Regeneration

Some Basic Thoughts on "Decisional Regeneration" From an Arminian Perspective

Someone asked a while back in the comments thread to one of my blog posts what I thought of “Decisional Regeneration”. Since this is a rather new label being thrown around mostly by Calvinists in a seeming attempt to mock a view of salvation conditioned by faith, it is important to address. Rather than write a new post I will just quote my initial response to the question below:

    I think “decisional regeneration” is a hard phrase to pin down and is just thrown around as a slander by Calvinists towards those who do not believe that regeneration precedes faith or that regeneration is irresistibly and unconditionally given to the “elect” alone. But there can be much more to it and so I wanted to be clear as to what your specific concern was.

In Defense of Resistible Grace to Retain the Goodness of God

To Calvinists, God's grace is irresistible. This follows naturally in their entire scheme of salvation by logical necessity. It is a point that must stand or the system falls. If God has not made His grace that moves the heart of man, convicts them of their sins, and enables them to come to Him irresistibly, then the Arminian is correct in that man has the ability to choose to resist that grace when it is presented to them. The question is, What does the Bible say, and What does that which we know about the character of God say?

Proof-texting Presuppositions with John 6:44, 65

Proof-texting Presuppositions with John 6:44, 65

    John 6:44 and 6:65 are commonly used as proof-texts that more often than not reveal the exegete’s presuppositions that are imposed upon the Gospel According to John than I believe John the Evangelist hoped to present in his Gospel. John 6:65 reads, "And he said, 'Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father,' " and John 6:44 reads, “No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day."

    From reading these two texts, where does one find evidence from these texts to make the following Calvinist assertions?

      Is predestination found in the text? No. Only if the reader pours it in.

      Is individual election found in the text? No. Only if the reader pours it in.

      Is eternal security found in the text? No. Only if the reader pours it in.

Al Jolson vs. Toby Mac Theology

1) Calvinist theology found in the opening lyrics to a famous song by Al Jolson:

YOU MADE ME LOVE YOU

You made me love you
I didn't want to do it
I didn't want to do it
You made me want you
And all the time you knew it
I guess you always knew it

You made me happy sometimes
Sometimes you made me glad
But there were times, dear
You made me feel so bad

2) Better theology by Toby Mac:

I WAS MADE TO LOVE YOU (chorus)

That I was made to love You
I was made to find You
I was made just for You
Made to adore You
I was made to love and be loved by You
You were here before me
You were waiting on me
And You said You’d keep me never would You leave me
I was made to love
And be loved by You

Does the Gospel According to Calvinism Offer Salvation to Anyone at all?

Dr. Picirilli thinks not. After making the point that Calvinists believe that those reprobates who hear the gospel cannot truly respond to the offer of salvation, he further observes that,

    Furthermore, in the Calvinistic system, the gospel is not really offering salvation to any, since neither the elect nor the non-elect can accept the offer or meet its conditions. In fact, the “conditions” are not really conditions in the Calvinist system. They are part of the “package” of salvation benefits given to the elect by virtue of the death of Christ for them.

    Without realizing it, the Calvinist is finally saying that repentance and faith (as the gift of God in the salvation “package”) are being offered to all who will repent and believe, when in fact none can do so. This reduces to pure tautology and is no offer at all. (Grace, Faith, Free Will, pp. 117, 118, emphasis his)

John Goodwin, *Redemption Redeemed*

Now available here online, John Goodwin's Redemption Redeemed may be the best defense of Arminianism ever written. Published in 1651 by the Arminian Puritan John Goodwin (1593-1665), it is written in seventeenth century English with a Puritan writing style, which can make for challenging reading. But it contains tremendous biblical exegesis. The patient reader will be rewarded with a powerful, classic, comprehensive, biblical defense of five point Reformation Arminian theology.

The book runs 740 pages and is made available here in eight file attachments. There is a table of contents along with the first part of the body of the book in the first file. Besides the last part of the body of the book, the final file also contains a Scripture index, a subject index, and a table of general rules for interpreting Scripture. The material is arranged like so:

File 1: Preliminary matter through page 78
File 2: Pages 79-173
File 3: Pages 174-268
File 4: Pages 269-363

Is the "New Heart" of Ezekiel 36:26-27 a Reference to Regeneration Preceding Faith?

Calvinists will often quote Ezekiel 36:26-27 as a proof text for regeneration preceding faith. The Calvinist doctrine insists that one must be given a new heart before that person can believe the gospel. For that reason, Ezekiel 36:26-27 is often called into service to demonstrate this principle. Below is the passage with verse 25 included:

    I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols I will cleanse you. And I will give you a new heart, and a new spirit I will put within you. And I will remove the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to obey my rules. (ESV)

Does this passage give the Calvinist what he needs to defend his doctrine? Does it truly demonstrate that regeneration precedes faith and that God must give a sinner a new heart before he or she can believe unto life?

The Equivocation of Regeneration

In the order of salvation, which comes first, faith or regeneration? Before we can answer that, don't we first need to understand what regeneration is? In this post I plan on contrasting Hodge's view with that of Arminius. Hopefully, in the process we can clarify the issue of monergism vs. synergism.

Hodge’s Order of Salvation

The Freedom & Bondage of the Will

The dichotomy of the freedom and the bondage of the will is both a theological and a practical verity. We know from Scripture that the will of individuals is free to choose from two or more options (cf. Lev. 22:18; 2 Cor. 9:7), and also that it is a slave to sin (Rom. 6:17). To say that a person can only choose to do wrong or evil is a man-constructed theory ~ an effort to persuade others to embrace his or her theology; it is not Scriptural teaching (Luke 11:13; Acts 10:1-2, 34-35). Yet, no one can choose to believe in Christ Jesus whensoever he or she wants: without the working of God's Holy Spirit, no one could ever be saved. Thus the bondage and freedom of the wil.

The Arminian and Calvinist Ordo Salutis: A Brief Comparative Study

The ordo salutis is the "order of salvation." It focuses on the process of salvation and the logical order of that process. The main difference between the Arminian and Calvinist ordo concerns faith and regeneration. Strictly speaking, faith is not part of salvation in the Arminian ordo since it is the condition that is met prior to God's act of saving. All that follows faith is salvation in the Arminian ordo while in the Calvinist ordo faith is the result of salvation in some sense. What follows is how I see the Arminian ordo compared to the Calvinist ordo along with why I find the Calvinist ordo theologically problematic.

Arminian ordo salutis:

Prevenient grace

Faith

[Union with Christ]

Justification

Regeneration

Sanctification

Glorification

Notes on Arminian ordo:

Syndicate content