For this my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found. And they began to be merry.

Luke 15:32 It was meet that we should make merry, and be glad: for this thy brother was dead, and is alive again; and was lost, and is found.

To say that he was dead and then alive again suggests that he was once alive before dying and then he came back to life again. The question I'd like to discuss is in what sense was he alive in the first place? Because of his faith? If so where does it indicate that in the parable? In the case of the prodigal son he was in right standing with his father kind of by default when he was born up until the time he was able to make his own decisions, right? His relationship with his father wasn't severed until he decided to leave the father and do his own thing, right? He was his father's son in the first place by way of birth, not because of his faith, right? Think about that for a minute before reading on.

So, if we applied this to a real life situation, couldn't the parable be compared to a child being born and then eventually growing and getting to the point of being able to make their own life decisions and they decide to live a sinful lifestyle? As is the case for all people they knew God because of what He has made (Rom 1:18-20) but decided to live a sinful lifestyle instead of glorifying Him as God and instead of repenting of their sins and putting their faith in Christ. But if they decide to repent of their sins rather than continuing in their sinful lifestyle then they become saved and enter into a relationship with God. The question is, what is the status of a person when they are born and before they are old enough to make their own life decisions? Saved or lost? The answer to that question can help determine the answer to the question of whether the parable of the prodigal son must be speaking of someone who was saved, lost and then saved again or not.

I see it as being the latter.

Right. I don't see James 5:19-20 as speaking of someone who had lost their faith and salvation and then were saved again. I see it as speaking of an immature Christian who was heading in the wrong direction and had put themselves in danger of losing their faith and salvation but then saw the error of their ways, repented and returned to being in a mature relationship with God.

Good post, John 14:6. In regards to the parable of the prodigal son, I am not going to give a detailed answer, I will just mention something I learned when I was studying hermeneutics. When one studies parables, it is important to determine the central point that the parable is trying to teach. Looking at the prodigal son, we need to consider the context.

1. Who was Jesus speaking to? The pharisees and scribes.

2. What was the occasion of this parable? The fact that the scribes and pharisees were murmering about Jesus eating with publicans and sinners.

3. We must take note that the parable of the prodigal son is only one part of a larger parable that includes the lost sheep and the lost coin as well. I believe all three parables are one.

4. What is the central point of this parable? It is summed up in the verses below...

Luke 15: 7 I say to you that likewise there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine just persons who need no repentance

Luke 15: 10 Likewise, I say to you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner who repents.”

Luke 15: 32 It was right that we should make merry and be glad, for your brother was dead and is alive again, and was lost and is found.’”

The younger son represented the publicans and sinners who were coming to Jesus, the older son represented the religious scribes and pharisees. There was joy in heaven and in the presence of the angels over the publicans and sinners who were coming to Jesus, yet there was no joy in the hearts of the men who claimed to know God, to love God, and claimed to serve Him.

"It is meet that we should make merry...", in other words Jesus was telling the pharisees that if they really loved God like they claimed to, they would rejoice that sinners were repenting. This is an indictment on the scribes and Pharisees, and possibly an invitation to recognize that their hearts were just as far from God as immoral sinners, and on that realization come to their own senses and repent. Notice the father went out to encourage the older son to come inside and join the celebration, but rather than accepting the invite like the saints and angels do, Jesus never gives the response of the older son. This is because the older son was the ones he was talking to, ( scribes and pharisees), and they needed to make up their mind if they were going to get with God's program or stay outside in the cold wallowing in their own hypocrisy.

As far as in what sense the younger son was alive and then dead then alive again, I cannot say for sure. Since the younger son represents the publicans and sinners, I do not think it is referring to people that were once born again, but that it is speaking of sinners in general. I am open to hear other views, though.

As far as the rest of your post, we are thinking alike in this discussion.

[Gadgeteer]

I appreciate your reasoning and I do see your view as a valid possibility, but I still disagree. Another key difference in our interpretations of the passage is that you see it as saying if someone is in the process of falling away then it is powerless to restore them to repentance while they are falling away, but I see it as speaking of those who have fallen away (rather than being in the process of falling away) and that it is impossible to renew people in that state to repentance.

Hi, John. The Greek conspicuously uses the participle form; though it is as you say, "they are fallen". But it's their falling-away that is the reason for non-repentance. I know it sounds kinda "circular", but all the translations agree.

Now, I know that God is quite merciful and patient with people so if my view is correct then it would require someone to have really fallen far from God to get to the point where they can't be renewed again unto repentance. I don't see someone having fallen away as something that can happen very easily.

"Ease" or "difficulty" is not in the text; he (very likely Paul) describes those who absolutely were once saved, but falling away knowingly they just won't want to repent.

Even then there is the principle of “delivering them to satan for destruction of their flesh that their spirit may be saved” (1Cor5:5) --- that can only mean that “they learn to be repentant”, because there is no spirit-saved without repentance. (See 1Tim1:20 for the same thing.)

So, if I'm understanding you right, you're saying that while they are delivered to Satan for destruction of their flesh they are powerless to repent but once that event has occurred then there is the possibility for them to repent.

No; "deliver-to-satan" conveys receiving the consequences of their sins. Did you look up 1Tim1:20? The point of "deliver-to-satan" was that they be taught not to blaspheme. Seems to be intending to lead them to the same place the Prodigal was when he "came to his senses and repented".

And you are relating that scenario to the Heb 6:4-6 passage, right? That's possible. I'll consider that possibility.

Just sayin' that the reason for the "impossibility/powerlessness to restore them to repentance", was their willful sin in the face of former real salvation.

I disagree. I'm not a dispensationalist so I don't see 2 Thess 2:9-12 as speaking of entirely different age than the one we are in now. I see no reason whatsoever that we can't use that passage to aid in our understanding of the topic we're discussing here. Below, you referred to Rom 1:24 as being similar to this passage (2 Thess 2:9-12). Why can't the concepts mentioned in these passages apply now? Can God not give people over to their wickedness even today if He chose to do so?

The two are similar if it's really the people themselves causing their own unbelief; I was speculating if God could actively send a delusion on those who refused to believe during the "age of Grace".

So, you don't think God can give anyone "over to a base and depraved mind" today?

Yes; but it's an "honoring of their previous unbelief" that God does --- really another "Semitic View" assertion.

Yes, I do. Where in Heb 10:26-29 does it indicate that if someone sins "willfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth" that they can ever repent of that?

It doesn't say they can; but also doesn't say they can't. Seems that Romans11:23 keeps rearing its head in these discussions.

;-)

Instead, it says regarding those who do that: "there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins, But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.". To me, it gives the impression that those who sin willfully (all Christians sin, but not all sin is willful sin) after coming to the knowledge of the truth are certain to face "judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries". But I guess that's not how you interpret it?

I see it as a willful turning away from Christ towards sin. Similar to Gal4:9, "Having been KNOWN by God, you are now turning back to weak worthless things to be enslaved all over again?"

I see Heb 6:4-6 as mirroring Heb 3:12-14 as well.

Very good. :-)

Heb 3:¹² Take heed, brethren, lest there be in any of you an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God. ¹³ But exhort one another daily, while it is called To day; lest any of you be hardened through the deceitfulness of sin. ¹⁴For we are made partakers of Christ, if we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end;

This indicates that in order to be "made partakers of Christ" we have to "hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end". We have to keep our faith until the end (of our lives or of the age, I assume). So, if we lose our faith that would mean we have gone to the point of having "an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God", right?

There are only two real-estates in the Universe; "in Christ", and "in sin".

Do you see a connection between falling away and developing ""an evil heart of unbelief, in departing from the living God" as I do?

It can't be anything else.

I don't see any indication that someone can be led back to repentance after that. It seems to me that we have to keep our faith and never lose it until the end in order to be "partakers of Christ". So, I'd like to know how you interpret Heb 3:12-14.

To me it fits fine with James5:19-20, and with Rom11:23.

Note that "partakers of Christ" uses metochos --- partakers/partners. It's also in Heb3:1, Heb6:4, and Heb12:8. Really does convey "saved". In Heb12 it's a past event, in context with the real possibility of being now without God's discipline, and therefore not being (no longer) adopted sons --- ceasing to be born-again!

I agree that "they’re not gonna listen to you no matter HOW long you beat their heads with the idea of repentance", but I'm not seeing where it indicates that they could ever repent after getting to the point of having lost their faith and their salvation.

If their inability to be restored to repentance is because of willful sin, there's always the possibility of "coming-to-their-senses".

I agree that their "crucifying-Christ-anew" is the cause of their unrepentance. I'm just not seeing anything in any of these passages which indicate that people who get to that point of sinning willfully, falling away and "departing from the living God" have the possibility of repenting and returning to God at some point.

God doesn't shut the door; if they're the cause of apostasy, they can be causal in returning. James5:19-20 and Rom11:23 must fit.

Now, don't get me wrong. I do believe that someone can backslide (for lack of a better term) and be led back to maturity but I'm must not seeing where someone can be saved, lose their salvation and then regain their salvation at some point. At the same time I believe it takes a lot for someone to get to the point of losing their faith and their salvation.

What it would take, is "denying Jesus" (2Tim2:11-13, Matt10:33), because of becoming enticed and entangled in sin and defilements and being worse than before salvation. (2Pet2:20-22.)

I think most of us struggle with our faith at times but that doesn't necessarily mean we all get to the point of being on the brink of losing our faith.

"Faithlessness" (2Tim2:11-13, which contrasts two real possibilities --- died/enduring/reigning, and faithless/denying/NOT-reigning) is not a fell-swoop thing; deception is sneaky. See James1:14-16, where again "thanatos" per Strong's Greek Lexicon is "physical death with implication of eternity in Hell".

It seems to me that the only way someone can get to that point is by being very undisciplined in their faith. By ignoring the warnings given in passages like Heb 3:12-14, Heb 6:4-6 and Heb 10:26-29. It seems that the kind of people who get to that point try to coast along to the finish line instead of running the race, as Paul talks about. It seems that those who fall away are those who don't show the proper appreciating for being saved and take it for granted and aren't careful about maintaining their faith.

It's not a "fell-swoop-thing"; it's just a tiny deviation, not really a branch at all away from the main path; why, it's right along SIDE of the main path --- but bit by bit it leads one astray so that one day he or she is shocked to see WILDERNESS and the main path nowhere in sight.

I believe there could be a connection between Heb 6:4-6 and those verses in the context that you're talking about, but at this point in time (remember, I'm open to the possibility of changing my mind on this) I see more of a connection with those verses in a different context.

I think we're closer than not. Again. :-)

[Gadgeteer]

No it cannot happen without regeneration, but one regeneration, ( birth), leads to a continual renewing. ( 2 Corinthians 4:16).
What is the renewing that 2 Corinthians 4:16 is speaking about?

It's gotta be the same thing --- be renewed in your spirit, lay aside the old sinful man and put on the new spiritual.

No, because only those who are regenerate can be cleansed and kept clean.

Do we agree that "regeneration" comes when we receive the Spirit? If therefore we can later reject the Spirit (as Scripture says, "grieve/resist/insult"), then we by definition also reject regeneration.

Yet we don't need to be repeatedly born again every time we are cleansed but 1 John 1:7 says if we walk in the Light as He is in the light, we have fellowship one with another and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin. One regeneration, ( if abided in), leads to a continual cleansing by the blood of Jesus, for the word "cleanses in 1 John 1:7 is present active linear, continuous action. See also 1 John 1:9. It does not say we are regenerated again every time we confess our sins, but it does say we are forgiven and cleansed from all unrighteousness.

Agreed. Abide in Him, be filled with the Spirit, be (abide-in) regenerated.

No, for no one can do these things until they are born again. Yet the renewing of the spirit of your mind, the laying aside of the old man, and the putting on of the New man does is done not only at regeneration, but also afterwards. How do I know? Because Paul was writing to regenerate believers. If a person had to be regenerated every time they did these things, how can it be said that Paul was writing to regenerate believers. There is a already done sense, and there is a not yet finished sense, for Paul said " such we some of you, but now you are washed, now you are sanctified, now you are justified...but he also commanded the people to cleanse themselves of every filthiness of flesh and spirit. The cleansing mentioned in the former occurred at regeneration, but the cleansing mentioned in the second instance was something that needed to be done, or else the apostle would not have given them this commandment/exhortation.

Let's see if we agree that "regeneration" is something the Holy Spirit brings, as He indwells a believer.

It doesn't say that he is regenerated again, but I would say that he is restored and renewed. Question: can we be regenerated without being baptized by the Spirit into Christ Jesus? If so, does the act of the Spirit baptizing us into Christ Jesus occur more than once? This is the logical conclusion of your statement.

As we've discussed in the last several weeks, "baptized-into-the-Spirit" is the same event as "baptized-into-Christ" (has nothing to do with water); it's the whole salvation experience, the old person dies (united/baptized into Christ's death), and we're new creations (as Jesus was raised from the dead we're united/baptized into His resurrection).

...part of that is "regeneration", as the Spirit indwells us....

The story of the prodigal son is a great comfort for ex-backsliders like me, but don't forget the context and who Jesus was talking about in the original context. He was not talking about backsliders, he was talking about publicans and sinners who were coming to Him in faith. In what way had the publicans and sinners been His children in former times. Let me know what you think on this, and then we can continue discussing this question.

Possibly He was teaching on the "New Covenant"; they had been members under the Old Covenant, through faith. Thus "was alive, then dead". The only way the Prodigal could be alive again, is to have been alive before.

By forsaking the New Covenant, rejecting Jesus, they were really rejecting God. Yes it can be argued that "they never belonged"; as Jesus said in Jn8:42, "If God was your Father then you would love Me".

Yes, when we become a prodigal we are alienated from God and cease to grow.

Regarding James 5: 20, it says that he that converteth a sinner from his way shall save a soul from death. Is the sinner already dead, or is the one who converts him saving him from imminent death, like saving a blind man from walking off the cliff? The word in verse 19 which was translated "err" means to be led astray or fall into error. So the departure is the result of error or being led astray. The brother who brings him back to the truth by convincing him of the error of his ways saves him from death. If the one who errs hears correction, instruction, and warning, they have sinned willfully. Yet if they were in danger of being led astray, yet came to themselves when warned, they are plucked from the fire.

Amen.

Remember, James earlier said that lust when it is conceived brings forth sin and sin when it is finished brings forth death.

In that, we allow ourselves to be "carried away by our own lust". It's a choice, just as it is in 1Cor10:12-13.

God graciously provides the escape to sin (always), but we choose.

As you and I agree, it's all a question of "abiding".

Amen

One of my favorite passages is James4:6-10.

:-)

[Gadgeteer]

I don't see James 5:19-20 as speaking of someone who had lost their faith and salvation and then were saved again. I see it as speaking of an immature Christian who was heading in the wrong direction and had put themselves in danger of losing their faith and salvation but then saw the error of their ways, repented and returned to being in a mature relationship with God.

He "wandered away from the faith", and "was led back"; could he have never been there (saved)? How could he not have been?

"Soul-death" (psuche-thanatos) --- how could that not mean "really unsaved"? And "uncovered-sins" --- that's unforgiveness, how could it not be "unsaved"?

What other meaning could it have but "fall-from-salvation, and be restored"?

[glad4mercy]

It's gotta be the same thing --- be renewed in your spirit, lay aside the old sinful man and put on the new spiritual.

I agree, but consider this...

2 Corinthians 4: 16 Therefore we do not lose heart. Though outwardly we are wasting away, yet inwardly we are being renewed day by day. 17 For our light and momentary troubles are achieving for us an eternal glory that far outweighs them all.18 So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen. For what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal.

This passage is talking about being renewed, but it is not talking about regeneration. It does not say we are born again day by day, it says we are being renewed day by day. You said yourself regeneration is something the Spirit brings as He indwells the believer. The Spirit does not go in and out of a believer day by day, He abides with the believer forever. Now I know you will say that we must abide for this to be true, and I agree in advance. The point is that the day by day renewings are not day by day regenerations.

Gadgeteer, how many times have you been regenerated? If regeneration is when we are indwelt with the Spirit, and you think that we are regenerated every time we are cleansed and renewed, this ammounts to the Spirit leaving us/departing from us every time we need cleansing. Does the Spirit leave on every occasion of sin, and then come back every time we are cleansed?

Possibly He was teaching on the "New Covenant"; they had been members under the Old Covenant, through faith. Thus "was alive, then dead". The only way the Prodigal could be alive again, is to have been alive before.

What I wrote about the prodigal son in my previous post (421)was a faithful exegesis of the passage taking the context into full consideration. Did you agree with it? If not, please show me where you think I erred in my intepretation of it.

Who was Jesus talking to when He told the parable, what was the occasion of the parable, and what is the central truth that the parable conveys?

[Boo]

He is the Savior of all men, chiefly/above-all believers. 1Tim4:10. We receive Him as Lord, and He becomes our Savior.

"if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved;
for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation."

Your verse does not tell us how to do it.

[glad4mercy]

Your verse does not tell us how to do it.

Boo, did you ever read post 331?

[Gadgeteer]

Boo, did you ever read post 331?

I am still awaiting a scripture verse or verses that tell(s) us how to accept Jesus as our savior.

I already know that people want to deny those scriptures that I have shown, so show me what I need to know - please.

Thank you Boo for the document you sent me. I have taken it into consideration. Now regarding the question posted above, I will not speak of "accepting" Jesus, for the correct word is "receiving" Jesus. Here are some verses on receiving, calling on, and coming to Jesus. I believe a person is regenerated when they come to Jesus, calling on His name.

John 1:12- 12 Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God--

Romans 10:9-15- 9 That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you confess and are saved. As the Scripture says, "Anyone who trusts in him will never be put to shame." For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile--the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him, for, "Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved." How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in? And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? And how can they preach unless they are sent? As it is written, "How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!"
John 3:14-18- ( What did the Israelites have to do regarding the bronze serpent to be healed?) Did they wash in water or did they look and live.)

Acts 2:21 And everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.'

John 5:40- yet you refuse to come to me to have life.

John 6:37- All that the Father gives me will come to me, and whoever comes to me I will never drive away

John 7:37 On the last and greatest day of the Feast, Jesus stood and said in a loud voice, "If anyone is thirsty, let him come to me and drink.

Revelation 22:17 The Spirit and the bride say, "Come!" And let him who hears say, "Come!" Whoever is thirsty, let him come; and whoever wishes, let him take the free gift of the water of life.

Who is the water of Life? He is the Holy Spirit.

Come to Jesus to be regenerated, which means receiving the Holy Spirit. So a person is regenerated when they come to Jesus and call on His Name. Question answered.

Let me ask you a question. If a person receives Christ in their dying moments and they are unable to be baptized before they die, will they perish? Consider the fact that Jesus said unless one is born of water and Spirit, they will in no wise enter or even see the Kingdom of Heaven. So if water is referring to the baptistry, (then they perish because they weren't waterbaptized?)

I can't add to what Glad said. Becoming-saved is far more than "believing/mental-assent"; James says in 2:19 that even demons believe. The kind of belief that is saved receives Jesus. Receives how? Receives His gift of grace (as Savior), and receives Him as Lord and Master.

In Rom5:17 those who receive the abundance of grace and the gift of righteousness shall reign with Christ -- shall be saved. How do we receive grace and righteousness? By receiving Jesus, and the Spirit.

The kind of "receive" that is embodied in Gal2:20:

"I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the One who loved me and delivered Himself up for me."

It's the kind of "receive" that is truly united in Jesus' death, our old sinful selves die; and we are united in His resurrection, we are now new creations by Jesus and the Spirit in us.

It's the kind of "receive" that abides in Him, walking hand in hand with Christ and the Spirit --- "Our FELLOWSHIP is with the Father and with the Son. He who has the Son has eternal life..." 1Jn1:3, 5:13.

[The Mighty Sword]

Upon complete and total surrender.

[Gadgeteer]

I agree, but consider this...

2 Corinthians 4: 16 Therefore we do not lose heart. Though outwardly we are wasting away, yet inwardly we are being renewed day by day. 17 For our light and momentary troubles are achieving for us an eternal glory that far outweighs them all.18 So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen. For what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal.

This passage is talking about being renewed, but it is not talking about regeneration.

I think it is. The concept of "abide-in-Me", is the same concept as "be filled with the Spirit"; it would mean exactly the same thing if worded "be regenerated". We have "be-renewed", we have "be-reconciled-to-God", and we have "be-filled-with-the-Spirit". There's no way that "be-regenerated" is not part of that position.

It does not say we are born again day by day, it says we are being renewed day by day.

Abide-in the Spirit and His regeneration.

You said yourself regeneration is something the Spirit brings as He indwells the believer. The Spirit does not go in and out of a believer day by day, He abides with the believer forever.

No. The man in James5:19-20 wandered away from the faith, and left/forsook the Spirit and regeneration. The man in Hebrews10:29 once was sanctified (cannot exist apart from regeneration) --- but now he scorns the very blood of Jesus that once sanctified him, tramples Jesus and insults the Spirit; he has forsaken the Spirit and regeneration.

If such men are led BACK to Jesus and back to being indwelt by the Spirit, then they return to being regenerated.

Now I know you will say that we must abide for this to be true, and I agree in advance. The point is that the day by day renewings are not day by day regenerations.

"Be-renewed" is not a day-by-day renewal either; it's something we abide in --- identical to Col2:6:

"As you have received Christ, so walk in Him."

Gadgeteer, how many times have you been regenerated?

How many times would the man in James5:20 be regenerated? At least twice.

If regeneration is when we are indwelt with the Spirit, and you think that we are regenerated every time we are cleansed and renewed, this amounts to the Spirit leaving us/departing from us every time we need cleansing. Does the Spirit leave on every occasion of sin, and then come back every time we are cleansed?

WE depart the Spirit through sin; the Spirit simply will not participate in sin --- so each time we sin it is "away from the Spirit". We are restored through repentance, or fall victim to being subject to Heb10:26-29.

The concept of the Spirit still indwelling us even when we sin, is part-n-parcel of "backslidden-but-saved", or more accurately described as "Antinomianism/Gnosticism".

What I wrote about the prodigal son in my previous post (421)was a faithful exegesis of the passage taking the context into full consideration. Did you agree with it? If not, please show me where you think I erred in my interpretation of it.

3. We must take note that the parable of the prodigal son is only one part of a larger parable that includes the lost sheep and the lost coin as well. I believe all three parables are one.

As far as in what sense the younger son was alive and then dead then alive again, I cannot say for sure. Since the younger son represents the publicans and sinners, I do not think it is referring to people that were once born again, but that it is speaking of sinners in general. I am open to hear other views, though.

All three stories had the same basic premise --- a coin that one once HAD, was lost; a sheep that once existed in the flock was lost; a son who once lived in the family, was lost/dead.

As I said, it may be conveying that "refusal to accept Jesus was tantamount to rejecting God" --- for he who loves God will love the Son.

Who was Jesus talking to when He told the parable, what was the occasion of the parable, and what is the central truth that the parable conveys?

The only difference between the Prodigal and the other two stories is that the Prodigal made a conscious choice to BECOME lost. The sheep assumedly did not, and the coin certainly did not. The whole dialog is about falling, and restoration upon repentance.

[glad4mercy]

"Be-renewed" is not a day-by-day renewal either; it's something we abide in --- identical to Col2:6:

Gadgeteer, I think we basically agree in our beliefs, but it is the way we define terms that is getting in the way. First of all, you say that regeneration and renewal are synonomous, I say they are not synonomous, and point to 2 Cor. 4:16 to demonstrate my point. That passage shows that we are renewed day by day. Then you turn around and say that we are not renewed day by day. Please look at 2 Corinthians 4:16 again. Pay particular attention to the bolded/underlined parts, and then reconsider what you said in the quote above.

2 Corinthians 4:16- For which cause we faint not; but though our outward man perish, yet the inward [man] is renewed day by day.

Note: The same Greek word that is translated renewed in 2 Corintians 4:16 is the word that is used in Ephesians 4:23.

Note: I agree with what you say about the need to abide in the renewing.

See, this clearly demontrates that our inward man is renewed day by day. So regeneration cannot be synonomous with the word renewing, or else we are regenerated day by day.

There is a renewal that takes place when we are regenerated, ( born from above), and there are renewals that take place after we are born from above as we are constantly being transformed more and more into the image of Christ,
2 Corinthians 3: 18- But we all, with open face beholding as in a glass the glory of the Lord, are changed into the same image from glory to glory, [even] as by the Spirit of the Lord.

Romans 12: 2 And be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what [is] that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God

In the Romans passage, Paul is not talking to unregenerate people here, nor do I think this verse is for only backslidden or erring Christians. This is something that every Christian, including abiding Christians, need to do.

Read Ephesians 2:22-32 in context. The believers that Paul is telling to be renewed in the spirit of their minds are regenerate, abiding, believers, who are indwelt with the Holy Spirit. They don't need to receive the Holy Spirit again for they are sealed with the Spirit. Yet they do need to be renewed in the spirit of their minds. Observe the following facts about the people Paul was speaking to in Ephesians 2:23

1. They had a former conversation ( Ephesians 4:22), in other words, they had an old way of walking that they needed to put off. The fact that it was former means that it was their way of life before they were regenerated. When we are born again, we are babes in Christ, and we grow in Christ as we continually keep putting off the old ways, and keep putting on the new man. Additionally, the new man is ever increasing and growing.

2. They were already members of one another. ( Ephesians 4:25)

3. They were indwelt with the Holy Spirit. ( Ephesians 4:30)

4. They were forgiven. ( Ephesians 4:32)

this are clearly saved, regenerate, Spirit indwelt believers.

As far as James 5:19-20 returning to the Lord, the passage does not say that he is regenerated again a second time, this is extropulation on your part. If I say they have no need for a second regeneration, that would be extrapulation on my part. The only thing the text says in James says is that a. it is possible for a believer to depart from the truth, b. it is possible for a fellow believer to turn him back to the truth, ( convert means to cause to return, to bring back) and c. the person that converts the one who has erred saves the one who was erring from death and covers a multitude of sins. No mention of regeneration, no mention of the Spirit having left and coming back, no mention of a third spiritual birth. There may be passages in the Bible that you might use to support your view, yet James 5:19-20 does not make a strong case for it, for it does not mention a second regeneration.

[GaryMac]

Good post, John 14:6. In regards to the parable of the prodigal son, I am not going to give a detailed answer, I will just mention something I learned when I was studying hermeneutics. When one studies parables, it is important to determine the central point that the parable is trying to teach. Looking at the prodigal son, we need to consider the context.

1. Who was Jesus speaking to? The pharisees and scribes.

2. What was the occasion of this parable? The fact that the scribes and pharisees were murmering about Jesus eating with publicans and sinners.

3. We must take note that the parable of the prodigal son is only one part of a larger parable that includes the lost sheep and the lost coin as well. I believe all three parables are one.

4. What is the central point of this parable? It is summed up in the verses below...

Luke 15: 7 I say to you that likewise there will be more joy in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine just persons who need no repentance

Luke 15: 10 Likewise, I say to you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner who repents.”

Luke 15: 32 It was right that we should make merry and be glad, for your brother was dead and is alive again, and was lost and is found.’”

The younger son represented the publicans and sinners who were coming to Jesus, the older son represented the religious scribes and pharisees. There was joy in heaven and in the presence of the angels over the publicans and sinners who were coming to Jesus, yet there was no joy in the hearts of the men who claimed to know God, to love God, and claimed to serve Him.

"It is meet that we should make merry...", in other words Jesus was telling the pharisees that if they really loved God like they claimed to, they would rejoice that sinners were repenting. This is an indictment on the scribes and Pharisees, and possibly an invitation to recognize that their hearts were just as far from God as immoral sinners, and on that realization come to their own senses and repent. Notice the father went out to encourage the older son to come inside and join the celebration, but rather than accepting the invite like the saints and angels do, Jesus never gives the response of the older son. This is because the older son was the ones he was talking to, ( scribes and pharisees), and they needed to make up their mind if they were going to get with God's program or stay outside in the cold wallowing in their own hypocrisy.

As far as in what sense the younger son was alive and then dead then alive again, I cannot say for sure. Since the younger son represents the publicans and sinners, I do not think it is referring to people that were once born again, but that it is speaking of sinners in general. I am open to hear other views, though.

As far as the rest of your post, we are thinking alike in this discussion.

From a different perspective -- The prodigal son message, as with all scriptures is a matter of how we see it. To go along with this understanding is Heb. 6

Heb. 6 Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,
2 Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.
3 And this will we do, if God permit.
4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,
5 And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come,
6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

Here we have a picture of one who in leaving the PRINCIPLES of the doctrine of Christ and as one who has gone on to perfection from these doctrines, our churches, our laws for tradition, and laid a new foundation which is repentance from these dead doctrines, and put his faith toward God instead of these bylaws from baptisms, laying on of hands as some do, and of resurrection of the dead and judgments as some do.

If this person has fallen away from these doctrines to follow faith toward God, Christ in you, having the mind of Christ, it is impossible to bring them back into those bondages because they have tasted what it is to be in Christ which is Gods heavenly gift. And it is impossible to renew them back again because there would be a need for Christ crucified all over again and these see that error. Repenting back to mans doctrines is not the same a repenting oneself to God.

Christ in you simply will not allow one to go back into these bondages. And most will not understand this post at all because doctrines, in which this text describes, will not allow that understanding.

Everyone is prodigal until that first born is dead by Gods will and the second man is raised by Gods will, which is Christ in you back to the Father as one as we are supposed to be. Letting God do it in us instead of us trying to figure it out by doctrines and laws for tradition by which man teaches -- and by Gods Spirit in us is the way to perfection, which is back to the Father as one which is Christ in you.

[glad4mercy]

From a different perspective -- The prodigal son message, as with all scriptures is a matter of how we see it. To go along with this understanding is Heb. 6

Good Bible interpretation first attempts to look at a passage in context so we can see determine, ( through the illumination of the Holy Spirit) what the speaker or writer actually meant, and also what it meant to it's original hearers. We need to avoid pulling the parable of the prodigal out of its immediete context, placing it by itself, then spiritualizing ever detail while forgetting to consider the entire parable as a whole.

Christ in you simply will not allow one to go back into these bondages. And most will not understand this post at all because doctrines, in which this text describes, will not allow that understanding.

Which doctrines prevent a person from understanding the text in Hebrews 6? Please be specific.

Everyone is prodigal until that first born is dead by Gods will and the second man is raised by Gods will, which is Christ in you back to the Father as one as we are supposed to be. Letting God do it in us instead of us trying to figure it out by doctrines and laws for tradition by which man teaches -- and by Gods Spirit in us is the way to perfection, which is back to the Father as one which is Christ in you.

I agree with this, but a distinction must be made between the doctrines of man and the doctrines of Christ. We must hold fast to what Christ taught us, and obey His commandments, for if we say we love Him or if we say we are in Him and He in us, and yet we do not keep His commandments, we lie and do not practice the truth.

[GaryMac]

Good Bible interpretation first attempts to look at a passage in context so we can see determine, ( through the illumination of the Holy Spirit) what the speaker or writer actually meant, and also what it meant to it's original hearers. We need to avoid pulling the parable of the prodigal out of its immediete context, placing it by itself, then spiritualizing ever detail while forgetting to consider the entire parable as a whole.



Which doctrines prevent a person from understanding the text in Hebrews 6? Please be specific.



I agree with this, but a distinction must be made between the doctrines of man and the doctrines of Christ. We must hold fast to what Christ taught us, and obey His commandments, for if we say we love Him or if we say we are in Him and He in us, and yet we do not keep His commandments, we lie and do not practice the truth.

Doctrines of man are -- Of the doctrine of baptisms, (sprinkled, splashed or dunked), and of laying on of hands, (or not laying on of hands), and of resurrection of the dead, (from the grave or in spirit), and of eternal judgment, (you must speak in tongues or you must not speak in tongues, you must do this or you must do that).

The doctrine from Christ is be one with the Father as I am one with Him, Let this same mind be in you who was in Christ Jesus, Be ye therefore perfect even as your Father in heaven is perfect. Pick up that cross and continue where I leave off. Behold the kingdom of God is within you: All the things that pertain to Christ be in you that we are -- and not law for tradition dictated by doctrines of man.

[John146]

Hi, John. The Greek conspicuously uses the participle form; though it is as you say, "they are fallen". But it's their falling-away that is the reason for non-repentance.

I understand your point. I'll have to think more on that before saying any more about it.

I know it sounds kinda "circular", but all the translations agree. "Ease" or "difficulty" is not in the text; he (very likely Paul) describes those who absolutely were once saved, but falling away knowingly they just won't want to repent.

I agree that it's speaking of those who were once saved. The difference in our views is not in whether or not we see them as having once been saved, it's that you see it as speaking of them as being in the process of falling away (with the potential of no longer falling away at some point) while I see it as speaking of them as having fallen away to the point of no return and being given over to their wickedness, similar to what Paul talks about in Romans 1:18-32 and 2 Thess 2:9-12.

No; "deliver-to-satan" conveys receiving the consequences of their sins. Did you look up 1Tim1:20?

Yes, although I was already quite familiar with it.

The point of "deliver-to-satan" was that they be taught not to blaspheme. Seems to be intending to lead them to the same place the Prodigal was when he "came to his senses and repented". Just sayin' that the reason for the "impossibility/powerlessness to restore them to repentance", was their willful sin in the face of former real salvation.

It seems you are assuming that Hymenaeus and Alexander were saved at some point before Paul delivered them "to Satan that they may learn not to blaspheme"? Do you have any specific evidence that would indicate they were once saved before that?

It doesn't say they can; but also doesn't say they can't. Seems that Romans11:23 keeps rearing its head in these discussions.

Please tell me how you understand Romans 11:23 to be related to this discussion. Do you see the Jews who were blinded and cut off as having previously been saved before being blinded and cut off? They were cut off because of unbelief (Rom 11:20). But when did they ever really believe?

I think we're closer than not. Again. :-)

We are. We differ on technicalities, really. We agree that people can be saved and then later fall away and lose their salvation and we agree that it's important to warn people about this since scripture does (such as in the passages from Hebrews). I think that's the main thing.