reprobation

A very good article

http://www.pbministries.org/books/pink/Sovereignty/sov_05.htm

John's Gospel vs. Low Grace Evangelicalism
by Bob Higby
But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name. John 20:31John is the only book of scripture addressed to the world at large, including unbelievers. Therefore we would do well to examine the typical methods and emphases of evangelicalism and compare them to the apostolic testimony. 1. Pious special pleading.Evangelicalism is full of the use of persuasive technique, the most common of which consists of a pious special pleading for the salvation of souls. The evangelist sheds public tears over the prospect of a single soul being eternally lost, then pleads and urges all to receive Jesus Christ as the only savior from sin and hell. In some churches this occurs at every service. A strong belief exists that souls must be COMPELLED into the kingdom or we have failed in our testimony. Some go so far as to say that our own salvation lies in doubt if we do not agonize publicly and plead personally for any soul who is not yet a believer.The gospel of John has no such emphasis. The facts regarding Christ’s identity as God and saving work on behalf of sinners are plainly stated for all to read and believe or scorn. A passionate hope is expressed that the reader will believe and enter life everlasting. An acknowledgment is also stated by Christ himself (John 10:24-26) that those not ordained to life WILL DISBELIEVE these plain facts. We should not expect that all will believe; God wants to be glorified by a damned people as well as a saved people. It is due to a miracle of God’s sovereign grace that ANY person believes to whom we communicate gospel realities. There are undoubtedly Christians in history who never witnessed a single soul believing their testimony. 2. Hell evangelism.Nothing characterizes evangelicalism more than the emphasis of accepting Christ to escape hell. This is really another form of pious special pleading. If the fire is heated hot enough and the extreme pain of unending torture is made vivid enough to the hearer, it is believed, the way of escape will be so desired that the message of Jesus will be welcomed with inestimable gratitude.Hardly anything is more disgraceful than the preaching of hell as a tool of evangelism. The word ‘hell’ is not even found in the gospel of John. There is only one passage focused on the destiny of reprobates:For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself; and hath given him authority to execute judgment also, because he is the Son of man. Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, and shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation. John 5:26-29This is all that the lost world needs to know about cosmology as related to the damned. Those who do evil and laugh at the gospel will face a resurrection of damnation. It is enough to state that reprobates will stand before God to receive their just condemnation. We don’t need to explain further what this condemnation involves. No preaching of hell-fire ever converted a single soul. Instead, God works the miracle of regeneration through his constraining love joined to the incomparable gospel of grace in Christ! The preaching of eternal life to those that believe the gospel is the focus and message of John.3. Avoid election.Loraine Boettner is typical of evangelicalism’s awful poppycock on this subject. The quotation to follow represents low-grace Calvinism at its worst, extracted from a book which is otherwise excellent on many issues:The doctrine of Predestination is a doctrine for genuine Christians. Considerable caution should be exercised in preaching it to the unconverted. It is almost impossible to convince a non-Christian of its truthfulness, and in fact the heart of the unregenerate man usually revolts against it. If it is stressed before the simpler truths of the Christian system are mastered, it will likely be misunderstood and in that case it may only drive the person into deeper despair. In preaching to the unconverted or to those who are just beginning the Christian life, our part consists mainly in presenting and stressing man’s part in the work of salvation, –faith, repentance, moral reform, etc. These are the elementary steps so far as man’s consciousness extends. At that early stage little need be said about the deeper truths which relate to God’s part. As in the study of Mathematics we do not begin with algebra and calculus but with the simple problems of arithmetic, so here the better way is to first present the more elementary truths. Then after the person is saved and has traveled some distance in the Christian way he comes to see that in his salvation God’s work was primary and his was only secondary, that he was saved through grace and not by his own works. The Reformed Doctrine of Predestination (Presbyterian and Reformed, Philadephia, 1971), pp. 348-349.I cannot express in words what terrible nonsense this is. The statement condemns itself purely by its own utterance in light of the message of grace. John’s gospel is very clear on the truth of election to eternal life by God’s grace apart from the will of man (1:13, 6:37-40, 10:14-16,27-30, 17:6-23). Apparently, Jesus and John were not aware of the ‘great wisdom’ of Spurgeon and Boettner on this subject! Neither Jesus nor John tried to institute a code of silence on the doctrine of predestination when teaching the unconverted. The truth that Christ came only for his sheep given to him by the Father is openly taught. In addition, there is no teaching that the sheep were unjustified prior to regeneration. Christ proclaims that he NOW has sheep not of the Jewish fold that ALL sheep hear his voice when it is sounded. They were always sheep in God’s election and predestined plan. This completely abolishes the ridiculous and absurd doctrine of common wrath. God loves and justifies his sheep TRANSCENDENT of time and at all moments WITHIN time.4. Avoid reprobation.This examination would not be complete without a look at the doctrine of reprobation in John. The evan-jellyfish world (including low-grace Calvinism) denies positive reprobation entirely. God supposedly wants all to be saved and mourns at the damnation of the lost. What saith the scriptures?I speak that which I have seen with my Father: and ye do that which ye have seen with your father. They answered and said unto him, Abraham is our father. Jesus saith unto them, If ye were Abraham's children, ye would do the works of Abraham. But now ye seek to kill me, a man that hath told you the truth, which I have heard of God: this did not Abraham. Ye do the deeds of your father. Then said they to him, We be not born of fornication; we have one Father, even God. Jesus said unto them, If God were your Father, ye would love me: for I proceeded forth and came from God; neither came I of myself, but he sent me. Why do ye not understand my speech? even because ye cannot hear my word. Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it. And because I tell you the truth, ye believe me not. Which of you convinceth me of sin? And if I say the truth, why do ye not believe me? He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God. John 8:39-47Then came the Jews round about him, and said unto him, How long dost thou make us to doubt? If thou be the Christ, tell us plainly. 25 Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me. 26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you. John 10:24-26The seed of the devil does NOT consist of the sheep of Christ in their sins and rebellion BEFORE they are called and hear his voice. The doctrine of common fall is completely absent from the teaching of John. The seed of Satan consists of reprobates who were NEVER the sheep of Christ and whom God does not purpose to save. They have the same spirit of sin and rebellion as their father Satan; not merely the substance or essence of sin and rebellion that the elect have before conversion.The gospel is a joyful, powerful, and simple testimony. At stake is eternal life vs. eternal death. We are to announce or publish the truth of Jesus Christ to a lost world, knowing confidently that the Lord will gather all of his sheep to the resurrection of life and all the devil’s children to the resurrection of damnation. God takes pleasure in BOTH destinies!

THE CAUSE OF SALVATION
A. W. Pink(1886-1952)
It may be shown from scripture that the CAUSE of salvation is not a single one, as so many suppose-- the blood of Christ. Here, too, it is necessary to distinguish between things which differ. First, the ORIGINATING cause of salvation is the eternal purpose of God, or, in other words, the predestinating grace of the Father. Second, the MERITORIOUS cause of salvation is the mediation of Christ, this having particular respect to the legal side of things, or, in other words, His fully meeting the demands of the law on the behalf and in the stead of those He redeems. Third, the EFFICIENT cause of salvation is the regenerating and sanctifying operations of the Holy Spirit, which respect the experimental side of it, or, in other words, the Spirit works IN us what Christ purchased FOR us. Thus, we owe our personal salvation equally to each Person in the Trinity, and not to one (the Son) more than to the others. Fourth, the INSTRUMENTAL cause is our faith, obedience, and perseverance; though we are not saved because of them, equally true is it that we cannot be saved (according to God's appointment) without them.

Beware of false preachers

Calvinism + Arminianism = Fullerism
If you are not familiar with Fullerism, or wonder how Calvinism + Arminianism = Fullerism, then this article will attempt to explain this little known doctrine which has wrought great havoc on the churches of God. For our purposes we will define Calvinism as believing in Particular Redemption and Arminianism as believing in the General Atonement.
If you are a believer in Particular Redemption you may ask yourself, “How is it possible to combine Particular Redemption with the General Atonement? Are they not mutually exclusive?” The answer is found with a man named Andrew Fuller.
Andrew Fuller was an 18th Century Particular Baptist preacher in England. The Particular Baptists he associated with are the same ones the Colonial American Baptists and later Primitive Baptists would trace their church ancestry through in the United States. Andrew Fuller was a very able preacher and was well known and widely regarded by the Baptists of his day. The origin of Missionary Societies among Baptists are traceable directly to Fuller and likewise the motivation for modern Sunday Schools. The reason why is found in his doctrine. Let us first consider Fuller in his own words.
Andrew Fuller quoted in “Particular Redemption” by William Rushton
“Concerning the death of Christ, if I speak of it irrespective of the purpose of the Father and the Son as to the objects who should be saved by it, referring merely to what it is in itself sufficient for, and declared in the gospel to be adapted to, I should think I answered the question in a scriptural way in saying, It was for sinners as sinners. But if I have respect to the purpose of the Father in giving His Son to die, and the design of Christ in laying down His life, I should answer, It was for His elect only.”
“In short, we must either acknowledge an objective fullness in Christ’s atonement, sufficient for the salvation of the whole world, were the whole world to believe in him; or, in opposition to Scripture and common sense, confine our invitations to believe to such persons as have believed already.” [Emphasis mine - JT]
“If satisfaction was made on the principle of debtor and creditor, and that which was paid was just of sufficient value to liquidate a given number of sins, and to redeem a given number of sinners, and no more, it should seem that it could not be the duty of any but the elect, to rely upon it; for wherefore should we set our eyes on that which is not? But if there be such a fullness in the satisfaction of Christ as is sufficient for the salvation of the whole world, were the whole world to believe in him; and if the particularity of redemption lie only in the purpose or sovereign pleasure of God to render it effectual to some rather that than other, no such consequence will follow,” etc. [Emphasis mine - JT]
I hope that every believer of Particular Redemption will sense something amiss in Fuller’s statements. To put it succinctly Fuller believed the death of Christ is efficient to save the elect and sufficient to save the whole world if they will only believe. In other words he did not deny election outright. Nor did he deny that Christ died to save the elect particularly. What Fuller is saying is not only will all the elect be definitely saved but the death of Christ is sufficient to save every one else if they will only believe. Therefore he makes the death of Christ both Particular and General at the same time. I think most Primitive Baptists will recognize this as nothing more than backdoor Arminianism because that’s exactly what it is.
Consider how seductive and appealing Fuller’s doctrine is. Fullerism, like Arminianism, makes faith and belief a condition to be met and therefore a good work instead of the fruit of the spirit and the fruit of the gracious state of salvation. It robs God of his glory by making man the decision maker of his salvation rather than God and puts man in control of his destiny rather than the Sovereign Almighty God who “doeth according to his will in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth: and none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou?” Daniel 4:35
However, Fuller knows better than to give an outright rejection of election and Particular Redemption. To carnally minded believers of election and Particular Redemption, Fuller’s heresy is almost irresistible. To their minds he gives them the best of both worlds.
The Biblically minded person gives God the full glory for saving his elect and only his elect through the Particular Redemption that is in Christ Jesus. We give God all the glory because he hath “chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love: Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,” Eph. 1:4-5.
We give the Lord all the glory further knowing that “that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth; It was said unto her, The elder shall serve the younger. As it is written, Jacob have I loved, but Esau have I hated. What shall we say then? Is there unrighteousness with God? God forbid. For he saith to Moses, I will have mercy on whom I will have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I will have compassion. So then it is not of him that willeth, nor of him that runneth, but of God that sheweth mercy," Rom. 9:11-16.
Frankly, believers of Fullers doctrine are believers in heresy just as bad Arminianism. In some ways Arminianism is to be preferred because that system is more honest about its logical consequences than Fuller’s doctrine, which ultimately leads to a denial of election and Particular Redemption. In fact the ultimate denial of election and Particular Redemption is exactly what happened to those who followed Fuller’s teachings.
As we said before, Fuller introduced Missionary Societies to the Baptists. This also led to the drive for modern Sunday Schools. These unscriptural innovations had never been heard of among Baptists before Fuller’s doctrine. Why did Fuller introduce them? The answer is simple. If the death of Christ is sufficient to save the whole world if they will only believe, then the more efficiently we can convince people to believe in Christ then the more people we will have to populate heaven. The end justifies the means. (Justifies – The doctrine of Justification is also tied up in this but we won’t delve into that now.)
What was the final outcome of Fuller’s doctrine? It was rather devastating. His system arrived in the United States around 1800. All of the Baptists, including many which become known as Primitive Baptist, were strongly swayed by Fuller’s practice and by his doctrine. Finally, small groups of Baptists throughout the United States began to see through the error and began to reject as heretical the doctrine and practice that had been introduced by Andrew Fuller. They became known as the Primitive Baptists.
Sadly, the majority of Baptists, which had been sound in the faith regarding Particular Redemption, could not see through the error and did not repent. At the time the split took place between what was known as the Old School and New School Baptists most if not all the New School Baptist confessions of faith retained their Particular Redemption statements. But the damage was done. The combination of the error in practice and its attendant error in doctrine now known as Fullerism slowly but surely became the actual doctrine of those churches. Finally, all of the New School churches followed Fuller’s Doctrine to its logical conclusion and denied election and Particular Redemption altogether and simply became Arminians.
Are there any followers of Fullers doctrine today? Yes there are. They are mostly found in what are known as Sovereign Grace churches. Much of what they say is sound. Indeed if you were to read Andrew Fuller, much of what he said was sound. But it only takes one rotten apple to spoil the barrel. Some well-known examples of Sovereign Grace preachers who follow Fuller’s teaching regarding the atonement are John MacArthur and John Piper. Both of them have a lot of very good teaching but it only takes a little leaven to leaven the whole lump.
John MacArthur states in “Questions and Answers”,
“I find in my own mind and in my own study of Scripture a strong case for a "General Atonement," for a "Universal Atonement," for an "All Encompassing Provision." For Jesus dying as the propitiation for our sins--and not for ours only but for the sins of the whole world, tying it in particularly with John, chapter three, "God so loved. . . ." What? "The world"--not the elect. "God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life." It seems to me that the giving of the Son was in response to the loving of the world, and that the propitiation which Christ was, was sufficient for the sins of all the world. So, I would say, that I believe, and I think this is maybe one way to understand it--I believe that the atonement of Christ was sufficient for the world, but is efficient for those that believe. I believe in, I guess what you could call a "Limited and Unlimited Atonement." It is unlimited in the sense that it was sufficient to cover the sins of the whole world--it is limited, in that it is applied only to those who believe. I don't like to get pushed beyond that, but I don't like to just take the title of believing in "Limited Atonement" or "Particular Redemption," that Jesus died only for the elect, because I think that that has some exegetical problems. I think you would have problems explaining certain passages of Scripture, but I admit to you that it is a very difficult issue, because there are many passages that apply His redemptive work "only to the elect," "only to those who believe." But I believe, compared with other passages, His redemption encompasses, in its sufficiency--the world.”
John Piper states in “The Duty: Faith”
“Today we focus on the third "D"—the duty that we have to believe. "For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whoever believes in him might not perish." Let me focus our attention on this act of believing from several different angles.”
“Believing is our link with the love of God. Notice how Jesus speaks of God's love-rescue: God so loved the world so that believers will not perish. One of the ways to express this is that the Love of God is sufficient to save the world, but efficient to save those who believe. Efficient means his love actually saves believers. It is effective in saving them from perishing. The love of God does not have this effect in the lives of those who do not believe. They perish.” [Emphasis mine – JT]
In “The Reformed Faith and Racial Harmony” Piper states,
3. Limited Atonement (Definite Atonement, Particular Redemption)
The main point of the doctrine of limited atonement is not to assert that Christ did not die for everyone in the sense that John 3:16 says he did: "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life." That is absolutely true: Christ died so that whoever believes in him will have eternal life. Christ’s death is sufficient for all, and should be offered to all as gloriously sufficient to save them if they will believe. "Limited atonement" does not deny any of that. [Emphasis mine – JT]
Having looked at statements from Fuller, MacArthur and Piper let us now consider extracts from the 1646 and 1689 London Confessions of faith followed by the Aberdeen Primitive Baptist Church articles of faith which deal with Particular Redemption. Notice how precise the language is, clearly stating the truth of God’s sovereignty in salvation.
The First London Baptist Confession of Faith 1646 Edition
3. And God hath before the foundation of the world, foreordained some men to eternal life, through Jesus Christ, to the praise and glory of His grace; [having foreordained and] leaving the rest in their sin to their just condemnation, to the praise of His justice.
6. All the elect being loved of God with an everlasting love, are redeemed, quickened, and saved, not by themselves, nor their own works, lest any man should boast, but, only and wholly by God, of His own free grace and mercy, through Jesus Christ, who is made unto us by God, wisdom, righteousness, sanctification, and redemption, and all in all, that he that rejoiceth, might rejoice in the Lord.
21. Jesus Christ by His death did purchase salvation for the elect that God gave unto Him: These only have interest in Him, and fellowship with Him, for whom He makes intercession to His Father in their behalf, and to them alone doth God by His Spirit apply this redemption; as also the free gift of eternal life is given to them, and none else.
The 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith
Chapter III: Of God's Decree
3. By the decree of God, for the manifestation of his glory, some men and angels are predestinated, or foreordained to eternal life through Jesus Christ, to the praise of his glorious grace; others being left to act in their sin to their just condemnation, to the praise of his glorious justice.
4. These angels and men thus predestinated and foreordained, are particularly and unchangeably designed, and their number so certain and definite, that it cannot be either increased or diminished.
5. Those of mankind that are predestinated to life, God, before the foundation of the world was laid, according to his eternal and immutable purpose, and the secret counsel and good pleasure of his will, hath chosen in Christ unto everlasting glory, out of his mere free grace and love, without any other thing in the creature as a condition or cause moving him thereunto.
6. As God hath appointed the elect unto glory, so he hath, by the eternal and most free purpose of his will, foreordained all the means thereunto; wherefore they who are elected, being fallen in Adam, are redeemed by Christ, are effectually called unto faith in Christ, by his Spirit working in due season, are justified, adopted, sanctified, and kept by his power through faith unto salvation; neither are any other redeemed by Christ, or effectually called, justified, adopted, sanctified, and saved, but the elect only.
7. The doctrine of the high mystery of predestination is to be handled with special prudence and care, that men attending the will of God revealed in his Word, and yielding obedience thereunto, may, from the certainty of their effectual vocation, be assured of their eternal election; so shall this doctrine afford matter of praise, reverence, and admiration of God, and of humility, diligence, and abundant consolation to all that sincerely obey the gospel.
Articles of Faith Aberdeen Primitive Baptist Church, Aberdeen, MS
4. That by God’s sovereign grace and mercy, elect sinners are predestined to eternal life and are redeemed and justified by the blood of Christ alone.
5. That Jesus Christ died for the sins of His people alone and they shall all be regenerated in time by the Holy Spirit, enabled to hear the Gospel of their salvations and caused to have faith in Christ as their Savior.
The Lord had blessed us with the great truths of his sovereign saving love. Let us continue to hold forth the truth of God’s word.
Elder James Taylor

A excellent Article

Must One Believe to "Be Saved?"
In a word, YES, but not for the reasons most people think. However, those who believe in what is called High Calvinism or Unconditional Election and Predestination or Particular Redemption such as the Primitive Baptists, some times say, No, you don't have to believe in order to be saved. This difficulty arises from a misconception, sometimes in both Calvinists and Arminians, about what it means to be saved.
First, the Bible makes a distinction between being saved eternally (eternal life) and being saved in time (conversion). That does not mean that eternal salvation and salvation in time are mutually exclusive. The fact is one begets the other. Salvation is a broad term that encompasses both eternal life and conversion. Therefore, those who experience eternal life will likewise experience conversion. But confusion arises when a failure is made to distinguish the meaning of a small but significant word be.
Most modern Christians, because of false theology, think the scriptures teach that to be means the same thing as to get. However, there is an important difference between the two. If the Bible taught that one must believe in order to get saved, then salvation would be by our own effort. But the Bible teaches one must believe in order to be saved. The word be indicates a statement of fact. The word get indicates a condition to be met.
What's the difference? Mark 16:16 states, He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. Clearly this scripture is talking about salvation in both its temporal and eternal aspect. Many Christians today have been taught that scriptures such as this one mean you must believe in order to get saved. But that is not at all what Christ said. The term "shall be saved" is translated from the Greek word sodzo. In this passage the verb sodzo is in the Future Tense, Passive Voice, Indicative Mood. The Online Bible says, "The indicative mood is a simple statement of fact." Because sodzo is written in the indicative mood, it means the salvation Christ has under consideration is not and cannot be a condition to be met. It means that belief is the evidence or assurance of salvation not the means to obtain salvation. It means that everyone who has been saved or will "be saved" will believe in Christ as a matter of fact. Thus, as this scripture demonstrates, belief is necessary because of salvation not to get salvation.
If Christ had rendered sodzo in the imperative mood, then one would be correct in saying you must believe in order to get saved. The Online Bible defines the imperative mood as that which, "expresses a command to the hearer to perform a certain action by the order and authority of the one commanding." A good example of a scripture with an imperative command is found in the Great Commission. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, Mathew 28:19. "Teach" is from the Greek word matheteuo. This verb is written in the imperative mood and expresses a clear command to the disciples to teach the nations Christ's doctrine.
Another example of sodzo is found in Ro 10:9, That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. And again in Ro 10:13, For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. In both of these scriptures sodzo is rendered in the indicative mood. Therefore it is a statement of fact that anyone who confesses belief in Jesus and His resurrection, calling upon His name from the heart, will be saved. Because the mood is indicative, it is not the belief, confession or sincerity that results in the saving, either in time or in eternity. Jesus Christ is the Saviour. He saves with the power of his shed blood and by grace alone delivers the sinner from death. Belief, confession and sincerity from the heart are all the result of Christ's saving work not the cause or means to obtain that saving work.
The recipients of this sovereign saving work of Christ are referred to in the scriptures as my sheep, His People, my people, the chosen, the elect and Israel (spiritual). John 10:27, Mathew 1:21, II Corinthians 6:16, Ephesians 1:4, II Timothy 2:10, Romans 9:6-24.
It is true that one doesn't have to believe in order to get saved but the Bible teaches a person must believe to be saved.
Elder James Taylor

Did the elect exist before the world began ?

OUR EXISTENCE IN CHRISTBEFORE THE WORLD WAS.
Roadhouse Station, Ill.November 6, 1868.
Dear Brother Beebe: - I now sit down to write a few lines to you, and must say that your editorial in reply to brother Vanmeter has been a mystery to me in one or two points. I must say there is a contradiction abroad somewhere; and it is for instruction I write. You stated, and truly too, “That which is born of the flesh is flesh,” nothing else, “and that which is born of the spirit is spirit,” and nothing else. Now you say that the same that was born by ordinary generation is in time born of the spirit. If I understand you, it leaves me in the same fix that Nicodemus was in. I will say that if the same man is born again, it is spiritual and I suppose it is incorruptible, and if this is the case, sin cannot approach it. Then this mortal has put on immortality, in part, but I find no such Scripture; but find that we have this treasure in earthen vessels, if in us at all, and the excellency is not of men, but of God. This is the same leaven which a woman hid in three measures of meal, till the whole was leavened. Now if the Adamic man is born and made spiritual, it is all leavened and is not a progressive work, as I have thought, to be completed in the resurrection. Now I think this new birth is clearly set forth in the words, “Christ in you, the hope of glory.” You made one point, that the inward man and the outward man are commensurate, and after the new birth there is but one man, and he is solely of the Lord, and I won’t have such an idea. To be born is to develop. Now in developing godliness through the prepared or subjugated body, there is a manifestation of righteousness which was not there before. Now if it perfected the Adamic man, Paul did not understand it clearly when he said that with his flesh he served the law of sin, and “O wretched man that I am, who shall deliver me from the body of this death.” Now this same body that was born first is born again, and the second birth leaves it still a body of death. Being born again surely does not make it spiritual, or it would not die.
Dear brother, I would be well pleased if you would write me a letter and give me your views on the inward man, and what it is, and also the outward man and what he is, just in as short a way as you can, and direct it to Road House Station where you send the “Signs”. And as my time is up in December, I want you to stop it then. I write you in good feelings for instruction.
Yours truly,A.W. Murray.
Reply to Brother Murray: - Dull and bungling as we are in expressing our views, we are surprised sometimes at our failure to make our views intelligible to our brethren, and still more surprised that any of them should understand us so very differently from what we mean. If we were as unsuccessful on all points in attempting to make ourself understood as we have been on the subject of the first and second birth of the children of God, we would return our pen to the wing of its mother goose, and leave the statement and defense of the truth to abler writers. We have not been without our fears that the late agitation on the regeneration and the new birth, at least to some of our readers, had a tendency to darken counsel, rather than to edify. Whatever we publish as our views on any subject, we give only as our views, holding none of our brethren responsible for them, only so far as they find them sustained by the Scriptures and made plain to their understanding. We neither ask nor desire any one to accept as true what we hold, or set forth, any further than our views are sustained by the unerring Scriptures of truth. And we have confidence in the Old School, or Primitive Baptists, that they will carefully compare what we publish with that sacred standard before they endorse it. But we must request them to consider candidly what we say before they condemn it; and in no case allow themselves to misconstrue or misrepresent what we advance. By our words we are willing to be judged; whether by them we be condemned or justified.
In replying to our brother Murray, we will make this one more effort to express, as explicitly and plainly what are our views, as we can.
First. It is our firm conviction that all the men, women, and children who belong to the elect family of God had an existence in Christ Jesus before the world began, and consequently before they had any of them been born at all, either of the flesh or of the Spirit.
Secondly. That their existence in Christ before the world began was so personal that no change could possibly be made, the inheritance of every one of them, for time and eternity, was assigned to each personally, definitely and unchangeably. That they were all of them loved personally, blessed with all spiritual blessings personally, and personally chosen in Christ Jesus before the foundation of the world, and that each and all were so definitely identified in the choice, love, grace, and gift of God that no one of them could possibly be misplaced, overlooked, or fail to fill the destiny appointed or to receive the spiritual blessings which were given them in Christ, or any one of them fill the place in the body of Christ which God hath ordained for another.
Thirdly. That they were all regarded as the children of God, and heirs of immortal glory before they were any of them made partakers of flesh and blood; and consequently before any of them were born of the flesh or of the spirit.
Fourthly. We hold that it was the counsel, purpose and ordination of God to bring all these heirs of glory into manifestation by a first and a second birth, preserving through both births the identity they had with him before the world began.
Fifthly. That their identity, individuality, and personality being anterior to their first and second birth, depended on neither the one nor the other, except to subserve the great purpose of God in their manifestation, which he ordained should be in the fullness of the dispensations of times.
Sixthly. That their first birth, or their being born of the flesh, was ordained for their manifestation in the flesh, as the children of the first Adam, of whose nature they were to partake, in whose transgression, depravity, and the mortality they were to be involved. And that until they were born of the flesh, they could not see the natural world into which they were to be born. And that when any one of them is born of the flesh, that man is born once. That man who was chosen of God, in Christ, is now born of the flesh, and can see the world into which he is born. That man, who was a man before he was born, now by his birth partakes of humanity, mortality, and corruption, and requires to be redeemed from sin, death and condemnation.
Seventhly. That very man, who was a man, as chosen of God in the election of grace, and whose name was written in heaven, in the book of the Lamb, and has been born of the flesh is by his one birth only revealed or manifested in the earthly nature which God ordained for him; but before he can be made manifest in a spiritual nature he must be born again. As there is natural life given to this man in his earthly birth; for that which is born of the flesh is flesh, so there is nothing natural given to the same man when he is born again, as that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
Eighthly. The vessel of mercy whom God afore prepared to glory by his first birth receives his mortality and in his being born again the same man receives his immortality. “I give unto them eternal life (John 10:28).” “That he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him. And this is life eternal, that they might know thee,” etc. Now being born of the flesh, and born again of the Spirit possesses both flesh and spirit, which Paul says are contrary the one to the other; he now possesses both mortality and immortality; his mortality is born of the flesh, and the flesh continues to be mortal as long as the man, so born, remains in the flesh. The immortality is born of the Spirit of him who only hath immortality, and continues to abide in the man who has experienced both births and possesses both conflicting natures which must both continue in him until the one is swallowed up of the other; until the flesh shall yield to the spirit, until this mortality shall be swallowed up of life. Then, but not till then, shall this mortal put on immortality, and this corruptible put on incorruption, the spirit shall then triumph over the flesh, when the flesh shall go down to the grave, and there be sown a natural body, and thence be raised a spiritual body, changed and fashioned like the resurrected body of our Lord, who has already risen from the dead, and become the first fruits of them that slept.
1. Now let us consider Christ as the first fruits, the perfect sample of what his saints shall be in their resurrection! Was Christ the Son of God, and perfectly identified in that full relation to the Father before he was born of the virgin, or begotten from the dead in his resurrection? Did his being made of a woman, under the law, or his resurrection constitute him the Son of God, or did he exist in his Mediatorial glory with his Father before the world began, the same as he will when the world shall be no more? See John 17:5. Had he the same glory with the Father before the world was that he ascended to when he went up with a shout?
2. Did Christ in his incarnation possess two whole and yet distinct natures in his one person? Was he both God and man at the same time? Was he properly the Son of God, and the Son of Man; and did his Godhead compose any part of his humanity or his humanity compose any part of his Godhead?
3. Was he the subject of two births, one of the virgin, when he was made flesh, and the other when he was quickened from the dead by the Eternal Spirit, in his resurrection from the dead? Before answering these last interrogatives, read Matthew 1:21; Luke 1:35; and Acts 13:33.
If then it be admitted that Christ possessed two whole natures in his one person, the one called flesh, which could suffer and die, and the other Spirit, which could not die, but had power to quicken and raise the dead, is it hard to infer that those who bear his image can also, being born first of that flesh of which also in like manner he took part, and then being born again of an incorruptible seed which liveth and abideth forever, be while here in the flesh, possess two distinct natures? The one born of the flesh, the other born of the Spirit, the one human, the other divine? One mortal, the other immortal; the one depraved and possessing in it “no good thing,” the other perfectly immaculate?
It is testified of our Savior, “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. The same was in the beginning with God. All things were made by him, and without him was not anything made that was made. And the Word was made flesh and dwelt among us (John 1:1-3 & 14).” Would it now be proper for us to raise the question, What part of the Word was made flesh? We are told it was the Word which was God. No less the Word because it was made flesh, no less God because identified with flesh.
So with the men, or people, which were with, and in, Christ before the foundation of the world, they are no more, nor are they any less, the people of God because they are made flesh, born of the flesh, and are thereby partakers of the transgressions, pollutions and mortality of the flesh, than they were before the world began. The man who was chosen in Christ Jesus in eternity was in time born of the flesh, defiled and involved in guilt and transgression, and washed from pollution and guilt by the atoning sacrifice of Christ. That same man, who was a man chosen in Christ from everlasting, and who was born of the flesh, and made flesh, is born again of a heavenly birth, receives a spiritual life from God, which is distinct from the life received by him in his first birth, and in his two-fold nature of flesh and spirit, dwells among us. Brother Murray has entirely mistaken, and misread us, in regard to our “making the point” which he condemns that the inward man, and the outward man are commensurate of the new birth. Such a thought never entered our heart; nor have we ever contended that our Adamic nature is born over again in the new birth, nor that it ever has or ever will be made spiritual. It is certainly not so now, and if it was it would cease to be Adamic; for Paul testified that Adam was not spiritual but natural; that Christ the second Adam is spiritual. To be spiritual then is to partake of the life and nature of Christ, not of Adam.
We have not time to discuss this subject in private correspondence with those who do not choose to patronize the “Signs”. We have about all we can do in addition to our pastoral and other ministerial labors to write for the “Signs”. We are very prone to be prolix in our articles, but the shortest way in which we can answer the last questions proposed we say: the outward man is the flesh, that is born of the flesh; and the inward man is the spirit, that is born of the spirit.
Brother Murray has mistaken us in regard to the old nature, which is born of the flesh, being born again of the spirit, and made spiritual. We hold, as we have tried to explain, that the subject of grace had an identity before he was born at all, either of the flesh or of the spirit; when born of the flesh, the fleshly nature produced by that birth became identified with him, so that he who before existed in Christ is now manifest in the flesh, and receives a fleshly corruptible, and depraved, dying nature. And the same person, man, or identity, who has received this earthly nature (it must be the same, or some other), also receives a spiritual, pure, incorruptible, imperishable and heavenly nature which is born of the Spirit, with which he also becomes identified; and that this man, person or identity retains both these antagonistic natures, and is identified with both, as long as he continues in the flesh, and until the one of them shall be swallowed up of the other, until the mortal shall put on immortality, when death shall be swallowed up of victory. In this complex state in which flesh and spirit are component parts the same person, we may properly speak of the man or person who is born, and born again, as a sinner, and of the same man or person in whom both natures now exist, as a saint. He is as black as the tents of Kedar; and at the same time, he is as white and comely as the curtains of Solomon. Or, as Erskine says:
“To good and evil, equal bent,I’m both a devil and a saint.”
“I am crucified with Christ,” “I am dead with Christ, nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me.” Paul uses the personal pronouns, I and me, identifying him, in both natures, thus, For I know that in me (that is in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing, for the good that I would, I do not, but the evil which I would not, that I do. Now if I do that I would not, it is therefore no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. For I see another law [or governing power] in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin which is in my members. O, wretched man that I am! Who shall deliver me from the body of this death? I thank God through Jesus Christ our Lord. So then with the mind I myself serve the law of Christ; but with the flesh the law of sin (Romans 7). Now when we can comprehend how the apostle could himself, with his mind serve the law of God without the concurrence of his fleshly nature, but in direct opposition to it; and how he himself could with his flesh serve the law of sin, without involving his spirit, in any participation in that service; and how he could say without contradiction, “I myself serve the law of sin, and yet it is not I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me.” I serve the law of sin; I myself, serve the law of God; but in such a way that it is not I, but sin that dwelleth in me. I am a wretched man, involved in a body of death; nevertheless I live, yet not I, but Christ that liveth in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, etc. Then we shall have less trouble in distinguishing between the flesh and the spirit, the old man, and the new, the outer man and the inward man, the natural man and the spiritual man; and how these two opposite natures emanating from opposite sources and produced by distinct births, can form the elementary parts of a Christian. Then shall we all better understand the words of our Lord, in which he has informed us that “That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit;” and we shall be less likely to conclude that anything earthly is born of the Spirit, or anything spiritual is born of the flesh.
Elder Gilbert BeebeMiddletown, N.YDecember 1, 1868.Editorials Volume 7 – pgs. 299 – 306

The basis of our salvation

Exactly what is the basis of our( The Elect) salvation ?

I like what Jonah said: in 2

9But I will sacrifice unto thee with the voice of thanksgiving; I will pay that that I have vowed. Salvation is of the LORD.

Salvation is conditioned upon the eternal purpose Of God and our election or being chosen by his soveriegn love...Scripture Text: 2tim 2: 1

9Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began,

predestination

TRUE PREDESTINATION
I am the Lord, I change not; therefore, ye sons of Jacob are not consumed. Mal. 3:6
A distinguishing doctrine of the Baptists is predestination. However, in these “modern, enlightened times,” one hears very little about it. The great truths of the Bible have caused separation in every age. Separation is something today that is looked upon as a heresy, but the doctrine of Jesus Christ is one that has caused separation from its beginning. “What fellowship hath light with darkness?”, Paul asks the Corinthian Church. We ask the same question today! Why would a person, claiming to believe in the glorious doctrine of the absolute predestination of all things want to associate in Church fellowship with those who cast aspersions on that doctrine?
This is an issue with which we all must come to grips. Do we as Old School (or Primitive) Baptists have any scriptural basis for uniting with those who do not believe the doctrine of the New Testament. In conjunction with this: should we recognize as ministers of the Gospel, or members of the Church, those who would repudiate predestination? In considering this matter we are reminded that there are many who claim to believe in predestination, but their definition is far different from the Bible’s. Scripture tells us that God works “all things after the counsel of his own will”. This is not what is being preached as predestination in many pulpits today. Men say, “Everything God predestinated is absolute, fixed and unchangeable.” But, ask them if they mean all things are determined, fixed and unchangeable and you will hear them sing a different tune. I think I hear one now saying, “God has secured the eternal salvation of His elect by predestination, but it does not follow that He has predestinated all of men’s actions with absolute predestination.”
The text we recorded as our heading makes a profound statement: God does not change! This is the consolation of the Saints. Whatever befalls them is the will of God because He changes not. This also shows the sureness of His predestination. This unchangeable one has “declared the end from the beginning and from ancient times the things not yet done, saying my counsel shall stand and I will do all my pleasure.” All His pleasure includes everything that takes place in time or eternity.
The corrupt nature of man hates this doctrine and the God that declares it, therefore, there must be separation. Those who love the truth cannot fellowship those who deny it. It is a sad thing to think that there are many wearing the name Old School (or Primitive) Baptists who deny God’s absolute predestination of all things. Many of us once assumed that when we met a Primitive Baptist they believed the same thing as we did. How wrong we were! In what we see is their desire to be popular with the world, they deny the vital principles of truth we hold dear. We would wish for honesty in those who deny this and other doctrines Baptist have and do hold. We hope they would go to those denominations which believe as they do, and leave us m peace.
The Lord still has a faithful remnant. They are scattered about; many sheep having no shepherd. While longing to feed on the Lord’s full and free salvation by Jesus Christ alone, they are fed the husks that the swine eat. They desire to hear the unchangeable God proclaimed, and instead have to listen to the “ifs” of duty preaching. By grace, we desire to stand fast for the truth that God changes not, regardless of the consequences from men. We trust others are of the same mind and will be blessed to earnestly contend for the faith once delivered to the saints.
R.N.L
The RemnantAugust – September 1987

The power of the word

This is an excellent article regarding who it is that hears and believes the gospel !

The Power of the Word by Jimmy Barber, 1970
For a long time I was burdened to see something written on this subject, but could not find it. I have spoken on this subject in the past and tried to reveal some of the golden nuggets that God has blessed me to see. At times I have been misunderstood and have had labels put on me that were not true. Now I am writing on this subject so that we may "grow in grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ."
Not Gospel Regeneration
Several years ago, I stated to some friends, "I do not believe in gospel regeneration, but I cannot disprove it." When I asked ministers for answers to some scriptures, I often got evasive answers. Therefore, I began to study the Word of God to find out if the Bible taught gospel regeneration or not. Now I can say, by the grace of God, "I do not believe in gospel regeneration and can prove to my satisfaction that the Bible does not teach such a doctrine." I believe if you honestly study this pamphlet you will understand my position, too.
New Birth Is the Power of God
There are some verses of Scripture concerning the new birth on which all can agree. The first of these is John 3:3-8. Jesus stated that one "must be born again," and He said that this birth is "of the Spirit." Further, in John 5:25, Jesus compared the new birth to a resurrection where people must hear His voice. A beautiful picture of this example is seen by Jesus raising Lazarus from the grave.
Some may wonder how the new birth is ascribed equally to the Spirit and Jesus? In John 6:63, Jesus stated, "It is the Spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing. The words that I speak unto you, They are spirit, and they are life." By comparing John 3:3-8 and John 6:63, it is seen that the giving of life is by the Holy Spirit and by the voice of the Son of God. Therefore, when Jesus stated that when He speaks His word it is equal to the Spirit, we see how the new birth is performed mutually by the Spirit and Jesus.
Other passages concerning the new birth state that the giving of life is by God, but they do not tell what means, if any, are used to accomplish it. The only other passage, aside from those given above, that gives credit to the Spirit being instrumental in the new birth is Galatians 4:29. All other passages state that it is God Who gives life, but they do not tell how He does it.
An Honest Look at Hard Scriptures
Some of the passages that previously troubled me are now some of the most comforting passages in God's Word. One of these is I Peter 1:22-25. Usually when one teaches on the new birth, he quotes only a portion of this passage--verse twenty-three. The person who believes in gospel regeneration interprets "the word of God" to mean the preached word--the word which a minister preaches. A person who does not believe in gospel regeneration usually interprets "the word of God" to be the same Word as in John 1:1, 14. He does this because the word for "word" in both places is "logos" in the Greek language. If I Peter 1:23 stood alone, either interpretation could be correct. However, a verse must not be interpreted out of its context.
Look at the passage again and notice verse twenty-two; these people had purified their souls in obeying the truth. The only way a person can obey something is to know about it. Therefore, to obey the truth, one must have it taught to him. Look at verse twenty-five. It states that the word is that which the gospel minister preaches. You may ask, "Is not Christ preached by the gospel?" The answer is yes, but we cannot pass this verse that easily. The word translated "word" in verse twenty-five is a different Greek word from the one in verse twenty-three. The word in verse twenty-five is "rhema," but in verse twenty-three it is "logos." "Logos" may be translated to mean Christ as in John 1:1, 14, but "rhema" means the written or spoken word. It is never translated nor interpreted to mean Christ. Likewise, "logos" does not always stand for Christ. It can, and most of the time does, mean the written or spoken word. In Matthew 7:24, 26, 28; John 4:37, 39; and I Timothy 1:15, it is translated "saying." In Matthew 12:36; 18:23; Romans 14:12; and Hebrews 13:17, "logos" is translated "account." It is translated "saying" fifty times, "account" eight times, "speech" eight times, along with other synonymous terms. The word "logos" is used 330 times in the New Testament and 225 times it is translated "word" and only seven times out of the 225 times is "logos" translated "Word" to mean Christ without question. Therefore, by studying the word "word" in its context in I Peter 1:23, the conclusion is that it means the written or spoken word.
You may be thinking that if gospel regeneration is not true then, "What does verse twenty-three mean?" I hope to answer this question later. First I will try to explain the following passages: James 1:18; Romans 1:16-17; 10:17; and I Corinthians 4:15.
Why Preach the Gospel?
To answer this question, I direct you to Romans 1:16-17. Paul stated that he was ready to preach the gospel of God to anyone. Paul further stated that he was a debtor to preach the gospel to all men and was not ashamed to do so because it was God's power unto salvation to the person who has faith.
I do not wish to divert to the subject of salvation, yet I remind you that "life" and "salvation" are two different subjects. Salvation is something that begins in the mind of God, is experienced in the believer's life, and is complete when in glory with God. Therefore, we are not studying salvation per se. We are studying life and the gospel and their relation to each other.
In Romans 1:17, Paul stated that the gospel reveals the righteousness of God "from faith to faith." Paul did not say that preaching the gospel causes the righteousness of God, but that the gospel reveals God's righteousness. Paul maintained that God's righteousness is revealed to the person who has faith. Romans 10:6-9 further explains this.
In Romans chapter ten, the subject is still the righteousness of God. Paul states that Israel (Israel as a nation) is ignorant of this righteousness. He also tells what God's righteousness maintains or asserts. It does not ask for God's Anointed to come from heaven nor to rise from the dead. The righteousness of God says that the word is so near that it is in the mouth and heart. It further maintains that the word is the same "word of faith" as the gospel of God. Therefore, when the testimony of the gospel is already in an individual, he can confess with his mouth or believe in this heart. Thus, by looking at this passage with Romans 1:16-17, when a man of God preaches the gospel and someone believes, it is because God has already placed the "word of faith" in the individual. Since the word translated "word" here in Romans 10 is "rhema" and not "logos," it cannot be interpreted to mean Christ. When Jesus stated in John 6:63 that the word spoken by Him was Spirit and life, the word He used was also "rhema." By comparing I Peter 1:23-25 in its context, one sees that the word which "begets again" is "rhema," the same "word" which is already in an individual when, or before, he believes the gospel.
How did this "rhema" get in the individual? It was when he heard the voice of the Son of God, not when he heard the voice of the preacher. When Paul heard the voice of the preacher, Stephen, it was only a "savour of death unto death," but when he heard the voice of the Son of God on the road to Damascus, it brought him to the ground. Then the Lord sent Paul to the preacher for the righteousness of God to be revealed to him. Thus the Scriptures state that "life and immortality are brought to light through the gospel" (II Timothy 1:10). This is the same as revealing, bringing to light, or receiving the righteousness of God.
Considering this, how does Romans 10:17 fit into the picture? Romans 10:17 states that faith comes by hearing. However, it does not say that life nor the Spirit comes by hearing. Galatians 5:22 states that faith IS a fruit of the Spirit, and we discovered the words that Jesus speaks, or the voice of the Son of God, is Spirit and life. Life (the Spirit) is present prior to faith or belief. A man dead in sin cannot hear nor believe. Furthermore Romans 10:8-9 teaches that when a person hears the gospel and believes, it is because the word, "the word of faith" (rhema), is already in him. Therefore, Romans 10:17 is not teaching the new birth. Yet, it has everything to do with a person believing in Jesus Christ and God revealing His righteousness to him. This is the same as having life and immortality brought to light.
A Look at James 1:18
Often James 1:18 is set forth to show gospel regeneration. On the surface, this verse appears to teach gospel regeneration. A study in the Greek language will show otherwise. However, James 1:18 proposes no problem if it did teach that the spoken or written Word was used by God in the new birth. Why? Because in giving life, it is the Son of God that speaks the word. But in revealing the life, it is the preacher speaking the word. Nevertheless, this passage teaches how life is revealed or brought to light.
Let us study the word "begot," in this verse. This word is "apokueo" in the Greek language, and it comes from the word "kuo" or "kueo" which means to be pregnant. Therefore, "apo-kueo" means "to bring forth as from the womb, or to give birth to." This word is used only twice in the Scriptures--here and in verse fifteen where it is translated "bringeth forth." James is not speaking about the initial quickening or giving of life, but how the life is manifested or brought to light. Thus, the giving of life to a child of God in the Spiritual realm is like conception in the natural realm.
Some may argue that at conception there is not a person, but only a fertilized egg. However, according to Psalm 51:5, David declared that he was a sinner the moment he was conceived in his mother's womb. Some people deny this is talking about original sin, yet I do not stand alone in this thinking. Men such as David Dickson, C. H. Spurgeon, Matthew Henry, John Gill, and many other sound scholars maintain that this verse is teaching original sin. Spurgeon stated, "It is a wicked wresting of scripture to deny that original sin and natural depravity are here taught."
This raises the following question, "Can someone who does not exist, nor ever will exist, be charged with something?" The answer according to logic, as well as the Scriptures, is an emphatic "NO!" Since David was a person at conception, we see that that is when his natural life began. Likewise, when God quickens a person, or gives him Spiritual life, he is alive like the babe in the womb of its mother. When someone preaches the Word of truth to that individual, it is parallel to the doctor bringing a child into the world. Therefore, from the time an individual is quickened or born from above, until the gospel is preached to him, he is existing by the umbilical cord of God's grace. It is possible for a person to be quickened for a time and not know anything about it, as a person is conceived and living for some time before he has a conscience awareness of his existence. Not everyone has a dramatic experience like Paul.
Our conclusion is that James was not speaking about giving spiritual life to anyone; he was speaking about life being brought to light as Paul said in Timothy (II Timothy 1:9-10). The context of the first chapter of James (as well as the entire book) bears out that he wrote to encourage professing believers to exhibit fruits of a child of God. James did not write to instruct how one becomes spiritually alive.
A Look at I Corinthians 4:15
I Corinthians 4:15 is also used to teach gospel regeneration. We cannot study the word "begotten" in this verse and come to a definite meaning of the word. "Begotten" is used in a very broad sense throughout the Scriptures. Still, I believe that after studying the word, we will see how I Corinthian 4:15 harmonizes with what is written above.
The Greek word for begotten is "gennao" which is a form of "ginomai." "Ginomai" carries the idea "to become." It can mean something coming to pass or something coming into existence. The word "gennao" has the idea "to beget, to be born, or to arise." I have tried to state the meaning of these words as briefly and simply as possible. For a fuller understanding of "gennao" and "ginomai," I suggest that the reader study them in depth.
The word "gennao" is translated as nine different words, with the majority being "begat" and "be born." When looking at Matthew 1:2-16, we find that it is used to indicate the giving of life. However, when looking at Matthew 2:1, 4; Luke 1:57; John 16:21, we find that the same word is used concerning a child being brought forth from the womb. Therefore, I have as much right to claim that Paul was speaking concerning bringing life forth as someone else does to say that Paul was inferring the idea of giving life. When interpreting this verse in light of the other passages on this subject, one discovers that Paul was saying the same thing as he wrote to Timothy concerning the gospel--that it was to "bring life and immortality to light." In Acts 18:10, when Paul was in Corinth for the first time and was going to leave because of persecution, the Lord told him to stay because He had "much people in the city." God had people in Corinth before Paul preached there, and God told him to stay and preach to them and bring forth life and immortality to light--that they might receive the righteousness of God. As with James, when we study the context of I Corinthians 4:15, we see that Paul is not speaking about how the people became living children of God. He was reminding them how they had Christ revealed to them, manifesting themselves as children of God. Since Paul was the first preacher in Corinth, he was instrumental in their conversion but not their regeneration. He was instrumental in their living like God's children, and they were to continue keeping the faith as he had.
I might add that this is exactly the same situation in Philemon 10. Paul, by the grace of God, brought to light the life that God placed in Onesimus so Onesimus would live like a child of God and not like the slaves of the world.
Summation
I have tried to show that when a person is quickened, the same Word of God (rhema) that is used in preaching is used in giving life. The difference is when this Word is used by the Son of God, it quickens or gives life to a dead sinner. However, when the same Word is used by the preacher, it brings life and immortality to light; or as Paul stated in Romans 1:16-17, the righteousness of God is "revealed from faith to faith." This is because the Word of faith (rhema) is placed within the individual by the voice of the Son of God, and it is the "same Word of faith" that we preach. Therefore, the same testimony that is in the Scriptures (the word--rhema) is in the regenerated person. When the Word (rhema) is preached to that individual, the two testimonies bear witness to the same thing; that is, the righteousness of God is revealed to the individual, and the life and immortality in that person is manifested or brought to light.
This shows how a person might believe in gospel regeneration because the same Word of truth is used in both cases. The difference lies in the person using the Word. I admit that while a minister is preaching the Lord may quicken someone who is listening to the preacher; however, God is not using the preacher's words; it is the words of the voice of the Son of God that quickens. God is only limited to Himself. Just as Jesus told the disciples to loose Lazarus and let him go after He had given him life, likewise, when God quickens a person, we should to be present with the gospel to loose him and let him go. You may ask, "How do we know who God is going to quicken?" I answer, "We don't." This is why Jesus said to go into all the world and preach the gospel; that is why Paul gave his life to be first with the truth of God and not let someone beat him to people with a half-truth (II Timothy 2:10). If we, who know this truth, do not go and preach it with the zeal of our brother Paul, may God take it from us and give it to those who will. I sometimes wonder if God has judged us for not spreading the truth by allowing those who preach a half-truth, or even a partial truth, to go and preach to His sheep.
Conclusion
I have not exhausted the subject in this small pamphlet. I believe this is an honest approach to the subject using the main passages involved. There can and needs to be much more written upon this topic. I have given a brief introduction with some answers to these passages of Scripture. I pray that this will be of some benefit to you and that it will cause you to study the subject to know His word and to preach it with great enthusiasm to his honor and to the manifesting of the life of His Son, Christ Jesus, in our mortal flesh.
Copyright 1990, 1991 by Veritas Publications

eternal justification

Does the bible indicate that Gods people, the elect have been justified from eternity ?

Read this good article, and may God bless His people, for christ sake..

http://www.mountzionpbc.org/Index/index04.htm