Regeneration

[S.T.Ranger]

Jesus took the common phrase and gave it a spiritual significance.

And I have to respectfully disagree with that, because the Lord is not borrowing from secular terms, He is expounding upon the promises of God in the Word of God, which promises Nicodemus should have been understanding of, since he made claim of being a Teacher of Israel.

The spiritual significance was given to the Doctrine in the Old Testament, and the understanding of it was given to us by the Spirit of God we received when we were saved.

So, no. We would not expect to see it in the OT because it was not a Hebraism. That does not mean that regeneration did not occur in the OT.

And what I always ask is that an instance of Regeneration be shown in the Old Testament. But, we must also address the positive arguments offered to establish that Regeneration is specific to the New Covenant.

For example, would we, like David, ask that the Lord not take His Spirit from us? As He did with King Saul? There is a distinctive difference between the Ministry of the Spirit in the Old Testament and under New Covenant conditions.

*** as a reference point, I am a Dispensationalist.

While my Doctrine does come into agreement with much of Dispensational Theology, I do not claim to be a Dispensationalist, but rather simply a Bible Student who happens to be (and proud of it) a Baptist. One fellow on another forum has a tag that reads "John was a Baptist, Christ was a Baptist...so I'm a Baptist too!" I agree with that for the most part, lol, though I did tell him he should change it to read "John was a Baptist, Christ is a Baptist, so I am a Baptist too!"

Because Christ is the Baptizer, just as John prophesied, and Christ and Paul quoted. He is the One Who baptizes with the Holy Ghost, which is something I don't think too many give consideration to. And we see that it is after Christ's Ascension that men begin to be Baptized with the Holy Ghost, and again, while many view this as an empowerment, or a subsequent event in the life of a believer, it makes much more sense to view it as the immersion of the believing individual into God, at which point they are made alive (born again spiritually).

And the death from which they are resurrected from is the death we all died in Adam, when Man became separated from God.

Thanks for the response, FSSL, look forward to more.


God bless.

 

[FSSL]

And I have to respectfully disagree with that, because the Lord is not borrowing from secular terms...

You keep hand-waving off arguments without providing counter-points.

"...anagenna? was a quite common vb. in NT times and was not confined to the mystery cults." A. Ringwald, ?Birth, Beget, Bear, Become, Miscarriage, Regeneration, Well-Born,? ed. Lothar Coenen, Erich Beyreuther, and Hans Bietenhard, New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1986), 178.

Jesus was surprised that Nicodeumus did not even understand that a metaphorical meaning of "born again" was being used among the Rabbis.

Nevertheless, this is just a very minor point...

And what I always ask is that an instance of Regeneration be shown in the Old Testament. But, we must also address the positive arguments offered to establish that Regeneration is specific to the New Covenant.

Jesus, speaking before the New Covenant said, "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him..." Spiritual life has ALWAYS come from the Father. Why because, since Adam, all have been wholly corrupt. "No man comes to the Father except by me."

Deuteronomy speaks about individuals in the nation of Israel gaining "circumcised hearts." Other places in the OT speak of a "new spirit." There is plenty of OT witness to the concept of regeneration. That is, if you define it as "God imparting spiritual life to a spiritually dead person."

For example, would we, like David, ask that the Lord not take His Spirit from us? As He did with King Saul? There is a distinctive difference between the Ministry of the Spirit in the Old Testament and under New Covenant conditions.

Which was not regeneration. It was a theocratic anointing giftedness provided by the Spirit for Davidic kings to rule the Davidic Kingdom. It had nothing to do with their regeneration. Unless you believe that OT saints could lose their salvation.

 

[S.T.Ranger]

And I have to respectfully disagree with that, because the Lord is not borrowing from secular terms...

You keep hand-waving off arguments without providing counter-points.

On the contrary, I have addressed each point directly, and still await an address of the points I have offered.

As I said before, the Lord was not using secular concepts, He was speaking of the Promises of God in the Old Testament, which I have quoted.

"...anagenna? was a quite common vb. in NT times and was not confined to the mystery cults." A. Ringwald, ?Birth, Beget, Bear, Become, Miscarriage, Regeneration, Well-Born,? ed. Lothar Coenen, Erich Beyreuther, and Hans Bietenhard, New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan Publishing House, 1986), 178.

The problem is...that is not what the Lord states. He says once must be  genna? an?then, which is another point I am still awaiting a response to. The Lord states one must be born from above, of water and the Spirit, and He contrasts this with being flesh...which Nicodemus responds to Him with. So anagenna? is not actually relevant to this text, and actually denies the argument.

Again, the Lord is expounding Biblical truth from the Hebrew Scriptures, not using secular concepts to teach. He actually addresses the error of Nicodemus with great wonder at his ignorance. He rebukes him and asks why he does not know what he is speaking about.

Jesus was surprised that Nicodeumus did not even understand that a metaphorical meaning of "born again" was being used among the Rabbis.

The New Birth is not metaphorical, one is made alive in Christ, and this is new.

Again, the metaphorical aspect of Regeneration is seen in terms that do not trespass into what is actually taught of them. Christ came, and then men were given the power to become sons of God. We are born again, born of God, born of water and the Spirit.

All of these refer to the same thing.

Nevertheless, this is just a very minor point...

I would agree. Though I will say you get high marks because you are the first one I have seen who added to the typical argument that new birth must have been possible because Christ told Nicodemus he must be.


Continued...

 

[S.T.Ranger]

And what I always ask is that an instance of Regeneration be shown in the Old Testament. But, we must also address the positive arguments offered to establish that Regeneration is specific to the New Covenant.

Jesus, speaking before the New Covenant said, "No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him..."

And the drawing is prophetic:


John 3:13-15
King James Version (KJV)

13 And no man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven.

14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:

15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life.


This is the primary thrust of John 6: that men must believe on the Crucified and risen Lord for salvation.

Those who do not have no life, because they have not yet been reconciled to God, brought into eternal union with Him, hence having Eternal Life (which can only be had by being in God, Who is Eternal).



John 6:47-53
King James Version (KJV)

47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.

48 I am that bread of life.

49 Your fathers did eat manna in the wilderness, and are dead.

50 This is the bread which cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof, and not die.

51 I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world.

52 The Jews therefore strove among themselves, saying, How can this man give us his flesh to eat?

53 Then Jesus said unto them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of the Son of man, and drink his blood, ye have no life in you.


His point is that unless one believe on Him (and this includes His coming in the flesh, and giving His flesh in sacrifice) they do not have life.

Those who ate manna, including Moses...are said to be dead. And so we see the "life" He came to bring contrasted with those under that former economy, and the conclusion is that they did not receive the life Christ is speaking about.

And as mentioned before, because the Gospel of Christ remained a Mystery until the Comforter came, again we see that the command to believe on Christ is given, just as the command that one must be born again, yet no-one is yet believing on the Lord, for He has not yet given His flesh (and resurrected) that men might believe on Him.

Nor had anyone received the Spirit of God which was promised in the Old Testament:


John 7:38-39
King James Version (KJV)

38 He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.

39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)


We can see that the True Bread and the Living Waters (eternal life) have a point in time in which we can say they began to be bestowed upon men.


Continued...

 

[S.T.Ranger]

Spiritual life has ALWAYS come from the Father.

This is true, however, spiritual life on an eternal level did not begin until God was in Christ reconciling the world unto Himself.

While men have a spirit that is everlasting, that is not the same thing as having the spiritual life one is bestowed with when they are born of God. For example, demons are spirits that will go into eternal torment, and will endure there forever, but, they do not have eternal life.

So too with the Old Testament Saint, they had spirits that will endure forever, yet that does not mean they had been given eternal life yet.

Why because, since Adam, all have been wholly corrupt. "No man comes to the Father except by me."

And no man still went into the presence of God prior to Christ's death. Man's only entrance to God was in physical terms. God met with man on earth, true, but when men died they went, not into Heaven, but into Sheol/Hades.

Deuteronomy speaks about individuals in the nation of Israel gaining "circumcised hearts."

In other words, "Let your hearts reflect the sign of Covenant relationship."

Again, I would strongly suggest that when we consider the "heart" and "spirit" of a man we do not equate that with the Spirit of God, or impose into it something that the New Testament denies as possible (a promise is yet a promise until it is fulfilled, and that is the case with New Covenant provision (i.e., new heart, new spirit, which is the result of receiving the Spirit of God in eternal union)).

Man plays no part in being born again, hence we do not equate the "Get you a new heart and a new spirit" with actually receiving a new heart and spirit (both speaking about man's mentality) as a result of receiving the Spirit of God.


Continued...

 

[S.T.Ranger]

Other places in the OT speak of a "new spirit."

I know, I quoted them.

There is plenty of OT witness to the concept of regeneration.

Again...where is the Scripture?

That is, if you define it as "God imparting spiritual life to a spiritually dead person."

I do. The life imparted is a result of the Eternal Indwelling of God which did not take place in Old Testament Economies.

Christ makes that distinction here:


John 14:15-18
King James Version (KJV)

15 If ye love me, keep my commandments.

16 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever;

17 Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.


The "dwelling with" can be likened to the filling of the Spirit we enjoy now. The Spirit of God did indeed minister in the lives and hearts of men in the Old Testament, but, that is distinct from the Eternal Indwelling promised here (and is clearly a future event in the lives of the disciples).

I would also note that here we see that the Comforter and Christ will come when they/we receive the Comforter.

Here...


21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.

22 Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world?

23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.


...we see that the Eternal Indwelling is that of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.

And again...it is yet future at the time of this teaching.


Continued...

 

[S.T.Ranger]

For example, would we, like David, ask that the Lord not take His Spirit from us? As He did with King Saul? There is a distinctive difference between the Ministry of the Spirit in the Old Testament and under New Covenant conditions.

Which was not regeneration.

That is correct.

Because no-one was being regenerated at that time.

It was a theocratic anointing giftedness provided by the Spirit for Davidic kings to rule the Davidic Kingdom.

Agreed. The Spirit of God has always empowered the faithful for service, particularly in roles of Prophet, Priest, and King.

We see Christ distinguish between the receiving of the Promised Spirit and being empowered after that takes place here:


Acts 1:4-8
King James Version (KJV)

4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me.

5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.

6 When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel?

7 And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power.

8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.


And we see exactly that: when the Spirit comes, as promised in both Old Testament as well as Christ's teachings...they begin preaching the Gospel of Christ...for the first time.

It had nothing to do with their regeneration. Unless you believe that OT saints could lose their salvation.

Absolutely not.

They, like we, had an eternal destiny that was secure in the faithfulness of God's grace. However, that does not change the fact that they all died not having received the promises. The Writer of Hebrews puts it like this...



Hebrews 11:13
King James Version (KJV)

13 These all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were strangers and pilgrims on the earth.


Hebrews 11:39-40
King James Version (KJV)

39 And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise:

40 God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.


We see that distinction again here...


Hebrews 12:22-24
King James Version (KJV)

22 But ye are come unto mount Sion, and unto the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an innumerable company of angels,

23 To the general assembly and church of the firstborn, which are written in heaven, and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made perfect,

24 And to Jesus the mediator of the new covenant, and to the blood of sprinkling, that speaketh better things than that of Abel.


I would suggest that the Old Testament Saint was Justified by grace through faith, and upon that basis his/her eternal destiny was as secure as ours. But, that does not mean they had received the promises of eternal remission of sins, Eternal Indwelling, or came into the presence of God at death.

Saved, yes, from an eternal perspective, but, still in need of...

...Eternal Redemption:


Hebrews 9:12
King James Version (KJV)

12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.


Eternal Redemption was obtained for us by Christ through His death, which is why men began to have the power to become the sons of God when Christ came.


God bless.

 

[FSSL]

I would suggest that the Old Testament Saint was Justified by grace through faith, and upon that basis his/her eternal destiny was as secure as ours. But, that does not mean they had received the promises of eternal remission of sins, Eternal Indwelling, or came into the presence of God at death.

Saved, yes, from an eternal perspective, but, still in need of...

...Eternal Redemption:

I do not understand the distinction. It is a distinction without a difference. In fact, it is very convoluted... In order for your system to work, you have to develop a new Gospel for every dispensation.

What kind of "salvation" does not lead to an eternal remission of sins? What kind of justification does not cancel a debt? It is absurd.

 

[Twisted]

I do not understand the distinction.

We all see that, and that doesn't make you a bad fellow or anything.  90% of Christians don't understand the difference.

I Cor. 15 being preached in King David's day is a little far fetched for me.  But oh well.

Salvation is always by the grace of God.  The "method" changes, and the results have different effects, but salvation is salvation.

 

[FSSL]

Cor. 15 being preached in King David's day is a little far fetched for me.  But oh well.

Salvation is always by the grace of God.  The "method" changes, and the results have different effects, but salvation is salvation.

Salvation ALWAYS includes a remission (removal of sin's penalties). There has ALWAYS been a cancelation of debt. In fact, I am reading Psalm 103 back into King David's day when he wrote: "As far as the east is from the west, So far hath he removed our transgressions from us."

 

[S.T.Ranger]

I would suggest that the Old Testament Saint was Justified by grace through faith, and upon that basis his/her eternal destiny was as secure as ours. But, that does not mean they had received the promises of eternal remission of sins, Eternal Indwelling, or came into the presence of God at death.

Saved, yes, from an eternal perspective, but, still in need of...

...Eternal Redemption:

I do not understand the distinction.

The distinction is dramatic. I will try to illustrate it:

Remission of sins (atonement) under Law:


Leviticus 17:8-11
King James Version (KJV)

8 And thou shalt say unto them, Whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the strangers which sojourn among you, that offereth a burnt offering or sacrifice,

9 And bringeth it not unto the door of the tabernacle of the congregation, to offer it unto the Lord; even that man shall be cut off from among his people.

10 And whatsoever man there be of the house of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn among you, that eateth any manner of blood; I will even set my face against that soul that eateth blood, and will cut him off from among his people.

11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.


The primary point here is that the sacrificial system of the Law, and in fact those that were offered prior to the establishment of the Covenant of Law (i.e., Abel, Noah, Abraham)...provided atonement for sins. This atonement was on a temporal and physical level, not to be equated with the Sacrifice of Christ. All who offered up these sacrifices would be required to continue offering up sacrifice their entire lives, because, as Hebrews makes clear, the blood (vicarious deaths) of bulls and goats and calves could not take away sins, and could not make the comer thereunto (the one on whose behalf sacrifice was offered) complete in regards to remission of sins.

All Old Testament Saints died still in need of redemption, and the Redeemer.


Remission of sins through Christ:


Hebrews 9:12-15
King James Version (KJV)

12 Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.

13 For if the blood of bulls and of goats, and the ashes of an heifer sprinkling the unclean, sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh:

14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?

15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.


In this one passage we have enough to see that the transgressions that were under the First Testament (Covenant of Law) had to be redeemed by the Blood of Christ.

We see that the sacrificial system of the Law was temporal and physical (sanctifieth to the purifying of the flesh).

The "Holy Place" Christ entered in is not the earthly Tabernacle (or Temple) made with hands, but Heaven itself. That is where Christ entered to obtain Eternal Redemption for us, so once again we see that Redemption has a specific point in time when it was achieved.

And if you would like to look at this in more detail, that would be great, but I will leave it at this for now, in order to keep the posts short for you.


Continued...

 

[S.T.Ranger]

It is a distinction without a difference. In fact, it is very convoluted... In order for your system to work, you have to develop a new Gospel for every dispensation.

On the contrary, the same Gospel of Christ is taught from Genesis to Revelation, however, as I am sure you are aware of, we know that the revelation of the Gospel was progressive.

In other words, the Prophets that preached the Gospel did so apart from the understanding given to us in this Age, according to the Ministry of the Spirit, which is distinct to this Age.

Consider:


1 Peter 1:9-12
King James Version (KJV)

9 Receiving the end of your faith, even the salvation of your souls.

10 Of which salvation the prophets have enquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the grace that should come unto you:

11 Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.

12 Unto whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but unto us they did minister the things, which are now reported unto you by them that have preached the gospel unto you with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven; which things the angels desire to look into.


The tendency is usually to say "but look, the Spirit of Christ was in them." This is true, however, we cannot nullify Christ's teachings that the Comforter would perform a unique and distinct Ministry among men after Christ returned to Heaven.

The Prophets knew that "unto us they did minister the things," because they knew they prophesied of what would happen at a future date. Ezekiel, for instance, knew that God placing His Spirit within them was something that would take place in the future.

As far as "the Spirit of Christ being in them," the ministry of the Holy Spirit has always been an internal effort, but, that is not to be equated with the promised Spirit of Prophecy, Who came on Pentecost, after Christ returned to Heaven from whence He came. John 14 teaches that we are indwelt by the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost, so we should not be surprised to see the unity of the Trinity here either.

As to whether there are more than one Gospels, there is a distinction we should give to the Gospel of the Kingdom, which was the Gospel preached by the Disciples of Christ during His Ministry here on earth. We distinguish it because we are told repeatedly by Paul that the Gospel of Christ was a Mystery not revealed to the Saints in Ages past, so we create conflict if we try to have the Disciples of Christ going out and preaching the Gospel of Christ. As I have shown, Peter was hostile to the Gospel of Christ, not understanding that it was not at that time, that season...that Christ would restore the glory of Israel in physical terms.


Continued...

 

[S.T.Ranger]

What kind of "salvation" does not lead to an eternal remission of sins?

What kind of justification does not cancel a debt?

Abraham was justified by grace through faith, as well as works, yet was still in need of the Redeemer, and Atonement on an eternal basis.

That was the promise of God:


Jeremiah 31:31-34
King James Version (KJV)

31 Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah:

32 Not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them, saith the Lord:

33 But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel; After those days, saith the Lord, I will put my law in their inward parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be my people.

34 And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord: for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them, saith the Lord: for I will forgive their iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.


Hebrews quotes this promise and we see that the Remission of sins through Christ is eternal and complete:


Hebrews 10:10-14
King James Version (KJV)

10 By the which will we are sanctified through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.

11 And every priest standeth daily ministering and offering oftentimes the same sacrifices, which can never take away sins:

12 But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins for ever, sat down on the right hand of God;

13 From henceforth expecting till his enemies be made his footstool.

14 For by one offering he hath perfected for ever them that are sanctified.

It is absurd.

Sadly that is the reaction most people have, and few will give this consideration as they should. It is normal for people to view the salvation provided in Old Testament Economies as, in large part, the same salvation Christ came to give. The mistaken notion that "Old Testament Saints were saved on credit" may be popular, but erroneous. We do not lessen the faith of the Old Testament Saint, for their faith was as genuine as any one of us, but, neither do we impose into the Old Testament that which Christ and the Apostles make clear was awaited on.

Again, they did not receive the Spirit we have in their lifetimes. They did not receive Atonement in their lifetimes. They were not reconciled to God and in relationship with Him through the New Covenant.

A parallel we might consider to illustrate believers of differing Ages receiving something at a later date which has no impact on their salvation are those who have died and received Heaven, though we have not. That does not make their salvation any more sure than ours.


God bless.

 

[FSSL]

Actually, I have given quite a bit of consideration to an exaggerated dispensational division. I grew up in it, went to a college that taught it. I attended a seminary that is dispensational but kicked most of the strange divisions out of it.

I get the idea of a progressive revelation. Unfortunately, while I get accused of bringing NT concepts back into the OT, I am suggesting otherwise. Most dispensationalists don't understand that the concepts and promises of salvation were understood by the OT saint (including this remission of their sins). They also knew about the indwelling ministry of the Holy Spirit... which we may eventually get to.

I'm lost and unable to follow. It seems you argue one direction (no eternal remission of sins), then you quote Jeremiah which says, quite clearly, that the OT saint understood that he had the promise of remission of his sins.

 

[Twisted]

Actually, I have given quite a bit of consideration to an exaggerated dispensational division. I grew up in it, went to a college that taught it. I attended a seminary that is dispensational but kicked most of the strange divisions out of it.

I get the idea of a progressive revelation. Unfortunately, while I get accused of bringing NT concepts back into the OT, I am suggesting otherwise. Most dispensationalists don't understand that the concepts and promises of salvation were understood by the OT saint (including this remission of their sins). They also knew about the indwelling ministry of the Holy Spirit... which we may eventually get to.

I'm lost and unable to follow. It seems you argue one direction (no eternal remission of sins), then you quote Jeremiah which says, quite clearly, that the OT saint understood that he had the promise of remission of his sins.

But isn't Jeremiah 31 yet future?

 

[FSSL]

But isn't Jeremiah 31 yet future?

Yes. It had meaning for them. Just like Psalm 103.

 

[S.T.Ranger]

Actually, I have given quite a bit of consideration to an exaggerated dispensational division.

Perhaps it would help if you expanded on what you see as "exaggerated dispensational division."

It is an issue that is central to this discussion, because that is what most people do...equate salvation in all Ages.

Consider:


Romans 5:12-14
King James Version (KJV)

12 Wherefore, as by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned:

13 (For until the law sin was in the world: but sin is not imputed when there is no law.

14 Nevertheless death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over them that had not sinned after the similitude of Adam's transgression, who is the figure of him that was to come.


Scripture teaches that accountability differs between the Ages according to the revelation provided to men. For example, those who were under the Law (in that Age) who rejected the Covenant of Law will not be held accountable as severely as those who reject Christ, His Sacrifice, His New Covenant, and the Ministry of the Holy Ghost (Comforter):


Hebrews 10:26-29
King James Version (KJV)

26 For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,

27 But a certain fearful looking for of judgment and fiery indignation, which shall devour the adversaries.

28 He that despised Moses' law died without mercy under two or three witnesses:

29 Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be thought worthy, who hath trodden under foot the Son of God, and hath counted the blood of the covenant, wherewith he was sanctified, an unholy thing, and hath done despite unto the Spirit of grace?


As the Writer does often, he contrasts the Age of Law and the Age of Grace (the Two Covenants). Here, in view are not Christians who sin after being saved, but those who reject that which God has commanded. "Moses' Law" is Covenant of Law, and v.29 describes that which brings about the punishment. And it will be more severe than those who rejected the Covenant of Law.

This is an important issue and will help us to distinguish between the provision of the prior Ages and the provision of this Age.

I grew up in it, went to a college that taught it. I attended a seminary that is dispensational but kicked most of the strange divisions out of it.

Again, what strange divisions do you speak of. I do not call myself a Dispensational, though there is much we would be in agreement about. It may be that the strange divisions are not relevant to this issue.


Continued...

 

[S.T.Ranger]

I get the idea of a progressive revelation.

This is a critical issue for the Bible Student. If we impose understanding of the Gospel of Christ into the Old Testament, then we nullify many passages and doctrinal statements of the New.

Again, we see that not even the disciples of Christ understood the Gospel. Here is a passage illustrating this:


Colossians 1:24-27
King James Version (KJV)

24 Who now rejoice in my sufferings for you, and fill up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ in my flesh for his body's sake, which is the church:

25 Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God;

26 Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints:

27 To whom God would make known what is the riches of the glory of this mystery among the Gentiles; which is Christ in you, the hope of glory:


The Mystery of Christ was revealed by the Spirit of God, when He came in the distinct Ministry of Comforter:


1 Corinthians 2:6-10
King James Version (KJV)

6 Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought:

7 But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory:

8 Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.

9 But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.

10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.


Most Pastors preach this as how wonderful Heaven is going to be, but, what Paul is saying here is that what eye has not seen, what ear has not heard, and what has not entered into the hearts of men...is the Gospel. That is the Hidden Wisdom of God. And it was not revealed in past Ages:


Romans 16:24-26
King James Version (KJV)

24 The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.

25 Now to him that is of power to stablish you according to my gospel, and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the revelation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the world began,

26 But now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith:


He makes that point here as well...

Ephesians 3
King James Version (KJV)

1 For this cause I Paul, the prisoner of Jesus Christ for you Gentiles,

2 If ye have heard of the dispensation of the grace of God which is given me to you-ward:

3 How that by revelation he made known unto me the mystery; (as I wrote afore in few words,

4 Whereby, when ye read, ye may understand my knowledge in the mystery of Christ)

5 Which in other ages was not made known unto the sons of men, as it is now revealed unto his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit;


Just as John the Baptist prophesied of the Lamb of God, yet sent his own disciples to inquire of Christ if He were the One they awaited...


Matthew 11
King James Version (KJV)

1 And it came to pass, when Jesus had made an end of commanding his twelve disciples, he departed thence to teach and to preach in their cities.

2 Now when John had heard in the prison the works of Christ, he sent two of his disciples,

3 And said unto him, Art thou he that should come, or do we look for another?


...even so the Prophets of God prophesied of Christ in the Hebrew Scriptures, but...

...they did not have the understanding of Christ as we do.

This is evident in the Disciples of Christ before Pentecost, and it would not be until they were Baptized with the Holy Ghost that they would go out and preach the Gospel of Christ. Prior to this they preached the Gospel of the Kingdom, which was specific to Israel...


Matthew 10:5-7
King James Version (KJV)

5 These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not:

6 But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.

7 And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand.


Matthew 15:22-24
King James Version (KJV)

22 And, behold, a woman of Canaan came out of the same coasts, and cried unto him, saying, Have mercy on me, O Lord, thou son of David; my daughter is grievously vexed with a devil.

23 But he answered her not a word. And his disciples came and besought him, saying, Send her away; for she crieth after us.

24 But he answered and said, I am not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel.


Christ ministered under the Law, and specifically in His Role as Messiah to Israel. The "Gospel of the Kingdom," if we look at it closely, is not very different from Isaiah, for example. In view is the physical Kingdom of Israel in her restored state. And while we do not nullify application of the teachings to the Kingdom we have been translated into, still, we must keep in mind that the Mystery of the Gospel was not at this time being revealed to men. Not even the disciples.

And if you look at the Greek concerning "Lost Sheep," I would suggest to you that in view is the Lord's declaration of Israel's state, which was one of separation and destruction. They were very much "lost."


Continued...

 

[S.T.Ranger]

Unfortunately, while I get accused of bringing NT concepts back into the OT, I am suggesting otherwise.

If we say that men were regenerate in Old Testament Economies, then we impose New Testament concepts that were still mystery, still hidden...into the Old Testament.

Here is a question, FSSL, do you see a difference between Israel and the Church? In other words, do you see Israel as the Old Testament Church, and were they equally redeemed?

Most dispensationalists don't understand that the concepts and promises of salvation were understood by the OT saint (including this remission of their sins).

I agree in large part, FSSL.  Yes, they knew that God would forgive their sins. They knew there would be a resurrection. They knew there would be a judgment day. They knew that a Messiah would come to redeem them.

But can I point out that what they did understand is that this would happen at a future date?

They had no understanding of the concept of Messiah dying in their stead to bring about eternal remission of sins which allowed for the reconciliation that remedies Man's Fall, Man's separation from God.

They also knew about the indwelling ministry of the Holy Spirit... which we may eventually get to.

I agree with this too, because the Ministry of the Spirit has always been internal and dealt with man's heart. However, we see the same concept they were familiar with existent in the Church today, which we call the "filling" of the Spirit. Quite a different issue from the eternal indwelling of God in the believer.

The Old Testament Saint, just as the New Covenant believer, could/can be filled with the Spirit of God. God still "comes upon" us in order to empower for ministry and service.

Would you agree an indwelt Christian can not be filled with the Spirit?

I'm lost and unable to follow.

Well, as you suggested before, let's just look at one issue and thresh it out. There are numerous issues that have to be dealt with, but when we deal with them we come to an understanding that makes distinct the Work of Christ in a way that most people do not consider. Understanding the significance of Christ's Work and how that differs from the Economies of the Old Testament will, I promise, show the magnitude of Christ.

And another benefit is that it helps us to understand better some of the issues that have been divisive in the Body for centuries. For example, most people teach John 15, when Christ states "I am the True Vine," as an example of either a person not being a Christian, or, worse, a Christian losing their salvation. The question not asked is "What is the vine that is not true, that Christ contrasts Himself to?"

The answer is...Israel.

If we understand that His teaching is prophetic (as is John 14), we see that what He is saying to these disciples, who we see certainly do not "abide in Christ" following this teaching, is that while they once looked to their heritage for relationship with God, they would no longer be doing that. From the time of the Cross and Pentecost, relationship with God would not be through Israel, or Judaism, or the Covenant of Law, but through Christ.

So in other words, what He is saying is that they are not to abide in Him, and, the fact is that they were not, at the time of the teaching, able to abide in Him, because they had no understanding of what it meant...to be in Him.

That is the Mystery of Christ.

Continued...

 

[S.T.Ranger]

It seems you argue one direction (no eternal remission of sins),

I have never argued "no eternal remission of sins," but, that eternal remission of sins was not received by the Old Testament Saint within his physical lifetime (but at the time of the Cross). The distinction is critical.

Abraham received forgiveness, for example, but would have to continue to offer up for sins. Because he had not yet received eternal remission of sins. Just as Hebrews shows the Old Testament Saint died in faith...not having received the promise/s, not having been made perfect/complete in regards to remission of sins.

That is not open to debate, that is simply what Scripture teaches. And when we understand that, we can begin to place Remission of Sins from an eternal perspective into a proper context in regards to the Doctrine of Christ.

then you quote Jeremiah which says, quite clearly, that the OT saint understood that he had the promise of remission of his sins.

Correct, but, the key word here is...Promise.

But what most will do is impose the receiving of that Promise into the Old Testament and conclude that they were forgiven like as we.

That is not the case.

The sins that were under the Law were redeemed by Christ through His Sacrifice, as shown yesterday in Hebrews 9:12-15. Here is another statement to that effect:


Romans 3:20-26
King James Version (KJV)

20 Therefore by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight: for by the law is the knowledge of sin.

21 But now the righteousness of God without the law is manifested, being witnessed by the law and the prophets;

22 Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:

23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God;

24 Being justified freely by his grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:

25 Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God;

26 To declare, I say, at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.

We see that the sins "that are past" are forgiven through His righteousness. And again we see the time-line established: it came to be when Christ came into the world, died, rose again, and ascended.

Again, it is a popular notion that Old Testament Saints were "saved on credit," but, the truth is that they were saved from an eternal perspective, but, forgiven and made complete in Christ retroactively.


God bless.