Regeneration/Born-Again

[wpr]

bene7:

Dave, it is God who justifies. And He doesn’t reckon Abraham’s faith righteousness until Gen. 15:6 (and as I pointed out, it’s based on the content of that faith). NO WHERE else is it stated. Even James quotes 15:6. Your argument is not with me, and you can’t change God’s word. Faith doesn’t justify, Dave, God does. And he determines the content of the faith through which He justifies the ungodly.

Blessings,
Bene

Bene, now you’ve confused me. Did you not assert earlier that you were not using Gn 15:6 to tell me when forensic rightiousness had been imputed. (was it Sandusky or did I just misunderstand?)

If you assert the moment of forensic imputation was Gn 15:6, this gets us back to Red’s earlier question (and mine). How you reconcile Jm 2:21(Gn 22), Gal 3:6 (Gn 15), Rm 4: 3 (Gn 15) and the supposed moment of imputed rightiousness in Gn 15:6?

I don’t buy your justifciation/sanctification argument. It’s way out of context in James.

 

[bene7]

Redbandito:

Did you ignore my last post? You never address the issue Bene. You ignore all rebuttals. It’s all good. I agree, God does justify the UNGODLY. That’s never been the question. The question is what happens to the UNGODLY once they’re justified. You’re a smart guy Bene, but I think you might be too smart for you own good here.

“…and whom He justified these He also glorified” (Rom. 8:30). That’s why you need to read ALL of Paul’s letter to the Romans, Red. He gets around to answering your question.

“He who did not spare His own Son, but delivered Him up for us all, how will He not also with Him FREELY give us all things” (Rom. 8:32)?

It is God who justifies the ungody, Red. Not faith, not works, not even “grace works.” Justification is based solely on the redemption which is in Christ Jesus (Rom. 3:24).

Blessing,
Bene

Hey, Red, take me with you to Hawaii, we’ll dicuss this face to face.

 

[sandusky]

Redbandito,

On this thread, and I believe on another thread, you said to me, “you are not interested in the truth, but only in winning the argument.” You also said that all I do is assert, re-assert, run to my thesis, and impose my theology on the biblical text. I think that you are projecting your behavior onto me.

IMO, you remind me of a fighter who runs from his opponent each round, and then at the end of the round, claims victory for the round.

Redbandito:

Nope. Paul clearly states it in Romans 2:7. You’re just ignoring it. You obviously don’t know what "begging the question: means.

You were begging the question, Red.

IMHO, every man, including myself, and bene7, is born with a Pelagian heart. It is only after the H.S. confronts him with his wickedness, that he sees that the truth is he cooperates with no one, but is born along by God the Spirit, and he himself merits nothing from God, nor does he deserve anything from God, but death. I don’t think you’ve confronted that yet.

Redbandito:

Uhhh, no. I did say that Jesus meant that. You have a conveniently short memory. What Jesus did not say is what specifically a believer is. You read into believer, your own imputation theology. Nobody is fooled by your verbal gymnastics.

John 5:24
24 “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.

Jesus clearly says what, specifically, a believer is. Can you pick it out?

IHMO, I think a lot of people are fooled by your verbal gymnastics, but I’m not.

Have a safe trip to Hawaii.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

It appears that Bene thinks Abraham did not have genuine faith in Gen 12, but Sandusky agrees with C.H. Spurgeon that he did. Is that correct?

 

[bene7]

Redbandito:

He quotes 15:6 and applies it to 22. What is so hard to understand about this? You are completely ignoring the clear words of Scripture.

Yes he does, but Abraham “demonstrates” the faith by which he was justified back in Gen. 15. Which is the point James is making: “SHOW ME your faith without works (which cannot be shown), and I will SHOW YOU my faith BY my works.” James does not say Abraham’s justification was “perfected” or “completed,” but his faith was (Ja. 2:22). All having to do with the “promised son.” But only ONCE is he ever reckoned righteous by God. Once is enough!!

Blessings,
Bene

 

[sandusky]

itsjustdave1988:

It appears that Bene thinks Abraham did not have genuine faith in Gen 12, but Sandusky agrees with C.H. Spurgeon that he did. Is that correct?

Even without having read bene’s post, I know that he would agree.

As Paul says, the just shall live by faith.

But one is not justified and re-justified, over and over again, but once.

“Having been justified.” Past completed action, with continuing result.

 

[Redbandito]

sandusky:

Redbandito,

On this thread, and I believe on another thread, you said to me, “you are not interested in the truth, but only in winning the argument.” You also said that all I do is assert, re-assert, run to my thesis, and impose my theology on the biblical text. I think that you are projecting your behavior onto me.

IMO, you remind me of a fighter who runs from his opponent each round, and then at the end of the round, claims victory for the round.

You were begging the question, Red.

IMHO, every man, including myself, and bene7, is born with a Pelagian heart. It is only after the H.S. confronts him with his wickedness, that he sees that the truth is he cooperates with no one, but is born along by God the Spirit, and he himself merits nothing from God, nor does he deserve anything from God, but death. I don’t think you’ve confronted that yet.

John 5:24
24 “Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.

Jesus clearly says what, specifically, a believer is. Can you pick it out?

IHMO, I think a lot of people are fooled by your verbal gymnastics, but I’m not.

Have a safe trip to Hawaii.

I’ve got 2000 years of Church history saying that I am not begging the question Sandusky. That’s cool. Like I said, I am fine with agreeing to disagree. But you are right, people are not “fooled” by my verbal gymnastics. They are convicted by the H.S. of what is true and blatantly obvious. The fact that I happen to be espousing what is true is just the grace of God. If there is one thing conversations like this do it is to show me how fortunate I am to be Catholic. I am so blessed that this stuff is “blatantly obvious” to me. There are very smart people, with a sincere heart for God (including Bene and You) that get caught up in these traps. I know that it is only by grace that I have been able to see the Scripture as it is. I pray for that grace for myself everyday. I will pray that the H.S. give you that grace too, wherever that might lead you. Above all things, His will be done.

 

[Philthy]

Philthy:

Endurance (of faith) is an element of salvation, not a cause of it. Even you say that those with saving faith will persevere to the end. Do you not?

bene7:

I did not say “to the end.”

Interesting that you chose to nitpik on “to the end” and ignored the entire comment I made with respect to perseverance which made no reference to “to the end” - I wonder why. No problem, I’ll repost it for you. Also interesting that you did not clearly articulate whether you actually disagree with the statement - all you have said is that you didn’t say “to the end”. Im not sure what perseverance would be otherwise, but you never cease to amaze me with your imagination and I await your clarification. Does that mean you disagree with the statement or not? Please be clear. Here is what you actually said from a prior post:

Bene7:

Now I do believe, however, that a true believer will persevere in faith (i.e., in Christ).

Do you believe that a true believer will persevere -to the end - in faith? Yes or no please.

Bene7:

I do not at all relate “perseverence” in respect to faith with that Matthew passage.

It is irrelevent whether you relate it to that passage or not. It is another concept, bene and it matters not whether you tie to a verse. Here is what I asked you last post - and you conveniently ignored:

Philthy:

As you said, those who are saved WILL PERSEVERE in faith. Do you not believe that it follows that if you are conscious that you are not persevering that you need to consider the extent of your faith? If not, then you don’t actually believe that those who are saved WILL persevere. Take your pick, but you can’t have it both ways.
Available Translations and Versions for Jam 2:20
NLT - Jam 2:20 -Fool! When will you ever learn that faith that does not result in good deeds is useless?
NKJV - Jam 2:20 -But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead?
NASB - Jam 2:20 -But are you willing to recognize, you foolish fellow, that faith without works is useless?
RSV - Jam 2:20 -Do you want to be shown, you shallow man, that faith apart from works is barren?
Webster - Jam 2:20 -But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
Young - Jam 2:20 -And dost thou wish to know, O vain man, that the faith apart from the works is dead?
Darby - Jam 2:20 -But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
ASV - Jam 2:20 -But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith apart from works is barren?

Bene7:

Phil, that verse in Matt. 24:13 states NOTHING about endurance “of faith.” It simply says “But to the one who endures to the end, it is he who shall be saved.” **It is you who reads into that verse your own doctrinal bias. **Bene

Bene, the verse SAYS “shall be SAVED”. Im not reading into it, it says “shall be saved” - how many interpretations of “shall be saved” are there? Eternal life is the usual context of that word in the NT.- don’t you agree? Yes or No? So if I interpret shall be saved to mean what it USUALLY means, is that "reading into it’? I don’t think so. It doesn’t mean that my interpretation is, in fact, correct but that is what the Gospel message is about: eternal salvation. When that word appears it is only natural, logical and contextual to assume it to mean eternal salvation. I am not reading into it.

Phil

 

[wpr]

itsjustdave1988:

It appears that Bene thinks Abraham did not have genuine faith in Gen 12, but Sandusky agrees with C.H. Spurgeon that he did. Is that correct?

Hello Dave,

This point has me spinning like a top. I wonder if you can help. Is there anything to the notion that James 2:21 really means Abraham was sanctified? Rather than “justified” in the Catholic sense?

This would have to do with the dual meaning of some Greek words I believe.

 

[Philthy]

Kendy:

So, I have generally given up on this thread so I hope this isn’t too far off what you guys have been talking about.

There’s a difference between justification and sanctification. Right? The first cannot be increased but the second reflects an on-going process. Am I wrong?

Kendy

You mean it’s not obvious from the bible?

 

[Philthy]

bene7:

And this is where you deny EVERYTHING I said in my post. You cannot “fall” from that which is eternal.

And why not, exactly? Eternal life exists independent of my participation or lack of participation in it. What was the state of Adam and Eve prior to their sin?

bene7:

You can’t lose that which you couldn’t earn in the first place.

And why not, exactly? The manner in which something is gained; ie by merit or otherwise, does not, of necessity, influence its permanence with respect to the individual.

bene7:

That’s always been the inconsistency of Catholicism, what they build up they eventually tear down.

Consistency is not necessarily all it is cracked up to be. You, for example, are consinstently reaching conclusions which you fail to substantiate and/or which do not follow from that which you have established. Consistency in unreliability is no prize.

Phil

 

[Kendy]

Philthy:

You mean it’s not obvious from the bible?

I mean no such thing. I was just wondering if my interpretation is accurate.

Kendy

 

[wpr]

sandusky:

Even without having read bene’s post, I know that he would agree.

As Paul says, the just shall live by faith.

But one is not justified and re-justified, over and over again, but once.

“Having been justified.” Past completed action, with continuing result.

Sandusky,

See post 273. Bene does not agree with you. He says the imputation happened in Gn 15:6. I guess you guys disagree on that point.

Frankly this new concept of “the content of that faith” is interesting. I wonder how a OSAS beleiver can be sure his faith is adequate? If only God knows, “the faith through which He justifies the ungodly”, then how are you sure of your salvation? Are you God?

Post 273 by Bene

Dave, it is God who justifies. And He doesn’t reckon Abraham’s faith righteousness until Gen. 15:6 (and as I pointed out, it’s based on the content of that faith). NO WHERE else is it stated. Even James quotes 15:6. Your argument is not with me, and you can’t change God’s word. Faith doesn’t justify, Dave, God does. And he determines the content of the faith through which He justifies the ungodly.

Blessings,
Bene

Post 283 by Dave

It appears that Bene thinks Abraham did not have genuine faith in Gen 12, but Sandusky agrees with C.H. Spurgeon that he did. Is that correct?

---

God bless,

Dave

 

[Philthy]

Kendy:

I mean no such thing. I was just wondering if my interpretation is accurate.

Kendy

It was a joke, Kendy - If it were perfectly clear from the bible, why would you be wondering if your interpretation was accurate? Who’s interpretation is the “gold standard” by which all others are judged?

 

[itsjustdave1988]

For Sandusky,

I gathered from Bene’s reply to me…

And He doesn’t reckon Abraham’s faith righteousness until Gen. 15:6 (and as I pointed out, it’s based on the content of that faith).

… that you and he disagree as to when Abraham had genuine faith. It is genuine faith that justifies, right?

Contrary to Bene’s implication, I too agree with C.H. Spurgeon.

The the faith Abraham had in Gen 12 was genuine faith, which necessarily justifies. We are justified by faith, unless it is “dead faith.” Abraham’s obedience shows us clearly that his faith was not the “dead faith” that Scripture speaks of. Surely Abraham did not have “dead faith” in Gen 12, since this moment of faith is upheld as a witness to the kind of faith Christians are to have by the Sacred Author of Hebrews (Heb 11:8). Which is precisely why C.H. Spurgeon also presents Abraham’s faith in Gen 12 as genuine faith. Genuine faith in God is justifying faith!!

If not, what kind of faith did Abraham have in Gen 12, non-justifying faith? How can this be correct based upon the text of Genesis and the Epistle of Hebrews?? How does a Protestant know when he finally has “justifying” faith, as opposed the to the supposed “non-justifying” faith which Abraham had in Gen 12??

For Bene… You implies that Abraham’s faith was not of the right “content” to be justifying. My question, what was lacking in Abraham’s faith in Gen 12??? Why does the Sacred Author of Hebrews list this among the examples where the men of old had faith, if it was a faith that lacked the right content?

How do you know that you have justifying faith or the supposed unjustifying faith that Abraham had in Gen 12??

 

[Redbandito]

Philthy:

It was a joke, Kendy - If it were perfectly clear from the bible, why would you be wondering if your interpretation was accurate? Who’s interpretation is the “gold standard” by which all others are judged?

Philthy,

Take it easy on Kendy. She is an inquiring mind. She has honest questions and is truly open to truth regardless of who or where it comes from. Thanks bro.

 

[sandusky]

Dave, you said:

I gathered from Bene’s reply to me…

bene7:

And He doesn’t reckon Abraham’s faith righteousness until Gen. 15:6 (and as I pointed out, it’s based on the content of that faith).

itsjustdave1988:

… that you and he disagree as to when Abraham had genuine faith. It is genuine faith that justifies, right?

Dave, you quote Spurgeon as saying that Abraham had a “genuine faith” in Gen 12, and I agreed. I also agree with bene, that the articulation of righteousness for Abraham comes from Moses in Gen 15.

Now you say:

itsjustdave1988:

The the faith Abraham had in Gen 12 was genuine faith, which necessarily justifies. We are justified by faith, unless it is “dead faith.” Abraham’s obedience shows us clearly that his faith was not the “dead faith” that Scripture speaks of. Surely Abraham did not have “dead faith” in Gen 12, since this moment of faith is upheld as a witness to the kind of faith Christians are to have by the Sacred Author of Hebrews (Heb 11:8). Which is precisely why C.H. Spurgeon also presents Abraham’s faith in Gen 12 as genuine faith. Genuine faith in God is justifying faith!!

If not, what kind of faith did Abraham have in Gen 12, non-justifying faith? How can this be correct based upon the text of Genesis and the Epistle of Hebrews?? How does a Protestant know when he finally has “justifying” faith, as opposed the to the supposed “non-justifying” faith which Abraham had in Gen 12??

So, did Spurgeon say a “genuine faith,” or, did he say, “genuine faith which necessarily justifies?” It seems to me that you are now adding to what Charlie said.

I have five volumes of his sermons, give me the title and date, and I’ll read it, and get back to you.

You are smelling blood where there is none; and dissension where there is none. You know, Dave, there is dissension within your ranks as well.

Brendan Byrne, a Jesuit and member of the Pontifical Biblical Commission, Joseph Fitzmyer, professor emeritus of biblical studies at the Catholic University of America, and Raymond E. Brown, late professor emeritus of biblical studies at Union Theological Seminary, New York, all concede that the Pauline dikaioo has primarily and fundamentally a forensic meaning (to declare righteous), as I have stated, and shown on this thread. (The info concerning those gentlemen is current as of 2001, I don’t know what they are up to today.)

Also, the Second Vatican Council document, Dogmatic Constitution on the Church (1964), that asserts on the one hand Trent’s medieval doctrine of justification also makes the entire doctrine of justification irrelevant on the other hand by teaching that all sincere people are saved, whatever their faith or lack of it (see para. 16).

So the discussion, from your side, is really moot. One need not be justified, merely sincere.

 

[wpr]

Sandusky,

Bene clearly stated he beleives the forensic imputation was at Gn 15:6. If you disagree with him, its fine. But it does not follow that even IF some Catholic theologins agree with some point or points you’ve made that your argument is anymore or less valid.

In my view, your position is a bit more honest, but frankly it leaves more holes in reconciling Jm 2, Rm 4, Gal 3, and Gn 12,15,22. I think Bene knows that. I beleive Bene uses Paul’s reference to Gn 15:6 to support forensic imputation precisely because he beleives it is a specific example of such. (I don’t see it though)

I think Bene’s position actually keeps imputed forensic salvation more intact. He’s a bit more like Mr. Calvin who recommends…“when you discuss justification beware of allowing any mention of love or of works, but resolutely hold onto the exclusive adverb”. He’s very resolute. (Red might say evasive)

Overall, I’d say you and Bene are in a pickle here. Can you please decide among yourselves whose right and get back to me?

 

[Kendy]

Philthy:

It was a joke, Kendy - If it were perfectly clear from the bible, why would you be wondering if your interpretation was accurate? Who’s interpretation is the “gold standard” by which all others are judged?

Now, isn’t that the million dollar question?

Kendy

 

[bene7]

itjustdave1988:

It appears that Bene thinks Abraham did not have genuine faith in Gen 12, but Sandusky agrees with C.H. Spurgeon that he did. Is that correct?

Of course he had genuine faith in both Gen. 12 and 22. In Gen. 12 he obediently left his homeland. In Gen. 22 he was even willing to offer up his promised son knowing, according to faith, God would have to resurrect him.

Notice, Dave, that it was a three day journey for Abraham and Isaac to Mt. Moriah. For those three days in the mind of Abraham Isaac was already dead. Sound familiar? Nevertheless, based on the promise made to him in Gen. 15, he knew God must resurrect Isaac in order to fulfill the promise. Of course we know that God prohibited Abraham from actually going through with it, but it beautifully illustrated (prefigured) what God would actually do with His own Son centuries later for the world. Abraham said: “God would provide for Himself the lamb…” (Gen. 22:8). Jesus said: “Your father Abraham rejoiced to see My day, and he saw it and was glad” (Jn. 8:56).

HEB 11:17-19 “By faith Abraham, when he was tested, offered up Isaac; and he who had received the promises (i.e., back in Gen. 15) was offering up his only begotten son; it was he to whom it was said, “In Isaac your descendants shall be called.” He considered that God is able to raise men even from the dead; from which he also received him back as a type.”

As a type of Christ. Abraham’s faith to leave his homeland was not reckoned to him as righteousness. Not even when he was willing to offer up his “only” son. But the faith that God honored, by which he justified Abraham, was in the context of his believing the promises regarding his son, which were yet future in Gen. 15:1-6. Unlike the other two instances you keep wanting to include, in Gen. 15 Abraham did nothing but BELIEVE what God had promised in word, and God (at that time, and only at that time) reckoned it (his faith) to him as righteousness. No works were involved.

In like manner, God now reckons as righteousness the faith of all who do no more than believe the word concerning His only begotten Son, whom He actually did offer up to sacrifice; a work of eternal redemption. And through that work (the only work required) He is now free to, gift-wise (without a cause), save, justify, and bestow eternal life to all men who do no more than put their faith in Christ.

ROM. 4:25-5:1 “*He who was delivered up because of our transgressions, and was raised because of our justification].” Therefore having been justified by faith we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ"

God is never called “merciful” when he justifies the ungodly through faith. He is considered “just” because of the offering up of His Son on the cross:

ROM 3:26 “…for the demonstration, I say, of His righteousness at the present time, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus.”

This teaching of Paul’s is didactic, not optimistic! There’s a God honoring, Christ glorifying reason why God reckoned Abraham’s faith to him as righteousness only in Gen. 15. And that reason is relevant to this very day in view of the cross of Christ and one’s complete faith in what He accomplished there on his behalf.

Blessings,
Bene*