Does Regeneration Proceed Faith

Doctrine May 21st, 2008

Derek:

A theological question for you. I stumbled across an article on an Armenian blog that doesn’t sit right. It seems to me that the author fails to define regeneration as a reformed/Calvinist would use the term. From what I can tell, the author uses regeneration as a synonym for justification; although he also throws justification in the mix.

Is it better to equate regeneration with awakening, or having our ears/eyes opened (so that faith can come by hearing)? Anyway, if you have time, I would like you comments on the following quote:

To claim that regeneration precedes faith, is to claim that God can bestow life apart from the blood of His Son. It is to claim that God gives life prior to the removal of sin. Since it is sin that causes spiritual death, our sin must first be removed through Christ’s blood before God can give us life. As long as sin remains, death remains. If God can bestow life (regenerate) apart from the the application of Christ’s blood, then the atonement becomes less than the necessary means by which a holy God reconciles sinners to himself (Rom. 5:10; Col. 1:21-23). For this reason, the Calvinistic doctrine of irresistible grace is not sufficiently Christocentric, does not theologically comprehend the nature and necessity of justification, ignores the necessity of union with Christ for salvation, and downplays the seriousness of sins deadly effects.

The Bible is clear that the new life belongs only to those who have been justified through saving union with Christ. Look again at Rom. 5:10,

“For if when we were God’s enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much more having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life!” [ NIV- emphasis mine]

It is only through union with Christ, wrought by the reconciliation of His blood, that we can experience regeneration. Only when we come to be “in Christ” can we experience the life that flows from Him, and this union results from faith (Eph. 1:13; Rom. 5:1). Consider Col. 2:12,

Full article found at htp://arminianperspective.wordpress.com

PS – FWIW, I think the author shoots his theology in the foot by appealing to Rom 5:10, since we were reconciled while enemies, not after we did something.

Thanks for the question,

Your right in that he doesn’t quite explain the Calvinists position on regeneration correctly. I would agree that one of the most common analogies that people use in trying to explain this is that of death. The blog writer even admits that this is a Biblical analogy used by Paul in Ephesians 2 and Colossians 2. My question to the author would be why does the Bible use the picture of death (when I am sure it would conjure up images of physical death to the original readers as it does to modern readers) if Paul didn’t what us to understand our state prior to the regeneration of Christ as hopeless. Still he is correct in saying that there is not a direct correlation between physical death and spiritual death. Being dead in your sins is an active state, being dead physically is not. Yet, that misses the point of the metaphor. When the author states:

“To be dead in sins means that we are cut off from the relationship with God that is necessary for spiritual life. Our sin separates us from a holy God and causes spiritual death. This is both actual and potential. The sinner is presently “dead” because, in the absence of faith, he is not enjoying life giving union with Christ. The sinner is potentially dead because if he continues in this state he will be forever cut off from the presence of the Lord in Hell (2 Thess. 1:9).”

The thing he lacks is the hopelessness of being dead. If you take a look at Ephesians 2, Paul further defines what the sate of deadness is. It is active disobedience. Paul says that we were “sons of disobedience” and “were by nature children of wrath.” We can’t change our nature, I can pretend to be a dog but everyone will see that I am human. They will know because they can see my nature. So if your nature is to be an object of wrath, then you can not change that state. The picture of physical death simply points out that inability to change.

This picture can be seen in Romans 3:10-18;

“as it is written: ‘none is righteous no not one; no one understands; no one seeks for God. All have turned aside; together they have become worthless; no one does good, not even one. Their throat is an open grave; they use their tongues to deceive. The venom of asps is under their lips. Their mouth is full of curses and bitterness. Their feet are swift to shed blood; in their paths are ruin and misery, and the way of peace they have not known There is no fear of God before their eyes.”

This is God assessment of the human race. It is what Paul means when he says we are dead. One misconception that the Arminian camp has is that a Calvinist does not believe in free will. That is not true, we believe that man is free to do what he wants, the problem is that because of his very nature he will always prove Romans 3 to be true. That is what it means to be spiritually dead.

So now on to the quote you sent me and the question about regeneration. His claim is that saying that God changes our nature and gives us faith so that we can believe “is to claim that God can bestow life apart from the blood of His Son.” I think he misses the picture of what this looks like. The Bible tells us that faith comes by hearing. It also tells us that we receive righteousness through faith, evidenced in our believing (Romans 3:21-22). It says that we are saved by grace through faith. Yet that faith is not our own doing but is a gift from God (Ephesians 2:8&9). So we are dead, by our very nature we will not pursue God. God intervenes in our deadness (regeneration) and gives us faith so that at the very same moment we would believe in the message that was preached, and we are cleansed from our sins. These things take place at the same moment, but are dependent on the work of God. Faith, forgiveness of sins (application of the blood of Christ) all take place in that moment of new birth (regeneration). Then, with my eyes open I will respond in action, professing faith and expressing repentance. This can be seen when Paul preached to Lydia, “the Lord opened her heart to give heed to what was said by Paul” (Acts 16:14). Without God acting she would not have been able to respond.

Any other way to view salvation puts the spotlight on my work and not on God’s. If I must believe, choose God, exercise faith, and ask for forgiveness etc. in order to be saved then what brought about my salvation? Is it not my works? I think that the confusion comes most in this argument because we want to evaluate one piece apart from the whole. The author is right in saying that there can be no regeneration apart from the application of Christ’s blood, he is just wrong in his view that Christ’s blood is applied by his will and not God’s. “For those whom he foreknew he also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son . . . and those whom he predestined he also called, and those he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified” (Romans 8:29-30).

It is God who calls us, and the call, through the work of the Holy Spirit, has the power of life because of Christ. The Bible says that he calls us “out of darkness into his marvelous light” (1Peter 2:9); he calls them “into the fellowship of his Son” (1 Cor. 1:9) and “into his own kingdom and glory (1 These 2:12; 1 Peter 5:10, 2 Peter 1:3). This is the picture we get from Jesus calling Lazarus (a dead man) from the tomb to life. The call and the power to respond to the call come from God.

For some more on this subject from those better studied than I, check out these links;

Comments are closed.