Hello,

We all believe that regeneration logically precedes conversion, i.e, we are not synergistic but believe in divine initiative in salvation.

However, there are not unconverted yet regenerated people walking around.

When a wheel moves, all the spokes move at the same time. The light is from the sun and the sun itself is the source, but we never see the two apart.

Can we say that there is any chronological space between regeneration and conversion at all? Or should we speak of both as functionally simultaneous.

Has anyone advocated the former? The latter? I'd love to read quotes.

__________________
Pergamum


"If a commission by an earthly king is considered a honor, how can a commission by a Heavenly King be considered a sacrifice?"
-- David Livingstone

I can only speak from experience that when I was regenerated to be able to have my first understanding of God I did not come to a saving faith immediately. I had a knowledge of His absolute sovereignty but didn't know if I would rather die than live with it. The gap was full of the struggle of the old man and lasted for two months. The two events for me were very distinct and identifiable events and it's as clear as day that they were not simultaneous.

__________________
Paul
No denomination, affiliated with FIEC
"Deliver me from worldly dispositions, for I am born from above and destined for glory" - Valley of Vision
"They think it strange that you do not plunge with them into the same flood of dissipation" - Peter

By conversion, do you mean justification?

__________________
Ewen
1689 LBCF
Assemblies of God Bible College
Singapore

I was just reading Spurgeon on this issue, and he is the one who invented the wheel! Er, came up with the wheel analogy for regeneration/faith.


"The righteousness of the Law is fulfilled in the Christian by the Grace of God. When we believe in Christ we not only receive pardon, but we also receive renewal. I am told that the teaching of certain people, nowadays, is that the Believer only gets pardon to begin with and a long time afterwards he gets the clean heart. But I say, on the authority of God’s Word, that no man is pardoned unless he has a clean heart! God gives the clean heart at the time He gives the pardon! You must never divide the renewing of the Holy Spirit from the pardon of sin. They go together and he that receives the pardon of sin receives a new birth—and is made a new creature in Christ Jesus then and there. The work of regeneration and the act of faith which brings justification to the penitent sinner are simultaneous and must, in the nature of the case, always be so"- "The Law's Failure and Fulfillment"


"I want you, now, to advance another step. I have almost anticipated this third point—“While you have light, believe in the light, that you may be the children of light.” Here is A RESULT OF FAITH MENTIONED. They who believe in Christ receive a change of nature. They were born heirs of wrath, but, by Grace they become children of the Light of God. “You were sometimes darkness, but now are you light in the Lord,” as soon as you have believed in Jesus Christ! This new birth, this regeneration, is a great puzzle to many poor sinners. One asks, “How can I make myself a new creature in Christ?” Of course, you can do nothing of the kind! This is a miracle—it is as much a work of God to make us children of light as it was to make light in the first place! Only God can work this miracle, but mark you this, there never was a soul, yet, that truly believed in Christ, but at the same time it underwent the change called the new birth or regeneration. Christians have often been asked about which is first, faith or regeneration, belief in Christ or being born again. I will tell you, when you answer me this question—When a wheel moves, which spoke moves first? “Oh, they all start together!” you say. So these other things all start together, whether it is the hub of the wheel, which is regeneration, or the spokes of the wheel, which are faith, repentance, hope, love and so on—when the wheel moves, it all moves at once!

If you believe in Jesus Christ and Him crucified, in the moment that you believe, this great change of nature is effected in you, for faith has, in itself, a singularly transforming power. It is a fact in everyday experience that when a man comes to believe in his employer, he becomes, at once, a better employee. A person whom I disliked, because I suspected him, becomes, at once, pleasing to me as soon as I trust him. So, faith towards God, in itself, produces a total change of mind in the man who has it.

But, beside that, there goes with faith a Divine energy which changes the heart of man. I have heard of an old sinner who had been in prison many a day, growing gray in his iniquity, who took a little child up in his arms, and, as he put his hand upon the boy’s curly head, he said, “There would be some hope for me if I could become like this little child.” Now, that is exactly what God can do for you! If you believe in Jesus Christ, you shall receive a new and childlike nature. There shall be created in you something better than what is called the primitive innocence of infancy—it shall be a really pure and holy life that shall be given to you and you shall become a new creature in Christ Jesus!"- "Despised Light Withdrawn"

Abraham Booth argued similarly, but I don't have time to post it at the moment...it's in his work "Glad Tidings to Perishing Sinners." You can read it online here.

Note: Neither of these men are saying that effectual calling does not precede faith. Neither are saying faith and repentance aren't gifts from God to the elect. The question is, is it called regeneration/new birth?

__________________
MarieP
Reformed Baptist Church
Louisville, KY

"I am not worthy of the least of all the mercies and of all the truth which You have shown Your servant" (Gen. 32:10)

What exactly do you mean by 'conversion'? Sanctification? Repentance? Obedience and good works? Enlightenment?

__________________


http://www.villagecommunitychurch.org/


"Preparing a sermon is like cooking a meal. You need pots and pans and utensils, but you don't bring them out to the table where people are eating." Derek Thomas


Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions?

You must be my mind-reader. This is the Spurgeon quote that I had in mind when I posted my question (I just couldn't locate it). Thanks. It appears that these men, though they would say that the divine initiative is the cause and source of one's faith/repentance, always speak of the New Birth and faith as happening in the same event (i.e. no chronological gap).

Faith is the reflex action of a regenerate soul.

The moment a soul is regenerated (i.e. washed in Christ's blood by the application of the Spirit/baptised "with" or "by" the Spirit by Christ into His body/given a new heart) he/she exercises faith in Christ. The moment he/she exercises faith in Christ he/she is justified and adopted, and definitive sanctification happens and evangelical repentance and progressive sanctification begin.

It may be wiser to distinguish the ordo salutis/order of salvation logically rather than chronologically.

__________________
Richard
communicant member, FCoS
Perth, Scotland UK

His Name forever shall endure;
last like the sun it shall:
Men shall be blessed in Him,
and blessed all nations shall Him call (Ps. 72:17)

You mentioned you'd love to read quotes. Just came across this on the net,

Not exactly a quote, and moreover Sproul is dealing with monergistic vs. synergistic regeneration. Maybe not quite what you have in mind but I leave it to you on how you read it.

What do you think of the Spurgeon quote below?


If we only stress that regeneration precedes faith (logically) but do not stress that these actions occur as one event (chronologically), do we make people believe that there is a chronological gap to be expected between regeneration and our faith.

Would Spurgeon's phrasing help to reduce this?

I certainly agree in principle that the events: 1)regeneration and 2) faith, are as related to each other as fertilization of the egg and growth.

But I'm not prepared to absolutize the principle, by saying that regeneration is like turning the ignition on a car--which is a fully functional machine, all systems GO as soon as the brand new car is started the first time.

I used to work in an auto plant. The body came out of paint, it came on the assembly line, it went from start to finish in maybe an hour or less, a BMW X5, $60,000 worth (OK, a bit overpriced). They started it up, did a wheel test in a booth (150 MPH or something), and drove that car off to park it for shipment. Bottom line, the car either was roadworthy, or it was in need of rework. But most of them probably went out the door, ready to drive.

The wheel-spoke analogy is an extremely simplified version of the full car analogy. But it assumes that the wheel just "exists", like the car "exists." That it only needs to energize the hub and the spokes and rim just roll.

It is close to reality to say that in many physically/mentally mature people there is an appropriate amount of pre-development to a conversion experience; or else what else is needed is substantially provided for or enhanced in the miracle of the new birth.

Birth is "organic." I think we need to keep that aspect of the "new birth" metaphor in mind. As I said above, the fertilization of an egg is necessarily connected to its growth and development. A good question might be: are there occasions when fertilization could be followed by delayed development?

Frozen embryoes are an example. And there might be other, more natural hibernations that take place, which we are not aware of. Why not? What about fits-and-starts? Do we not know of people with developmental handicaps? Plants that seem to struggle, or have growth-sprurts?


Now, I also realize that as a Presbyterian, I may be more amenable to accepting exceptional regenerative (germinating) acts of God (e.g. the possibility of regeneration-from-the-womb, or physical birth) than a Baptist is. I accept that God may implant a seed of faith whenever he wills, he may water it and grow it in different ways.

I believe the same Spirit-power, grace, and means both germinates and grows a seed of faith. It is the gospel that waters. In fact, I think it is normative to think of children's faith so developing. Since the operation is secret, we water them all as in a garden, and look for the fruits of conversion and righteousness.

So, while in the mature person, I think it is almost inevitable that we will see less chronological separation between regeneration and faith, yet even there I do not think we ought to assume it is our job to detect that connection, or that we should/must in every case see some "sign" that the work of salvation has begun--or else doubt it.

We should be gardeners, not cartsmen.

__________________
Rev. Bruce G. Buchanan
ChainOLakes Presbyterian Church, CentralLake, MI


When posting friends, kindly bear those words of earthly wisdom in mind:
Oh, that God the gift would give us
To see ourselves as others see us.
--Robert Burns, 1786 (modernized) ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ ♦ Click to get: Board Rules -- Signature Requirements -- Suggestions? --

Pastor Bruce,

Would you expect that many more Presbyterians would allow for a chronological gap than Baptists? Are there closely related paedobaptist/credobaptist issues at stake also?

Also, apart from babies and the mentally deficient, which may be special cases, can there be walking-around-regenerate people who are not yet converted? And of course, there is the hypothetical case of a post-regenerate but pre-converted person dying before coming to faith if we allow for any chronological time-gap.


Also, are you comfortable with the language of Spurgeon above which speaks of faith effecting our change of nature?

Calvin used the term regeneration as including the whole process of conversion and sanctification. Van Mastricht’s treatment of regeneration is, in many respects, typical of the late 17th century and many aspects would be readily recognized, particularly the explanation of regeneration as an instantaneous introduction of a new principle of life into the heart by the Spirit, logically prior to faith.

God certainly has his hand on his elect prior to conversion, moving them to the point of regeneration; but this moving is not regeneration. The physical birth analogy seems appropriate in this regard: The first thing we do when we are born is breathe, the first thing we do when we are born again is believe.

Whether or not there is a temporal gap between the two events may be beyond me, but it seems clear that Scripture gives no support to the idea that there may be regenerate persons running about without saving faith. We may not be able to discern the timing of this event in the lives of children brought up in Christian homes, but it nevertheless happens at some point. Praise God.

__________________
Jim
1689 LBCF
Independent Bible Church
North Texas, USA

Perg,
I can only speak by what I've seen mostly here on the PB. When we (prebyterians) point to Scriptures that seem to speak to the reality (not necessarily the commonality) of pre-partum regeneration, or near-birth regeneration, those texts are usually given a different gloss by the baptists.

In that kind of case, there may be more among our side who see the gap; however I'm not that comfortable confidently asserting a similarly generous gap for more mentally mature people in general.

I am not willing to grant that there are A LOT of "normal" people walking about who are regenerated, but not converted. While conceptually I can allow for it, theologically I find it probematic. If it does exist, then a cause should be discovered, and the obstacle to development removed. Because development is NORMAL. Non-deveopment is ABNORMAL, and like most biological abnormalities leads to premature death.

I'm reminded of the soils that "sprung up" with growth and were scorched to death, or were "choked out." Those were barren and fruitless (not just weak producers) and are condemned. Some "life" just looks like it, and isn't really.

But, we have to allow for people who are untaught, poorly taught, and who may be children of God. But we should also affirm faith in a God who works by means, and believe he will bring more water of his gospel to those who require such sustenance, that they may become what the elect are all destined for.


I would say that the exercise of saving faith is part and parcel of a changed nature, and works further changes to a once-depraved nature.

Bruce, thanks for your thoughts. I am re-researching this topic this week and I believe that regeneration precedes conversion logically. I am just wondering about the chronological aspects of the question.

Are you comfortable with saying that "faith effects a change of nature in a sinner?" or would you state that faith is the end-result of the new birth, as I recently heard someone assert.

Spurgeon says the former.

Also,

Spurgeon, on one sermon, also reminds his listeners that the Holy Spirit does not believe for the sinner, but that the sinner must believe for himself. How would you evaluate this way of phrasing it by Spurgeon?

Perg,
On the nature question, I want to distinguish between the initial "change of nature" and subsequent change.

Certainly my faith, my belief in God's Word of the gospel, changes me. Plants grow because of the sun's effects, and they grow as they function as plants. But what made the seed?

We're talking about a nature which was dead, and is now changed to living; and changes that are working through to recharacterize the thing itself.

Regeneration is the life imparted from without.

It might help to think of the idea of seeing. We need life, an eye, and light to see. Sight is likened to faith in Scripture. God makes the eye alive, he creates the eye, and sends the light. And we "see", I do, you do; God doesn't see for us. But it's such a passive thing, like faith. We see because it is natural.

What we see makes changes in us. The use of the eye, the exercise of the eye will contribute positively or negatively to the nature of the eye (in some sense, e.g. don't burn your retina!). But sight didn't create the ability to see.


Does this help?

I sure enjoyed this. Definitely some food for thought. For me, I know I slowly came around first by becoming more pure in actions, then became a Christian, then fell into a comfortable christian, regenerated, and now a practicing Christian who performs and learns of the Christian faith. Not to confuse this with a person who just gets saved 10 times over and over again......i tend towards monergism verse Synergysm anyway.

__________________
RL

Just speaking from my own conversion 'experience' for me it was a process. When I look back at it, I would almost be certain that I was regenerated some time prior to my 'conversion.' The intervening time for me was a time of serious seeking and investigation, but I don't think I would have been an honest seeker had not the Spirit regenerated me prior to my conversion experience.

The Scriptures teach the following:

Yet we know (according to Romans 3) that no one seeks after God. In my mind, for the Luke passage to be true, regeneration must occur some indefinite period of time prior to allow the person to "seek, ask and knock."

That's my subjective experience, I'm sure there are people for whom regeneration preceded conversion by a very short period of time. For me it was a discernible amount of time.

__________________
Carl Gobelman
Long Grove Community Church (Evangelical)
Vernon Hills, IL
Blog: http://newcreationperson.wordpress.com

"Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation. The old has passed away; behold, the new has come."

I know that regeneration logically is the cause of faith (or "precedes" faith) but can one be born again chronologically before one has faith?

Here is Spurgeon again with a denial:

Spurgeon: Metropolitan Tabernacle Pulpit, Volume 37, Year 1891, pages 560, 561, The Law's Failure and Fulfillment:


Is Spurgeon contrary to the Bible on this point? Or is he stressing this particular point so that none, in their Calvinism, would make regeneration chronoloigcally precede faith in such a way that there would be a time-gap between the new birth and faith?







"The dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God, and they that hear shall live" -- John 5:25.

"As many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name" -- John 1:12.

"Ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus" -- Galatians 3:26.

"Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ, is born of God" -- 1 John 5:1.

I think only , possibly, some hyper-Calvinists (?), would split regeneration and faith chronologically. When the light of the Holy Spirit is switched on in our hearts, things move at the speed of light. (II Corinthians 4:6).

The regenerate heart cannot but exercise faith in Christ even if it is small faith. It is of the nature of the regenerate heart to exercise faith.

Richard,

So you are placing a belief in this chronological gap as one of the danger-signs of hyper-calvinism?







Would it be too much to contend that regeneration and faith are inseparable and simultaneous?

To be honest with you I don't know too much about hyper-Calvinism, except that it used to, and may still, afflict some English Baptist churches.

See this book,

Really, what we're talking about is "evidence" for conversion.

Spurgeon is correct when he says that to have the first thing is to have the second thing, immediately and of necessity. What he's guarding against is the notion some have that you could possess a new, regenerated heart, but basically be mentally and spiritually unaware, unaffected, unimpacted by it--and perhaps for years. It is quite proper for him to oppose this view.

We should be careful not to read into his words support for things that expressed hostility to another thing could leave out. That would be like saying CountryX going to war against CountryA means X must be a friend to A's enemy, CountryB. Perhaps X needs to go to war with B also, but the fact that he does not is no indication of his allies.


To repeat an earlier observation, I do not think this question affects a presbyterian in the same way it does the baptist. I think both have an obligation to deal with it, but on our side, we simply do not place nearly the emphasis on making the judgment of where, or how far into conversion a person may be.

A person who wants to join the church: we ask him very simple questions after ensuring (by a members class and/or interview) that he has a rudimentary introduction to the faith he says he wishes to unite himself with. And we baptize him (and he is thereby baptized, regardless).

Whether he is regenerated, lying, or fooling himself, it doesn't make any difference. Except for the fact we may have to do church discipline in one way or another with him.

But we don't receive his profession (which presupposes his regeneration), and then wait a period of our own examination to see if his life exhibits sufficient "evidences" of his conversion before we will take him at his word. The signs will be there, eventually. Certain things we want to see early on, such as church attendance. But what a "weak" indicator that is! It is little more than verbal profession, week after week. And yet, it could be all we have to go on for quite some time.

Pastoring is constant attention, visiting, questioning, encouraging, looking, watching, warning, patience, preaching, praying, sacraments. All this is discipline. All these avenues of care and monitoring the flow of information.