# Regeneration: New & Old



## Christusregnat (Mar 19, 2008)

Hello All,

Regeneration: what is it? Is it exclusively the immediate work of God upon the soul of a sinner? Is it a lifelong process of God working on the sinner?

The older view appears to be that regeneration is the lifelong process of salvation, initiated (generally speaking) at baptism, continuing to effectual call, growing in sanctification, mortification, etc., and culminating in glorification.

The newer view appears to be that regeneration is the one-time act of bringing a lost sinner from death to life (being "born again").

Questions for discussion: 

Do the Scriptures support either of these views, exclusive of the other? 

Do the Scriptures teach a mixture of these two views?

Do the Scriptures teach an entirely different view, unrecognized in either view?

If you answered any of the foregoing, please provide scriptural and confessional support. 

Godspeed,


----------



## danmpem (Mar 19, 2008)

I'm wondering, do you mean "old" in the OT way, or the early church fathers way?


----------



## JohnTombes (Mar 19, 2008)

Some Puritans and older Reformers understand salvation as a whole and the delineation of all its parts as a series of synecdoches in the morphology of conversion. Following Ramist categories, they worked from the whole to the parts making distinctions, without separation. Each part, however, still represents (signifies) the whole. It is more of a methodo-'logical' dillemma. So, conversion is a life-long process actuated by and sustained by the work of the Spirit. Regeneration is viewed as not just the instantaneous act whereby sinners are made alive, but theologically, and logically, the act of keeping the sinner made a saint alive in Christ. Actually, viewed in this way, baptism has sanctifying efficacy. Sanctification is a part of soteriology doctrinally and necessarily.

Mike


----------



## Christusregnat (Mar 20, 2008)

danmpem said:


> I'm wondering, do you mean "old" in the OT way, or the early church fathers way?



Sorry Dan, 

Some argue that Calvin and other early reformers would have talked about regneration as an on-going process, and that only later did the reformed adopt the idea of an immediate work of God upon the soul of man.

Any scriptural support for either side?

Cheers,

Adam


----------



## Christusregnat (Mar 20, 2008)

JohnTombes said:


> Some Puritans and older Reformers understand salvation as a whole and the delineation of all its parts as a series of synecdoches in the morphology of conversion. Following Ramist categories, they worked from the whole to the parts making distinctions, without separation. Each part, however, still represents (signifies) the whole. It is more of a methodo-'logical' dillemma. So, conversion is a life-long process actuated by and sustained by the work of the Spirit. Regeneration is viewed as not just the instantaneous act whereby sinners are made alive, but theologically, and logically, the act of keeping the sinner made a saint alive in Christ. Actually, viewed in this way, baptism has sanctifying efficacy. Sanctification is a part of soteriology doctrinally and necessarily.
> 
> Mike



Any scriptural support for these positions John?

Cheers,

Adam


----------



## danmpem (Mar 20, 2008)

Christusregnat said:


> danmpem said:
> 
> 
> > I'm wondering, do you mean "old" in the OT way, or the early church fathers way?
> ...



I've only been exposed to the more contemporary idea that regeneration is the immediate act of God. The only verse that I know of regarding the topic is Titus 3:5 (just goes to show you how much I really know). I would love to hear different Reformed views + scripture on it.


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Mar 20, 2008)

Christusregnat said:


> JohnTombes said:
> 
> 
> > Some Puritans and older Reformers understand salvation as a whole and the delineation of all its parts as a series of synecdoches in the morphology of conversion. Following Ramist categories, they worked from the whole to the parts making distinctions, without separation. Each part, however, still represents (signifies) the whole. It is more of a methodo-'logical' dillemma. So, conversion is a life-long process actuated by and sustained by the work of the Spirit. Regeneration is viewed as not just the instantaneous act whereby sinners are made alive, but theologically, and logically, the act of keeping the sinner made a saint alive in Christ. Actually, viewed in this way, baptism has sanctifying efficacy. Sanctification is a part of soteriology doctrinally and necessarily.
> ...



Adam,

What Mike is getting at is that the early Reformers sort of subsumed the things that we separate in the ordo salutis into the term regeneration. Regeneration, then, would not only include what we think of in terms of God making us alive but also faith, repentance, justification, and sanctification that follow.

There is a reason why the different aspects of salvation were distinguished: namely because of abuses that would see a logical priority of faith prior to regeneration or even others who see our growth in grace or perfected faith as the grounds of justification.

Thus, current parlance is to use the term regeneration to the idea of being brought from spiritual death to spiritual life as when Christ tells Nicodemus that a man cannot even see the Kingdom unless he is born from above.

Now, assuming that men keep their categories straight, the ordo is useful but we also need to be careful that we don't try to compartmentalize our salvation as if justification and sanctification have separate ends for instance. One of the problems with many Churches today, in fact, is that they will do a good job of teaching that men begin by the Spirit in faith but then they don't continue to ground the sanctification of a man on the basis that he has been created for good works and that his regeneration, repentance, faith, and justification were birthed by God that He might live unto Him. Sanctification "programs" sometimes tend to take on a life of their own and confuse the believer that by the doing of these deeds they are keeping themselves in the faith that they might ultimately be approved of God. Sanctification, rightly viewed, is a fruit of our having been justified and united to Christ and is a Gospel fruit.

I don't know if I'm doing a good job of describing this. I just can appreciate why one might use one term (regeneration) to refer to the multiple concepts because God has elected us from Eternity for His ends, made us alive to give us hearts that would respond to His call, justified us by the instrument of our faith, and then uses our justificaiton as the grounds of our living unto Him. We've been made holy that we might be holy and are becoming holy that we might be presented to Him, along with the whole Church, on the last day. We have been saved, are saved, are being saved, and will be saved all at the same time.

From our standpoint then, it's not enough to merely look at salvation in eternity in the abstract (God's election) but we lay hold of Christ as He has been made known to us in the Covenant of Grace in time and space. But just because we've believed and are justified doesn't mean that salvation is completed. We are made upright that we might press in to the Kingdom of heaven, to have hearts and lives aflame for Him, and all ultimately to His glory when His sons are revealed.

But, getting back to the main point, the reason why we can't just jump to the conclusion of the matter in an introductory explanation of salvation is because there are many competing views about how a man is born again and we need to break it apart to ensure that men are not distorting the Gospel by forgetting that they are dead in their sins and trespasses and that God's election, predestination, call, and regeneration must come before we are able to respond with the faith He has gifted us with.


----------



## DTK (Mar 20, 2008)

Christusregnat said:


> Hello All,
> 
> Regeneration: what is it? Is it exclusively the immediate work of God upon the soul of a sinner? Is it a lifelong process of God working on the sinner?
> 
> ...


Just addressing your initial question alone, it is both, though today we usually limit the term to the implantation of a new principle of life. Calvin usually employed the term as a life-long process of renewal, but there were times when he used it in the more narrow sense as we do today. 

*John Calvin (1509-1564):* Now by saying “all” he surely makes God the author of spiritual life from beginning to end. Previously he had taught the same thing in other words: that believers are from God in Christ [Ephesians 1:1; 1 Corinthians 8:6]. Here he clearly commends the new creation, which sweeps away everything of our common nature. We ought to understand here an antithesis between Adam and Christ, which he explains more clearly in another place, where he teaches that “we are his workmanship, created in Christ for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them” [Ephesians 2:10, cf. Vg.]. For he would prove our salvation a free gift [cf. Ephesians 2:5], because the beginning of every good is from the second creation, which we attain in Christ. And yet if even the least ability came from ourselves, we would also have some share of the merit. But Paul, to strip us, argues that we deserve nothing because “we have been created in Christ... for good works which God prepared beforehand” [Ephesians 2:20, cf. Vg.]. He means by these words that all parts of good works from their first impulse belong to God. In this way the prophet, after saying in the psalm that we are God’s handiwork, so that we may not share it with him, immediately adds: “And we ourselves have not done it” [Psalm 100:3 p.]. *It is clear from the context that he is speaking of regeneration, which is the beginning of the spiritual life;* for he goes on to say that “we are his people, and the sheep of his pasture” [Psalm 100:3]. Moreover, we see how, not simply content to have given God due praise for our salvation, he expressly excludes us from all participation in it. It is as if he were saying that not a whit remains to man to glory in, for the whole of salvation comes from God. _Institutes of the Christian Religion_, Vol. 2, ed. John T. McNeill and trans. Ford Lewis Battles, (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, reprinted 1977), Book II.3.6, p. 298.

DTK


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Mar 20, 2008)

Thanks DTK. Much more succinctly stated.


----------



## BobVigneault (Mar 20, 2008)

Let me restate the important cautions that Rich mentioned only with smaller, bite sized words for the newbie. If you are like me then you know what it means to 'resume, consume, assume and presume' but when Rich said 'subsume', you realized again that there is a special language that 'theologs' speak in. "Conflate" is another one of those words for me. I'm still thinking that to 'conflate' means to fill four tires at once with air. OK, that's the end of my intro.

One thing Rich said, and this is so important, is be careful about how you treat the 'order of salvation' (ordo sulutis). This order (and there are several variations) is a LOGICAL sequence of the benefits of salvation. Think of salvation as a package, a suitcase. 'God SAVES sinners', 'Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be SAVED' - these are simple phrases but too simple for the theologian. The theologian wants to know what is in the suitcase? Well, by going to scripture we can make a list of the elements of 'salvation'. Then we try and put them into a logical order. The key word is 'logical' as opposed to 'chronological'. When we try and arrange the list chronologically, _in time_, we run into troubles.

By trying to make the list chronological we will run the risk of confusing important benefits, for example: justification with sanctification, regeneration with conversion, and so on.

So even in Pastor King's quote from Calvin you can see where this confusion can create a problem. 


> *It is clear from the context that he is speaking of regeneration, which is the beginning of the spiritual life*



If one interprets the word 'beginning' as the logical beginning of the benefits of salvation then we will be ok. If one interprets that same word as the 'chronological' beginning then we might ask, "is the benefit just a 'jump start' for salvation or does it continue."

This is where definitions are all important. I might say that I once found the Lord's Day to be nothing special but know I hold it with great esteem because the Lord regenerated my thinking. Well that would be true but it could be confusing. That would be better described as 'sanctification' or 'transformation' (Rom. 12). But some might say "yes but that is the ongoing process of regeneration." One could also say "it's the ongoing process of 'conversion'."

So definitions and logical vs. chronological order must be established when these types of questions come up. Many times the questions are answered simply not by debate but by agreement on a definition.

So the question here is, has the definition of 'regeneration' changed since the reformers?


----------



## PuritanCovenanter (Mar 20, 2008)

Christusregnat said:


> danmpem said:
> 
> 
> > I'm wondering, do you mean "old" in the OT way, or the early church fathers way?
> ...



Dr. R. Scott Clark recommended a book to me on this topic and I couldn't afford it at the time. He did acknowledge that this was true, if I am not mistaken. Regeneration does take on a more precise meaning during the Reformation. Let's see if he will chime in and tell us what the book is he recommended and tell us a little more maybe.


----------



## Christusregnat (Mar 20, 2008)

SemperFideles said:


> Christusregnat said:
> 
> 
> > But, getting back to the main point, the reason why we can't just jump to the conclusion of the matter in an introductory explanation of salvation is because there are many competing views about how a man is born again and we need to break it apart to ensure that men are not distorting the Gospel by forgetting that they are dead in their sins and trespasses and that God's election, predestination, call, and regeneration must come before we are able to respond with the faith He has gifted us with.
> ...


----------



## Christusregnat (Mar 20, 2008)

BobVigneault said:


> So the question here is, has the definition of 'regeneration' changed since the reformers?



Bob,

Indeed a good question. Is it possible, however, that the sometimes confusing language was because Calvin and other reformers had not thought all the way through the question of definition? In other words, could it be that Calvin's definition of regeneration was as precisely defined as... say... John Murray's?

More importantly, did the definition of regeneration changes from the time Scripture was first written until Calvin's day?

Thanks for conflating my theological Chevy! 

Godspeed,

Adam


----------



## Christusregnat (Mar 20, 2008)

PuritanCovenanter said:


> Christusregnat said:
> 
> 
> > danmpem said:
> ...



Dr. R. Scott Clark responding to my post???

To Quote Napoleon Dynamite: "SSSSSWEEET!"



Adam


----------



## DTK (Mar 20, 2008)

> Does scripture even give us a basic concept of regeneration. If so, where (chapters, verses, etc.)?


In terms of the implantation of a new principle of life, i.e. when Christ resurrects us from deadness in sin, here are a few texts...

*Ezekiel 36:25-27* 
25 "Then I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean; I will cleanse you from all your filthiness and from all your idols. 
26 "I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit within you; I will take the heart of stone out of your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. 
27 "I will put My Spirit within you and cause you to walk in My statutes, and you will keep My judgments and do them. 
(Many Reformed theologians believe Jesus spoke to Nicodemas in John 3 with Ezekiel 36 in mind).

*John 1:12-13* 
12 But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name: 
13 who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God. 

*2 Corinthians 4:6* 
6 For it is the God who commanded light to shine out of darkness, *who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.* Notice the radical nature of what Paul is saying...He likens God's work of new creation to His work of creation, "Let there be light." The same God who commanded "let there be light" is the one who shines in our hearts. If I may say it reverently - For darkened sinners, it is God who turns on the light, and the switch is in His pocket, not ours. 

*Ephesians 2:1-6* 
1 And *you He made alive*, who were dead in trespasses and sins, 
2 in which you once walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit who now works in the sons of disobedience, 
3 among whom also we all once conducted ourselves in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind, and were by nature children of wrath, just as the others. 
4 But God, who is rich in mercy, because of His great love with which He loved us, 
5 even when we were dead in trespasses, *made us alive together with Christ* (by grace you have been saved), 
6 and raised us up together, and made us sit together in the heavenly places in Christ Jesus... 

*Colossians 2:13* And you, being dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, *He has made alive together with Him*, having forgiven you all trespasses, 

James 1:18 
18 *Of His own will He brought us forth by the word of truth*, that we might be a kind of firstfruits of His creatures.

*1 Peter 1:22-23* 
22 Since you have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit in sincere love of the brethren, love one another fervently with a pure heart, 
23 *having been born again*, not of corruptible seed but incorruptible, through the word of God which lives and abides forever, 

*1 John 3:9* 
9 *Whoever has been born of God* does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because *he has been born of God.* (There are other instances of this in 1 John).

Notice that with the exception possibly of Ezekiel 36 where God is promising what He will do, this act of God is described in the past tense rather than on-going. This is one of the reasons that has led Reformed theologians to use the term "regeneration" in the more narrow sense, i.e., at the very beginning of one's new life in Christ.

This is rushed on my part, but I pray you find it useful.

DTK


----------



## Poimen (Mar 20, 2008)

DTK said:


> *1 John 3:9*
> 9 *Whoever has been born of God* does not sin, for His seed remains in him; and he cannot sin, because *he has been born of God.* (There are other instances of this in 1 John).
> 
> this act of God is described in the past tense rather than on-going.



One other significant (with regards to regeneration) past tense verse in 1 John is *1 John 5:1*

"Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God"

'Whoever believes' is in the present tense while the 'is born of God' is the perfect tense implying a past action (regeneration) with present results (believing that Jesus is the Christ or simply, faith).


----------



## Christusregnat (Mar 20, 2008)

DTK said:


> > Does scripture even give us a basic concept of regeneration. If so, where (chapters, verses, etc.)?
> 
> 
> In terms of the implantation of a new principle of life, i.e. when Christ resurrects us from deadness in sin, here are a few texts...
> ...



Excellent info! Thanks for passing it along. So far, the definition appears to be a once-for-all radical change, but one which has ongoing effects.

Anyone to argue for the "older" view based on Scripture?

Cheers,

Adam


----------



## Poimen (Mar 20, 2008)

Certainly the earliest Reformed confessions spoke of a regeneration much like we do today:

*Belgic Confession* (1561): Article 35 "The Holy Supper of Our Lord Jesus Christ"

Now those who are regenerated have in them a twofold life, the one corporal and temporal, which they have from the first birth and is common to all men; the other, spiritual and heavenly, which is given them in their second birth, which is effected by the Word of the gospel, in the communion of the body of Christ; and this life is not common, but is peculiar to God's elect.

*Heidelberg Catechism* (1563): Q&A 8

Q. But are we so depraved that we are completely incapable of any good and prone to all evil?
A. Yes, unless we are born again by the Spirit of God.

See also the *Second Helvetic Confession*, Chapter 9


----------



## Poimen (Mar 20, 2008)

In addition Calvin says:

“For if we consider the peculiar character of baptism, surely it is an entrance and a sort of initiation into the church, through which we are numbered among God’s people: _a sign of our spiritual regeneration, through which we are reborn as children of God._ On the other hand, the Supper is given to older persons who, having passed tender infancy, can now take solid food.” (emphasis mine)
-Calvin’s _Institutes_, Book 4, Chapter 16.30


----------



## DTK (Mar 20, 2008)

Christusregnat said:


> Anyone to argue for the "older" view based on Scripture?


Oh goodness, I hope my prior post wasn't misleading. Let me hasten to add that Calvin's usual use of the term regeneration for our whole process of renewal in Christ is indeed legitimate and very orthodox. God's purpose in redemption, indeed in the new creation is to restore in us what was lost in Adam, namely the image of the Lord Jesus Christ. The whole process of sanctification, for instance, is descriptive of that very reality. This is why, for example, John Murray emphasized what he called "definitive sanctification," i.e., our initial break with and death to sin, as well as "progessive sanctification," which is the process in our lives of mortifying (putting to death sin in our members) in order to restore in us the image of our Lord Jesus Christ. All of this can rightly be described as regeneration in its broader sense.

One example of this in Scripture, and there are many, is *2 Corinthians 3:18*, 18 But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, *are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as by the Spirit of the Lord.*

Regeneration, in its broader sense, has ample biblical support.

DTK


----------



## Christusregnat (Mar 21, 2008)

DTK said:


> Christusregnat said:
> 
> 
> > Anyone to argue for the "older" view based on Scripture?
> ...



DTK,

I'm sorry, but I think my initial post was very unclear about what I was looking for.

The 2 Cor passage is very helpful in describing our ongoing transformation by the renewing of our minds. However, the language used is not that of a second birth, or a birth from above. Is there any regeneration (second, from above, or new birth) used in the ongoing sense in scripture? Does scripture identify regeneration with ongoing growth in grace, or is this a confusion of categories. 

I think that defining regeneration as sanctification is not how the scriptures do it; that's why I'm looking to have my thinking changed by Scriptural usage.

Sorry for the confusion.

Godspeed,

Adam


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Mar 21, 2008)

Christusregnat said:


> DTK said:
> 
> 
> > Christusregnat said:
> ...



Adam,

I'm sure DTK will give a better explanation but I want to talk this out for my own benefit as much as for any others' as I want to practice putting this together coherently. Yours is a great question that I know will come up again so I ask DTK and others to forgive me if it seems presumptuous to answer. I'm not trying to answer in your stead but merely provide my explanation.

I think your confusion here is stemming from the "word" regeneration. The term has taken on a narrower definition to relate to the new birth so that all those verses quoted by DTK would support the notion of what our new birth achieves. If we narrowly define regeneration as the new birth that precedes faith and somebody asks us to support the idea Scripturally then we go to the verses that DTK quoted.

But what you're asking for now is for somebody to support the idea that the word "regeneration" can be used in a broader sense. It's just a word in this case so one is not going to necessarily find a writer using the _term_ regeneration in various passages any more than the exact term is used in all the passages where the narrower definition was exposited.

Thus, what would be necessary to "prove" that a single term is appropriate to describe the entire process would be to show an "inter-connectedness" between calling, spiritual life, faith/repentance, and sanctification. We need not find a single verse for spiritual life that uses the word regeneration, a single verse for faith that uses the word regeneration or a single verse for sanctification that uses regeneration. Rather, the real issue is whether there is any sense in which they can all be subsumed under a single term that might even be used in each "phase" while still doing justice to each step.

I hope that wasn't hopelessly confusing.

I would argue that Romans:1-11 is at least one section of Scripture that appropriately demonstrates what we're after:


> 1Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. 2Through him we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in hope of the glory of God. 3More than that, we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, 4and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, 5and hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us.
> 6For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. 7For one will scarcely die for a righteous person—though perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die— 8but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. 9Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. 10For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life. 11More than that, we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation.


Verse 6 in terms of logical priority precedes verse 1 because it's talking about how Christ died for us while we were enemies but it's all in the purpose of God to justify the un-Godly. Notice the thought in this section how God purposes us to make us alive to have faith in Him that we might be united to Christ in newness of life with the life that He gave us before faith. New birth and justification and sanctification and all the other categories we might distinguish are all part of the life that God gave us toward His purpose of justifying and making Holy His sons. It is then not a stretch to use a single term "regeneration" to capture the idea that newness of life is given that we might believe and live in newness of life. We might now call the newness of life that precedes faith regeneration in current usage of the term but it's the same life, born from above, that births our faith that justifies us and is the same life that is the "engine" of our sanctification.

In many ways, in fact, it is preferable to think of sanctification in the same sort of light as regneration because we can run into the problem of treating sanctification as a process of infused habits like the Roman Catholics or Arminians and forget the fact that we begin in newness of life, endure in it, and finish in it.


----------



## Jimmy the Greek (Mar 21, 2008)

Matthew 19:28:
And Jesus said to them, "Truly I say to you, that you who have followed Me, in the *regeneration* when the Son of Man will sit on His glorious throne, you also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. (NASB)

So also the KJV and others: translating the Greek word παλιγγενεσια

This is not a specific reference to the initial impartation of spiritual life, but more a reference to the culmination, or the completion of a process.


----------



## Christusregnat (Mar 21, 2008)

Gomarus said:


> Matthew 19:28:
> And Jesus said to them, "Truly I say to you, that you who have followed Me, in the *regeneration* when the Son of Man will sit on His glorious throne, you also shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. (NASB)
> 
> So also the KJV and others: translating the Greek word παλιγγενεσια
> ...



Gomarus,

Could it not also be referring to the "twinkling of an eye" when the earth and heaven will be entirely renewed, rather than the process leading up to this?

Cheers,

Adam


----------



## Christusregnat (Mar 21, 2008)

Semper Fi, thanks for the explanation! See my responses below in *bold*.


“Thus, what would be necessary to "prove" that a single term is appropriate to describe the entire process would be to show an "inter-connectedness" between calling, spiritual life, faith/repentance, and sanctification.”

*I believe that our confession is right in using the term "salvation", or the verb "to save" or "saving" as this all-encompassing term. Justification, sanctification, glorification, effectual calling, etc. are all part of our salvation. Good works are the way God has appointed us to salvation. This, I believe, is the biblically accurate term to use; regeneration, as far as I can tell, is not.*


“WE need not find a single verse for spiritual life that uses the word regeneration, a single verse for faith that uses the word regeneration or a single verse for sanctification that uses regeneration. Rather, the real issue is whether there is any sense in which they can all be subsumed under a single term that might even be used in each "phase" while still doing justice to each step.”

*This is what I'm having difficulty with: I don't think that all aspects of our salvation can be subsumed under regeneration. All aspects may be related to it, but they are also related to justification, adoption, glorification: it's a package deal.*

“I hope that wasn't hopelessly confusing.”

*Not any more than me * 


“I would argue that Romans:1-11 is at least one section of Scripture that appropriately demonstrates what we're after:
Quote:
1Therefore, since we have been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ. 2Through him we have also obtained access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and we rejoice in hope of the glory of God. 3More than that, we rejoice in our sufferings, knowing that suffering produces endurance, 4and endurance produces character, and character produces hope, 5and hope does not put us to shame, because God’s love has been poured into our hearts through the Holy Spirit who has been given to us.
6For while we were still weak, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. 7For one will scarcely die for a righteous person—though perhaps for a good person one would dare even to die— 8but God shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us. 9Since, therefore, we have now been justified by his blood, much more shall we be saved by him from the wrath of God. 10For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God by the death of his Son, much more, now that we are reconciled, shall we be saved by his life. 11More than that, we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation.

Verse 6 in terms of logical priority precedes verse 1 because it's talking about how Christ died for us while we were enemies but it's all in the purpose of God to justify the un-Godly. Notice the thought in this section how God purposes us to make us alive to have faith in Him that we might be united to Christ in newness of life with the life that He gave us before faith. New birth and justification and sanctification and all the other categories we might distinguish are all part of the life that God gave us toward His purpose of justifying and making Holy His sons. It is then not a stretch to use a single term "regeneration" to capture the idea that newness of life is given that we might believe and live in newness of life. We might now call the newness of life that precedes faith regeneration in current usage of the term but it's the same life, born from above, that births our faith that justifies us and is the same life that is the "engine" of our sanctification.”

*I will have to ponder this….*


“In many ways, in fact, it is preferable to think of sanctification in the same sort of light as regneration because we can run into the problem of treating sanctification as a process of infused habits like the Roman Catholics or Arminians and forget the fact that we begin in newness of life, endure in it, and finish in it.”

*This is where I think the confessional term, "saving grace" for sanctification is preferrable to regeneration. It recognizes sanctification as an intergral aspect of our salvation, but doesn't confuse it with the biblical teaching on the new birth. Confusing regeneration with sanctification or justification, is, to my mind, a bit confusing, and doesn't seem to do justice to the definitions of each term. Yes, they are related; but, no, they are not the same.*

Interested in your thoughts


----------



## DTK (Mar 21, 2008)

It was not my intention, nor do I believe that my words equated sanctification with regeneration.

But, all of that aside, I would encourage you to find a copy of Berkhof's _Systematic Theology_, and begin reading on page 465 regarding the various uses of the term "regeneration." I apologize that I could not be of more use. I do think that Berkhof gives a much better treatment of the use of this word.

DTK


----------



## Christusregnat (Mar 21, 2008)

DTK said:


> It was not my intention, nor do I believe that my words equated sanctification with regeneration.
> 
> But, all of that aside, I would encourage you to find a copy of Berkhof's _Systematic Theology_, and begin reading on page 465 regarding the various uses of the term "regeneration." I apologize that I could not be of more use. I do think that Berkhof gives a much better treatment of the use of this word.
> 
> DTK



DTK, 

Forgive me for misunderstanding what you had said (or was it Semper Fi?). Either way, I'll go flagilate myself, since it's good Friday 

ANYwho, I'll pick up Louis at page 465, and give it a looksee.

Thanks for the advice!

Cheers,

Adam


----------



## Semper Fidelis (Mar 21, 2008)

Christusregnat said:


> DTK said:
> 
> 
> > It was not my intention, nor do I believe that my words equated sanctification with regeneration.
> ...



I hope it was not I. I did not intend to imply it either if anything I wrote implied it. As I noted, I think it is perfectly legitimate to use the term regeneration in a very specific manner to refer to the new birth that precedes our faith. I think DTK did a marvelous job of expositing the verses that support this concept.

My response was aimed at Christusregnat's request that a _wider_ use of the term regeneration is legitimate.

Regarding that, I believe you answered your own question, Adam, by noting that the term salvation can be used broadly. The point is that, if you're going to use the term specifically then remember how you're using it in a sentence but, if you see an author using it as a broader term in the past, keep track of the fact that his definition is broader than later usage. I was only trying to explain why a broader use of the term regeneration is legitimate.

That all said, because we currently utilize regeneration in a certain way, I would not use it in a broader sense today as it would lead to confusion among those who are now accustomed to how it is utilized.


----------

