Table of Contents

Appendix A Detailed Contents

Chapter 4.16

From Darkness to Light II

Spirit-liberated Reason & Salvation

Overall Objective

To understand the function of the human mind with spiritual regeneration.

Table of Topics

A) Saving Faith is Supernatural

B) Saving Faith is Irresistible

C) Saving Faith is a Gift

D) Saving Faith is Rational

E) Saving Faith is Preserved in Spirit-liberated Reason

F) Saving Faith is a Result of Regeneration, not Revelation

Primary Points

Spiritual regeneration is the hinge on which salvation turns because humans “straight from the factory” will not be able or willing to accept the Gospel without supernatural modification.

The Gospel is irresistible and saving faith a gift because a spiritually regenerated mind will naturally and automatically accept the message.

When a human is truly given free will through regeneration, their mental insanity regarding spiritual truth is healed, and they will choose Heaven instead of Hell, hope instead of despair, life instead of death, and forgiveness instead of guilt.

Spiritual regeneration allows us to maintain our faith in God, and this is the explanation for the exceptional faith of OT heroes.
The difference between the “Peter of Passover” who denied Christ, and the “Peter of Pentecost” who was eventually crucified for Christ illustrates the difference between Spirit-liberated and devil-darkened reason

A) Saving Faith ^[1] is Supernatural

We have discussed in the previous chapters that the sinful nature in an unregenerated heart will not allow a person to truly accept the full message of Creation or the Gospel. Because “The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned,” (1 Cor 2:14) it is impossible for those not possessing the Spirit to sufficiently accept the truth that would save them. Elsewhere we discuss the fact that mental acceptance is essential to any real faith, and because the unregenerate heart cannot and will not accept the Gospel, they cannot have saving faith in it. ^[2]

Therefore, it is the regeneration of the Holy Spirit that is the hinge on which spiritual conversion turns. The spiritually dead cannot deny their sinful nature, because it is them. Only the entrance of the Holy Spirit can break its bondage, giving the human a New Nature and release their mind so that it will embrace the Gospel as we would expect any right thinking human to do.

Paul reflected this when he wrote that “God” must “grant” unregenerate unbelievers “repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth” so that they “will come to their senses and escape from the trap of the devil, who has taken them captive to do his will” (2 Tim 2:25-26). In other words, the control of the devil is so strong over the unregenerate that if God does not supernaturally give them a change of mind regarding the truth, they will never be able to accept it (cf. 2 Cor 4:3-4). ^[3]

We believe that the Apostle is praying that this very thing would happen for unbelievers in Ephesus when he wrote: “I pray that out of His glorious riches He may strengthen you with power through His Spirit in your inner being, so that Christ may dwell in your hearts through faith” (Eph 3:16-17). There is no other way that Christ can dwell in our hearts through faith, except that the Spirit of God supernaturally infuses “power” in our “inner being” to “fix” us and make us able to have a faith that receives Christ. ^[4]

This is why God’s promise of the New Covenant included:

I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put My Spirit in you and move you to follow My decrees and be careful to keep My laws. (Ezek 36:26-7)

The reason that the Jewish people as a nation could not savingly believe in God was a “heart” problem (cf. 2 Cor 3:14-17).

Without such a “heart” transplant, we remain spiritually “dead in [our] sins and in the uncircumcision of [our] sinful nature” (Col 2:13), unable to overcome the mental insanity that would reject the Gospel because, “The man without the Spirit does not [and cannot] accept the things that come from the Spirit of God [including the Gospel], for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned” (1 Cor 2:14). However, while the sinful nature prohibits a person from seeing the value of the Gospel, through the regeneration of the Holy Spirit, sin is dethroned and “We have . . . received . . . the Spirit Who is from God, that we may understand what God has freely given us” (1 Cor 2:12). The Apostle succinctly describes this supernatural salvation process when he writes: “He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit” (Tit 3:4-5).

The Apostle demonstrates the different abilities of darkened and liberated reason as well when he tells the Corinthians that before their conversion he, “resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and Him crucified” (1 Cor 2:2), because until they were regenerated and enabled to accept this simple message, they wouldn’t understand anything else. But after their conversion, he notes, “We do, however, speak a message of wisdom among the mature,” (1 Cor 2:6) referring to those who have Spirit-liberated reason.

In addition, the Holy Spirit not only liberates our logical reason, but our conscience as well, which results in a proper recognition of our sinfulness. This is what Christ was speaking of when He said, “When He [the Holy Spirit] comes, He will convict the world of guilt in regard to sin and righteousness and judgment” (John 16:8). It is in the human preaching of Christ that one hears of their need for a savior because of sin, but it is the supernatural work of the Holy Spirit that fixes the conscience in order that it may properly produce guilt. The Apostle speaks of this when he writes the Thessalonians: “We know, brothers loved by God, that He has chosen you [for salvation], because our Gospel came to you not simply with words, but also with power, with the Holy Spirit and with deep conviction” (1 Thess 1:4-5; cf. Acts 2:36-37; 2 Cor 4:2-7).

B) Saving Faith is Irresistible

We noted in chapter 4.14 that it is only because of sinfully induced insanity that people do not embrace the promises in the Gospel. With regeneration, a person is free to do what a normal human would do with such a message. But they are more than free; they are compelled to believe the Gospel.

Another way of saying it is that no one whom the Holy Spirit regenerates will refuse the Gospel, because it will be impossible for their new Spirit-liberated reason to do so. Believing is a rather automatic human response when exposed to what the mind perceives as facts.

Imagine that you have been color blind your whole life such that a wall in your bedroom looks black. Then through a miracle, your color-blindness is healed and you now see the true color of the wall which is white. You can even look at the wall and try to think of it as black but it is impossible to do so. After seeing it as the white it really is you cannot see it as black again. God made us so that we cannot, and He uses this aspect of our reasoning for His purposes.

Accordingly, James Clark suggests a “thought experiment” to demonstrate the autonomous, automatic, and enduring nature of our believing faculties. He writes:

If you believe in God, stop believing in God for a few seconds. Now believe in Him again. Now stop, now start. We don’t just decide what to believe. Belief is, typically, something that happens to us. ^[5]

It is because He has made our minds to function in this way that the Protestant Reformers could say that saving grace was irresistible. More specifically, we would say that saving faith is irresistible. When God opens the spiritual eyes, ears, and heart of a person, they will see Christ for Who He really is and such belief will be automatic just as anything else we see is. Along these lines, Charles Spurgeon (1834-1892) preached: “No sooner is the soul quickened, than it at once discovers its lost estate, is horrified thereat, looks for a refuge, and believing Christ to be a suitable one, flies to him and reposes in him.” ^[6]

Accordingly, Reformed theologian Robert Reymond can say:

Faith in Christ is the inevitable Spirit-wrought response by the elect to the gospel, an effect of the Holy Spirit’s regenerating activity in conjunction with the ministry of the Word. ^[7]

Another way of putting it is to say that when a human is truly given free will through regeneration, their mental insanity regarding spiritual truth is healed, and they will choose Heaven instead of Hell, hope instead of despair, life instead of death, and forgiveness instead of guilt. As Augustine (354-430) put it: “[Saving] grace does not destroy the will but rather restores it.” ^[8] When someone has Spirit-liberated reason, believing the Gospel is just as “natural” and certain as believing 1+1=2. Every person who is regenerated by the Spirit will savingly believe the Gospel, no exceptions.

Accordingly, Alvin Plantinga, in the context of saving faith, writes:

For the person with faith, the great things of the gospel seem clearly true, obvious, compelling. She finds herself convinced-just as she does in the case of . . . elementary truths of arithmetic. Phenomenologically, therefore . . . there is no similarity at all to a leap in the dark. ^[9]

While the content of saving faith is unique, it is remarkably similar to any other real faith in the way it is obtained, and in its certainty. When the truths of the Gospel are presented to a spiritually liberated mind, they are readily understood, much like anyone will respond to a history teacher describing a well documented fact concerning George Washington. In addition, there would be no distinguishable difference in the certainty that one has in the historical facts concerning Christ and those concerning George Washington. Such is the nature of saving faith. It is indeed a miracle wrought by the Holy Spirit, but it is processed by our regenerated natural faculty of belief in the same way that all of those things are processed and obtained which we really believe.

Accordingly, J. Oliver Buswell (1895-1977), the noted theologian, wrote:

Religious [saving] cognitive belief requires neither a greater degree nor a different kind of faith. Perhaps the reason religious cognition seems to have these greater and different requirements of faith, is that a change of religious belief, aside from the cognitive element, also requires a renovation and reorientation of personal nature and ethical alignments and loyalties, familiarly called “the new birth.” ^[10]

C) Saving Faith is a Gift

The process by which we come to saving faith makes it obvious why the Scriptures describe it as a gift. Accordingly, the Apostle writes: “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God” (Eph 2:8), and “For it has been granted to you on behalf of Christ . . . to believe on Him” (Phil 1:29). ^[11]

Because of the sinful nature we are born with, we must be born again in order to believe savingly in Christ, and just like our first physical birth, we have no power or authority to initiate our second spiritual birth. Upon such regeneration and the dethroning of the sinful nature, humans really do have the ability to freely choose Christ.

However, at this point, we must be very careful in how we explain why we choose Christ when given the choice. If we claim that we choose Christ because of anything dependent on ourselves, it automatically becomes a meritorious act and we are in danger of preaching “a different Gospel–which is really no Gospel at all” (Gal 1:6-7). Saving faith is “by grace” and “not from [our]selves” (Eph 2:8) because if anyone hears the Gospel with Spirit-liberated reason, they will believe just like we have. ^[12]

Do we somehow take credit for recognizing that 1+1=2? No, it is a natural conclusion for anyone with properly functioning reasoning. Likewise, after having our reason supernaturally restored by the Spirit, it is only natural, and rather automatic to believe the Gospel. To Spirit-liberated reason it makes perfect sense that the King deserves dominion over our lives and that we cannot save ourselves and must trust Him to do so. And again, anyone who honestly had properly functioning reasoning faculties would immediately believe the same. This is why saving faith is the gift of God and not a meritorious work of humans.

Accordingly, Charles Spurgeon said many critical things about saving faith in the following:

My dear friends, after all, the kicking against the doctrine of election is a kicking against the Gospel, because this doctrine is a first principle in the divine plan of mercy, and when rightly known, it prepares our minds to receive all the other doctrines. Or on the contrary, misunderstand this, and you are pretty sure to make mistakes about all the rest.

Take for instance final perseverance; some men say, “If we continue in faith, and if we continue in holiness, we shall certainly be saved at last.” Do you not see at once that this is legality—that this is hanging our salvation upon our work—that this is making our eternal life to depend on something we do?

Nay, the doctrine of justification itself, as preached by an Arminian, is nothing but the doctrine of salvation by works, lifted up; for he always thinks faith is a work of the creature and a condition of his acceptance. It is as false to say that man is saved by faith as a work, as that he is saved by the deeds of the law. We are saved by faith as the gift of God, and as the first token of his eternal favor to us; but it is not faith as our work that saves, otherwise we are saved by works, and not by grace at all.

If you need any argument upon this point, I refer you to our great apostle Paul, who so constantly combats the idea that works and grace can ever be united together, for he argues, “If it be of grace, then it is no more of works otherwise grace were no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more of grace, otherwise work is no more work.” ^[13]

D) Saving Faith is Rational

It should be noted here that, although it is only a spiritually liberated mind that will accept the Gospel, it is still the intellect that receives it. This is why the Gospel must be preached to minds. As we have demonstrated elsewhere, the Apostle’s evangelistic strategy was not dependent on intellectual apologetics in an attempt to prove the Gospel, but rather a reasoned, understandable, and even persausive presentation of the Gospel itself. ^[14] This is because everything God does to or through us He does to or through our reason, including saving us from Hell.

Accordingly, the renowned NT scholar John Stott, in his book, Your Mind Matters, writes at length on the importance of the mind as the place where saving faith occurs. First, Dr. Stott discusses the real meaning of the Apostle’s statement in 1 Corinthians 1:21, “For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know Him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe.” Some might conclude that there is then no need for an understandable presentation of the Gospel. To the contrary, Dr. Stott explains:

Notice carefully the contrast which the apostle is making. It is not between a rational and an irrational presentation, as if to say that, since human wisdom could not discover God, God has dispensed with a rational message altogether. No. What Paul is contrasting with human wisdom is divine revelation. But it is a rational revelation, “what we preach,” the kerygma of Christ crucified and risen.

For, although men’s minds are dark and their eyes are blind, although the unregenerate cannot by themselves receive or understand spiritual things “because they are spiritually discerned,” nevertheless the gospel is still addressed to their minds, since it is the divinely ordained means of opening their eyes, enlightening their minds and saving them. ^[15]

Likewise, Dr. Stott comments on the Apostle’s statement in Romans 10:17 that, “faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ”:

His argument implies that there must be a solid content in our evangelistic proclamation of Christ. It is our responsibility to set Jesus Christ forth in the fullness of his divine-human person and saving work so that through this “preaching of Christ” God may arouse faith in the hearer. Such evangelistic preaching is far removed from its tragic caricature, all too common today, namely an emotional, anti-intellectual appeal for “decisions” when the hearers have but the haziest notion what they are to decide about or why. ^[16]

Dr. Stott offers additional biblical evidence for the place of reason in saving faith when he writes:

New Testament evidence that our evangelism should be a reasoned presentation of the gospel is that conversion is not infrequently described in terms of a person’s response not to Christ himself but to “the truth.” Becoming a Christian is “believing the truth,” “obeying the truth” . . . “acknowledging the truth.” Paul even describes his Roman readers as having “become obedient from the heart to the standard of teaching to which you were committed.” [Rom 6:17]. It is plain from these expressions that in preaching Christ the early Christian evangelists were teaching a body of doctrine about Christ. ^[17]

Dr. Stott concludes:

Our duty then is to avoid distorting or diluting the gospel, and at the same time to make it plain, to cut the word of truth straight so that people can follow it lest “when any one hears the word of the kingdom and does not understand it, the evil one comes and snatches away what is sown in his heart.” [Matt 13:19] I fear that our clumsy explanations sometimes give the devil this very opportunity which he ought never to be allowed. . . .

What Paul had renounced, he told the Corinthians, was the wisdom of the world (as the substance of his message) and the rhetoric of the Greeks (as his method of presenting it). Instead of worldly wisdom he resolved to preach Christ and him crucified, and instead of rhetoric to rely on the power of the Spirit. But he still used doctrine and arguments. So then in our evangelistic proclamation we must address the whole person (mind, heart and will) with the whole gospel (Christ incarnate, crucified, risen, reigning, coming again, and much else besides). ^[18]

It is fideism, the view that real faith is apart from reason, that insists faith is irrational. We have discussed this view thoroughly elsewhere. ^[19]

E) Saving Faith is Preserved in Spirit-liberated Reason

Because we obtain salvation through what we believe, salvation is obtained through the mind as described above. Likewise, then, saving faith is also preserved in the mind. We demonstrated in chapter 4.12 that for the unregenerated person, the sinful nature and satan are free to squelch the evidence on which their faith in God is based, and they therefore lose such faith. Such is not the case with the born again Christian.

We believe this is illustrated in ones such as Noah, Abraham, Moses, Caleb, Joshua, David, and the Prophets who had such enduring faith in God, but not because of something they could take credit for in and of themselves. Rather, we would suggest that God’s Spirit worked in such men in a special and unique way, enabling them to maintain the supernatural faith in God they had. The Holy Spirit did not impart the stories of these great men to glorify them, but rather to point again to the God who enabled them.

Accordingly, the Canons of the Council of Orange (529), an early meeting of Church leaders, states:

And thus according to the passages of holy scripture quoted above or the interpretations of the ancient Fathers we must, under the blessing of God, preach and believe as follows. The sin of the first man has so impaired and weakened free will that no one thereafter can either love God as he ought or believe in God or do good for God’s sake, unless the grace of divine mercy has preceded him. We therefore believe that the glorious faith which was given to Abel the righteous, and Noah, and Abraham, and Isaac, and Jacob, and to all the saints of old, and which the Apostle Paul commends in extolling them (Heb. 11), was not given through natural goodness as it was before to Adam, but was bestowed by the grace of God. ^[20]

The OT heroes seemed to be forerunners of those Israelites, who through the New Covenant, were also to receive the Spirit. In other words, the following promise from Ezekiel was fulfilled for such men long before it would be realized for the Jewish nation in general:

The faith of Noah (cf. Gen 6:5-14), contrasted with the other estimated 10 billion people in the world; ^[21] the faith of Abraham (cf. Gen 15:6), contrasted with Lot; the faith of Moses (cf. Num 11:17), Joshua (cf. Num 27:18), Caleb (cf. Num 14:24), and the Prophets (cf. 1 Pet 1:11) contrasted with the rest of the Jewish nation; the faith and character of David (cf. 1 Sam 16:13-14; Ps 51:11), contrasted with Saul; all reflect, as the verses referenced indicate, a special work of the Spirit in their lives, and demonstrate even in the OT the vast difference between regenerated and unregenerated hearts in relation to faith.

There would seem to be good evidence that such men were not under the control of a sinful nature that is “hostile to God [and] does not submit to God’s law, nor can it do so” (Rom 8:7). All men born since Adam have been in bondage to the sinful nature, and if these men were not, it was undoubtedly because some action of the Spirit had transformed them so that the sinful nature was dethroned, enabling them to love, obey, and believe God as they uniquely did. Any real virtue in humanity is a fruit of the Holy Spirit. ^[22]

We are therefore inclined to agree with theologian Wayne Grudem when he writes: “[T]he fact that there was any saving faith at all in old covenant believers requires us to think that there was some kind of regenerating work of the Holy Spirit in them, enabling them to believe.” ^[23] Likewise, Millard Erickson writes, “There are several biblical considerations that argue for the occurrence of regeneration in the Old Testament (or pre-Pentecost) period.” ^[24] While we would stop short of calling it regeneration, there was no doubt a special operation of the Spirit in the lives of OT heroes, and it was His enablement that made them heroes. ^[25]

David clearly implies a special possession of the Holy Spirit when he prays, “Do not cast me from Your presence or take Your Holy Spirit from me” (Ps 51:11). OT scholars Keil and Delitzsch comment on David’s statement:

David’s prayer has reference to the very same thing that is promised by the prophets as a future work of salvation wrought by God the Redeemer on His people (Jer 24:7; Ezek 11:19; 36:26); it has reference to those spiritual facts of experience which, it is true, could be experienced even under the Old Testament relatively and anticipatively. ^[26]

As we turn to the NT, we would suggest that the difference between the “Peter of Passover” and the “Peter of Pentecost” illustrates the difference between Spirit-liberated and devil-darkened reason in regards to faith as well. Because of a supernatural, direct revelation from God, the Apostle Peter sincerely and confidently believed that the King was, “the Christ, the Son of the living God.” (cf. Matt 16:15-17). In fact, he was so confident of Who Christ was that he said just as sincerely and confidently: “Even if I have to die with You, I will never disown You” (Matt 26:35).

Yet, that “very night,” Peter did “disown” Christ, not once or twice, but “three times” (Matt 26:34); and not before angry crowds of politicians or priests, but before a lone “servant girl” (Matt 26:69) and then “another girl” (Matt 26:71). We would suggest, as described in chapter 4.12, that both sin and satan (cf. Luke 22:31-2) took advantage of the free reign they have to oppress, confuse, and deceive the unregenerated mind, resulting in Peter losing the faith he had in Christ.

Fast-forwarding a mere fifty some days, ^[27] we see the Apostle Peter preaching the present salvation and coming condemnation of the King fearlessly to a crowd of thousands. A few days later we find him defiantly standing before the Sanhedrin, in the face of “threats” (Acts 4:21) and commands, “not to speak or teach at all in the name of Jesus” (4:18). Nonetheless the Apostle declares: “Judge for yourselves whether it is right in God’s sight to obey you rather than God. For we cannot help speaking about what we have seen and heard” (4:19-20). Finally, early Church history tells us that Peter was willingly crucified upside down for his faith in Jesus Christ. ^[28]

What was the difference? Was Peter’s indomitable faith a result of seeing Christ resurrected? Hardly, as he had seen resurrections before (cf. John 11:44ff) and still denied Christ. The answer is Pentecost! Peter had been regenerated on that glorious day, as was every believer to be afterwards. This is substantiated in John when we read:

Whoever believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, streams of living water will flow from within him. By this He meant the Spirit, Whom those who believed in Him were later to receive. Up to that time the Spirit had not been given, since Jesus had not yet been glorified. (John 7:38-9) ^[29]

Like the OT Jews, Peter’s faith wavered as his unregenerated mind was filled with doubts by his self-preserving, self-centered, and uninhibited sinful nature. But with regeneration, he was liberated from such insanity, and his reason was enabled to think rightly, being unable to deny what he knew, even at the threat of death. Accordingly, we suggest that NT believers who now enjoy the same supernatural regeneration will no longer be susceptible to the actual denial of Christ like the pre-Pentecost Peter, but will rather willingly die for such faith like the post-Pentecost Peter.

It is because the truth of our saving faith resides and is preserved in our Spirit-liberated reason, that the believer’s mind will be the target of the antichrist’s attacks in the last days. Christ says: “false Christs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and miracles to deceive even [the mind of] the elect–if that were possible” (Matt 24:24). And while the whole rest of the world will be persuaded by such evidence (cf. Rev 13:3), those with Spirit-liberated reason will “hold to the testimony of Jesus” (Rev 12:17).

At least part of the reason will be the fact that satan will not be able to produce greater evidence for a belief in him, as opposed to the King. Nor will satan have evidence or arguments sufficient to rival all the evidence that God has provided for His rightful worship, including that which He has provided in the past, and that which He will no doubt be providing in abundance even in those trying Last Days.

F) Saving Faith is a Result of Regeneration, not Revelation

One point that can be made here is that while our regeneration is supernatural, we would argue that the rest of the salvation experience is rather “natural.” In other words, the truths of the Gospel do not come to us by way of supernatural revelation as they did to the Apostle Paul (cf. Gal 1:11-12), but rather the “natural” preaching of the Gospel through humans. Likewise, it seems misplaced to claim that the Spirit in some way supernaturally applies or communicates the truths of the Gospel to our minds. Rather, He simply “fixes” our reason, which then accepts the facts and evidence of the Gospel, just like it accepts any other facts or evidence.

However, some would suggest otherwise. For example, Geoffrey Bromiley in an entry to the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia on “Faith,” seems to describe the “illumination” of the Spirit as something more than just restoring reason, but as also containing revelation apart from, and in addition to, the preached Gospel:

Even to understand the facts and truths [of the Gospel] in their real significance, an illumination is required that goes beyond ordinary comprehension (1 Cor. 2). This is the illumination that is effected by the Holy Spirit bearing His own witness [revelation?] along with that of the written and spoken word. Again, this illumination carries with it more than intellectual perception. It is a disclosure [revelation?] not only of facts and truths, but of the true nature of God in Jesus Christ and of the true nature of man as the lost sinner who has no hope of salvation except in God. ^[30]

The work of the Spirit seems to be confused here with what the message of the Gospel alone is sufficient to convey to spiritually liberated reason.

Imagine, for example, that you are standing in a room that is completely dark, with another person whose presence you are not aware of. If someone comes and turns on the light, you will automatically and naturally see the person. It is not that the light in the room somehow subliminally communicates that there is a person in the room, which is the way the “testimony” or “illumination” of the Spirit is often described by theologians. Rather, the light (i.e. Spirit) simply enables your natural reasoning faculties to function, thus producing a belief in the same way God made us to obtain other beliefs.

Without the sinful nature, our moral reason (i.e. conscience) will “naturally” produce the guilt that Dr. Bromiley speaks of, and likewise, our logical reasoning (i.e. mind) will “naturally” produce a belief in the King based on the testimony and evidence that can be “naturally” provided in the preaching and explanation of the Gospel. ^[31]

Extras & Endnotes

A Devotion to Dad

Our Father, thank You again for setting our minds free to know and serve You. We thank You for enabling us to escape the “insanity of humanity” concerning the message of Creation and the Gospel. Help us to have compassion on those who do not accept these messages, understanding that it is not because of a mental problem, but a spiritual problem which only God can fix. Amen.

Gauging Your Grasp

Why do we claim that the regeneration of the Holy Spirit is the hinge on which spiritual conversion turns? Why would you agree or disagree?
Why do we claim that the Gospel message is irresistible and that saving faith is a gift in regards to Spirit-liberated reason? Why would you agree or disagree?
What is our explanation for the exceptional faith of OT heroes? Why would you agree or disagree?
What is one suggested explanation for why the Antichrist will not be able to deceive Christians during his reign on earth?

Recommended Reading

For more detailed discussion of the nature of saving faith see chapters 6.2-6.

Publications & Particulars

We italicize saving faith because we define it rather precisely elsewhere and it needs to be distinguished from the many other kinds of faith. Saving faith is simply the faith that saves us. For further discussion of this see section 6.1.D and 6.2.C.1. ↑
For further discussion on the mental acceptance involved in faith see section 6.15.A. ↑
Admittedly, there is some disagreement on the identification of “the opponents” being addressed in 2 Timothy 2:23-26. John MacArthur seems to claim they are believers when he writes:

Because the objects of this instruction are those who teach false doctrine and live ungodly lives, this particular instruction is in the form of correction. . . . Consequently, when confronting believers who are teaching falsehood and living sinfully, one must never do so with an attitude of personal superiority. Christians are to have compassion for them in their sin just as the Lord has compassion. (MacArthur’s New Testament Commentary, Electronic Edition STEP Files CD-ROM [Parsons Technology, 1997], 2 Tim 2:23-26)

However, knowing Dr. MacArthur’s stand on the need for holiness to prove one’s faith (The Gospel According to Jesus, etc.), we are surprised to see him assume that “those who teach false doctrine and live ungodly lives” are believers.

Concerning the identification of “the opponents” in this passage, Donald Guthrie writes: “There can be no doubt that the false teachers mentioned elsewhere in the Pastorals are in mind here” (The Pastoral Epistles (Eerdmans, 1999), 166). Gordon Fee, however, is not so sure and writes:

The greater difficulty is with the word translated those who oppose him, an extremely rare word that can refer either to the opponents themselves or to “those who are adversely affected” (Bernard) by the opponents. Is Timothy to discipline his opponents . . . or is he to instruct or re-educate those who have been “taken in” by the false teachers? This is not easy to determine, since both are elsewhere seen as entrapped by satan (cf. 1 Tim. 4:1-2; 3:7; 6:9). It is probably safe to say that it at least includes the people who have been so ensnared and may also include the false teachers themselves. (1 & 2 Timothy, & Titus [Hendricksen, 1988], 265.

George W. Knight III is equally ambiguous stating that “those who are in opposition” are either the “false teachers themselves or . . . those influenced by the false teachers. (Commentary on the Pastoral Epistles (NIGTC) (Eerdmans, 1992), 2 Tim 2:23-26).

John Calvin was clear on his position that “the opponents” were unbelievers, commenting here that:

[T]he conversion of a man is in the hand of God . . . Thus, whoever shall consider that repentance is the gift and work of God, will cherish more earnest hope . . . unbelievers are so intoxicated by satan . . . being asleep . . . drawn by the unseen power of satan. That is what we saw at Ephesians 2:2 that satan exerts his energy in unbelievers. (Calvin’s Bible Commentaries [online at http://www.ccel.org], 2 Tim 2:24-26)

We agree with Calvin and believe “the opponents” not only refer to false teachers in the church, but unregenerate false teachers at that.

First, Paul describes the recipients of this ministry as promoting “foolish and stupid arguments” and “quarrels” (v. 23). We doubt that the Apostle would characterize believers asking doctrinal questions in this way. Secondly, he describes them as “everyone” (v. 24) which certainly at least goes beyond just believers. Thirdly, the recipients “oppose [antidiatithemenous]” “the Lord’s servant” (v. 25). Literally, the Greek means to “set oneself in opposition” (NAS Hebrew & Greek Dictionaries, Robert L. Thomas, gen. ed., Electronic Edition, Parsons Technology [Lockman Foundation, 1998], G475). In other words, these people are doing more than merely disagreeing with “the Lord’s servant” but they are publicly opposing and even persecuting them.

Which is why the minister needs to be reminded not to be “resentful [anexikakon]” (v. 24), the Greek literally meaning, “endure evil” (Ibid., G420). or “bearing evil without resentment.” (A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Early Christian Literature (BDAG), F. W. Danker, ed., 3^rd ed. [University Of Chicago Press, 2001], ἀνεξίκακος).

2 Timothy 2:24 is the only place the word anexikakon is used in the NT. The BDAG is wrong in our opinion to claim the word is being used here to refer to “bearing evil without resentment, patient, tolerant, of Christians.” There is nothing in the word itself or its uses in ancient Greek literature to suggest this, so we must infer its meaning from the context. As demonstrated here, the context is rather mean and arrogant unbelievers, not believers. In other words, the recipients being described here are being so evil toward the minister of the Gospel that resentment is tempting and considerable endurance is needed in the face of their personal attacks.

If one still doubts that the passage is referring to ministry to unbelievers, we need to take note of their relationship with satan. John Stott comments on the phrase “come to their senses”:

He [satan] also drugs or inebriates them, for the word used of his captives’ escape (ananēphō) means literally to ‘become sober’ or ‘come to one’s senses again’ (ag) after a period of diabolical intoxication. (The Message of 2 Timothy [Intervarsity, 1973], 2 Tim 2:25)

The Apostle also describes them as “having been held captive [ezōgrēmenoi, lit.: “captured alive” (NAS Hebrew & Greek Dictionaries, G2221)] by [the devil] to do his will” (v. 26 NAS). This is not describing the temporary deception of a believer, but the complete enslavement of the unregenerated under the dominion of satan described elsewhere in Scripture (cf. John 8:44; Rom 6:6, 16; 1 John 5:13). The Greek rendered here as “held captive” is used elsewhere in the NT only at Luke 5:10 where it metaphorically refers to catching fish in a net. Again, there is a sense of complete control and helplessness which certainly describes the “children of the devil” (1 John 3:10). ↑
Admittedly, we part with all commentators we know of in interpreting the Apostle’s prayer in Ephesians 3:16-17 as concerning unbelievers. Accordingly, Dr. Stott writes:

Some are puzzled by this first petition when they remember [assume?] that Paul is praying for Christians. ‘Surely’, they say, ‘Christ dwells by his Spirit within every believer? So how can Paul ask here that Christ may dwell in their hearts? Was Christ not already within them?’ To these questions we begin by replying that indeed every Christian is indwelt by Christ and is the temple of the Holy Spirit.’ Nevertheless as Charles Hodge rightly comments, ‘The indwelling of Christ is a thing of degrees’.’ (The Message of Ephesians [Intervarsity, 1986], 135)

On the contrary, we do not believe that “The indwelling of Christ is a thing of degrees,” but rather a one-time complete act. Therefore, the popular interpretation of Ephesians 3:16-17 as concerning the need for believers to yet be indwelled with Christ not only seems to ignore the Apostle’s statement at face value, but can lead to the erroneous idea that not all of the Person of Christ comes to dwell in us at conversion.

This is a potentially harmful teaching, similar to the Pentecostal doctrine of the “baptism of the Spirit,” in which only some Christians have all of the Person of the Spirit. The biblical fact is that all of Christ is in any born again Christian and there are no “degrees” of indwelling, although there is certainly degrees of controlling. Christ fully indwells all Christians (cf. 2 Cor 13:5; Col 1:27; 1 John 5:12), just as the Holy Spirit does, but He does not equally control all Christians.

The whole difficulty is solved by simply allowing for the fact that the Apostle was concerned that there were still unconverted people in the Ephesian church. Is that so difficult? The Apostle stated clearly that he feared the same thing about the Corinthian church (cf. 2 Cor 13:5).

We agree with most commentators then that the Apostle is praying about a sequence of spiritual growth here. However, we would suggest that such a sequence would need to start with regeneration for some of the people who would hear or read the Apostle’s epistle, before they could then be, “rooted and established in love,” having “power . . . to grasp . . . the love of Christ” so that they “may be filled to the measure of all the fullness of God” (3:17-19).

Those who are Reformed in their theology may have difficulty with the idea of the Apostle praying for what God has already decided to do in terms of who will and will not be saved (cf. Eph 1:4-11; Acts 13:48; 2 Tim 2:10). However, the Apostle was not praying for certain individuals to be saved, but for whatever elect were in the church that had not yet been converted. Therefore, even from a Reformed perspective, this would be a very appropriate prayer. ↑
James Clark, in Five Views on Apologetics, Steven Cowan ed. (Zondervan, 2000), 139. ↑
Charles Spurgeon, quoted online at http://www.monergism.com/ thethreshold/articles/onsite/whatmoner_history.html ↑
Robert L. Reymond, A New Systematic Theology of the Christian Faith (Thomas Nelson, 1998), 730. ↑
Augustine of Hippo, quoted online at

http://www.monergism.com/thethreshold/articles/onsite/whatmoner_history.html. ↑
Alvin Plantinga, Warranted Christian Belief (Oxford University Press, 2000), 264. ↑
J. Oliver Buswell, The Philosophies of F. R. Tennant and John Dewey, (Philosophical Library, 1950), 118 ↑
While the Apostle could hardly be clearer in Ephesian 2:8-9, some wish to claim that he meant to intentionally exclude saving “faith” from those requirements of salvation that are “not of yourselves,” and that he was only generally referring to salvation as that which is a “gift of God.” This seems unlikely. If the Apostle is teaching that being “saved” is “not from yourselves . . . is the gift of God” and “not by works” then he certainly meant that the “faith” through which we are saved is also “not from yourselves . . . is the gift of God” and “not by [our] works.”

The Apostle made it clear elsewhere that saving faith is a gift given by God when he wrote: “It has been granted [by God] to you . . . to believe on Him” (Phil 1:29) for salvation. Paul described his own salvation experience as: “The grace of our Lord was poured out on me abundantly, along with the [saving] faith that are in Christ Jesus” (1 Tim 1:14). Not only the “grace” to be saved was “poured out on” Paul by the “Lord,” but “the faith” as well. Likewise, Luke describes “those who by [God’s] grace had believed” (Acts 18:27).

Normally a different view of Ephesians 2:8-9 is supported by claiming that the differing genders of the Greek words make it impossible for “this [touto]” to refer to “faith [pisteōs].” According to a personal conversation I had with the foremost Romans scholar Douglas Moo, Professor of NT at Wheaton College, this is not true. The genders of Greek words can differ, and often do in the NT, when referring to ideas, which is a very legitimate view of this text. Accordingly, Abraham Kuyper wrote regarding Ephesians 2:8-9: “Nearly all the church fathers and almost all the theologians eminent for Greek scholarship judged that the words ‘it is the gift of God’ refer to faith.” (The Work of the Holy Spirit, Eerdmans, 1946, 407). For further comment on the Greek text of Ephesians 2:8-9 see Book 6: Biblical Believing, chapter 6.3. ↑
For further discussion of Ephesians 2:8-9 see section 6.3.B. ↑
C. H. Spurgeon, “Effects of Sound Doctrine,” (online at http://www.spurgeongems.org/vols4-6/vols4-6.htm ), # 324. ↑
For a discussion of apologetics in relation to the Apostle’s approach to evangelism see section 2.2.C.; and chapters 5.11 and 5.13. ↑
John Stott, Your Mind Matters (Intervarsity, 1973), 21-22. ↑
Ibid., 46. ↑
Ibid., 48-49. ↑
Ibid., 51-52. ↑
Fideism is discussed further in chapters 2.10 and 6.12. ↑
Council of Orange; online at http://www.reformed.org/documents/ index.html?mainframe=http://www.reformed.org/documents/canons_of_orange.html ↑
Henry Morris, the recognized founder of modern creation science, calculated that in the estimated 1700 years between Adam and Noah, with people having multiple children until very old age, that around 10 billion people were on the Earth at the time of the flood. See calculations online at http://www.redeemerfw.org/resources/prefloodpop.html. ↑
For further discussion on the source of any virtue in humanity see chapters 5.1; 5.7-8. ↑
Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology (Zondervan, 1994), 769-70. ↑
Christian Theology, 2nd ed., (Baker, 1998), 993. However, as noted below, we feel the term OT “regeneration” is too strong. ↑
The case of King Saul requires special comment. In 1 Samuel 10 God tells Saul that:

The Spirit of the LORD will come upon you in power, and you will prophesy with them; and you will be changed into a different person. Once these signs are fulfilled, do whatever your hand finds to do, for God is with you. . . . As Saul turned to leave Samuel, God changed Saul’s heart, and all these signs were fulfilled that day. (vs. 6-7,9)

The language certainly suggests a supernatural experience of the Holy Spirit. However, Saul demonstrates a significant difference between spiritual “anointing” in the OT and regeneration in the NT. In the former, you could lose the Spirit. Later, after Saul’s disobedience, we read “Now the Spirit of the LORD had departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the LORD tormented him” (1 Sam 16:14). This is precisely what King David feared when he prayed after his sin of adultery: “Do not cast me from Your presence or take Your Holy Spirit from me” (Ps 51:11).

However, we do not believe this is a possibility under the New Covenant. We receive eternal life (and regeneration) when we believe on Christ (cf. John 3:16), and something eternal cannot be temporary. Accordingly, the Apostle said:

And you also were included in Christ when you heard the word of truth, the Gospel of your salvation. Having believed, you were marked in Him with a seal, the promised Holy Spirit, Who is a deposit guaranteeing our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God’s possession—to the praise of His glory. (Eph 1:13-14)

The case of King Saul described above reflects a great difference in how the Spirit worked in OT believers and how He does so today under the New Covenant. Because we believe being born again by the Holy Spirit is an irreversible process just like physical birth, we reserve the word “regeneration” for NT believers, while recognizing that the Spirit did transforming, enlightening work in the lives of OT believers as well.

Accordingly, after discussing the work of the Spirit in the OT Dr. Grudem comments:

I do not mean to say that believers’ experience of regeneration in the old covenant was exactly the same as that of new covenant believers. While considerations listed in the following discussion indicate a less-powerful work of the Holy Spirit in the old covenant, defining the nature of the differences is difficult, since Scripture gives us little explicit information about it. (769-70)

Likewise, after making a case for the regeneration of OT believers much like that which occurs under the New Covenant, Dr. Erickson notes that, “The Holy Spirit did not dwell within, but exerted an external influence” (994). Accordingly, it is difficult to conceive of OT believers being born again in the NT sense if the Spirit did not actually indwell them. ↑
C. F. Keil and F. Delitzsch, Commentary on the Old Testament Electronic Edition STEP Files CD-ROM (Findex.com, 2000), in loc. ↑
This is based on the fact that the Jewish festival of Pentecost (during which Peter preached) was the fiftieth day after the Jewish Passover (when Christ was tried and crucified). ↑
Eusebius quotes Origen (c. 200) as saying: “Peter was crucified at Rome with his head downwards, as he himself had desired to suffer.” (Ecclesiastical History, III.1; online at http://www.ccel.org. ↑
Some may interpret John 7:39 as evidence against our view that some OT believers were regenerated by the Holy Spirit. However, this statement would not necessarily negate the fact that limited and nature-changing operations of the Holy Spirit occurred before Pentecost (cf. previous footnote concerning King Saul and the difference between OT and NT work of the Spirit)

Also, the question arises as to when the promise of John 7:39 was fulfilled. John speaks of Christ giving the Spirit to the Apostles before Pentecost (cf. 20:22; Acts 1:7-8; 2:1-4). How do we reconcile these accounts? First, let us note that none of this changes our claim that the Apostle Peter was not regenerated by the Spirit during his denials of Christ, for these occurred before even the event described in John 20:22.

Secondly, it is best to interpret John 20:22 as a separate and different operation of the Spirit than the one recorded at Pentecost. Accordingly, NT scholar Leon Morris writes at John 20:22:

The relation of this gift to that made on the day of Pentecost is obscure. Some scholars maintain that the two are incompatible. They hold that Luke thought that the Spirit was not bestowed until ten days after the ascension, whereas John thought of this gift as taking place on the evening of the day of resurrection. But this may be going too far too fast. The circumstances of the two gifts are completely different. And, whereas that in Acts 2 is followed immediately by some very effective preaching, no sequel to this gift is narrated [in John 20].

It is the teaching of the New Testament that “There are different kinds of gifts, but the same Spirit” (1 Cor. 12:4), and the problem is probably to be solved along these lines. It is false alike to the New Testament and to Christian experience to maintain that there is but one gift of the Spirit. Rather the Spirit continually manifests himself in new ways.

Subsequent to the gift at Pentecost the Spirit fell on all who heard the word in the house of Cornelius (Acts 10:44), just as “on us at the beginning” (Acts 11: 15). On several occasions believers are said to have been “filled with the Holy Spirit” (e.g., Acts 4:8, 31; 9:17; 13:9; cf. Rom. 5:5; 1 Cor. 2:12, etc.), where the aorists indicate new activities of the Spirit, rather than a reference to what had always been the case. John tells of one gift of the Spirit and Luke of another. . . .

Hoskyns sees in the predictions of [John] 14:16, 26; 16:7, 13, evidence that John thought of a gift of the Spirit that would be given after Jesus’ return to the Father. “There is therefore a distinction between the two gifts of the Spirit. The Resurrection scenes in the Fourth Gospel are all preparatory scenes, preparatory for the mission. What the Lord will do invisibly from heaven He here does visibly on earth. The mission is inaugurated, but not actually begun. The disciples still remain in secret, behind closed doors. The actual beginning of the mission lies outside the scope of the Fourth Gospel. There remains, therefore, room for the Pentecostal outpouring. (The Gospel According to John, [Eerdmans, 1995], 747-8).

NT scholar D. A. Carson lists John Calvin, B. F. Westcott, and F. F. Bruce as additional supporters of this view (The Gospel According to John [Eerdmans, 1991], 650). ↑
“Faith” in the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia (ISBE), Geoffrey W. Bromiley, ed., 4 vols., (Eerdmans, 1988), II:271. ↑
For further discussion of the “testimony” and “illumination” of the Spirit see chapters 3.4 and 3.5 respectively. ↑