ECT The New Birth. What good has been the Reformation?

[Cross Reference]

The receiving God’s own life_is the starting point of all spiritual life of the born again Christian. How useless is of all our exhortation, persuasion, argument, explanation and study, purposed to induce some understanding in the mind, some determination in the will, some feeling in the emotion if, in the end it has not assisted people to receive God’s life into their spirit. But if we who are responsible for preaching/teaching the gospel truly perceive that unless people receive God’s life into the depths of their beings we have not done anything profitable, what good then has been the Reformation to us who swear by its precepts?

 

[Nihilo]

What good has been the Reformation?

It in part helped the Church to know how important it is to preach, protect and defend the right to religious freedom, and to keep the Church separate from the State.

 

[Cross Reference]

It in part helped the Church to know how important it is to preach, protect and defend the right to religious freedom, and to keep the Church separate from the State.

Oh. OK. I left that part out. Now, do you have answer to the OP?

 

[WonderfulLordJesus]

The receiving God’s own life_is the starting point of all spiritual life of the born again Christian. How useless is of all our exhortation, persuasion, argument, explanation and study, purposed to induce some understanding in the mind, some determination in the will, some feeling in the emotion if, in the end it has not assisted people to receive God’s life into their spirit. But if we who are responsible for preaching/teaching the gospel truly perceive that unless people receive God’s life into the depths of their beings we have not done anything profitable, what good then has been the Reformation to us who swear by its precepts?

I believe, and also believe most Protestants would agree, a primal benefit of the Reformation was getting back to a reliance on the Holy Bible, the inspired word of God, as the only, ultimate authority, in all matters Christian. Publishing the Bible in native tongues was the death nail to what had become a universal slavery to the doctrines and agendas of corrupt men. So, just having a Bible in our own tongues has been, by far, the greatest blessing of the Reformation, that I can see in my life, anyway, nothing else coming close to having a whole, reliable book of the mind of God.

As to all the arguing, anyway, it is unprofitable, is forbidden in scripture (1 Timothy 6:4-5, Philippians 2:14): nobody is saved by arguing. There is nothing wrong with exhortation, strong preaching, or a discussion to try and address issues, accept or reject, but the disciples were to dust off their feet when rejected, move on to somebody else who may listen. You don't camp on a heathen's doorstep, spend your life disputing with the spiritually blind, any more than it makes sense to beat your head against a brick wall. A person is saved by coming to the cross of Christ, in repentance before God, believing in the Lord Jesus for salvation, which is the result of preaching the word of God and responding to the conviction of the Holy Spirit, a spiritual work of God, not an intellectual work of man. As a matter of fact, nobody is going to understand scripture, to properly discuss it, absent the Holy Spirit.

It's common sense it's impossible to argue anybody into anything spiritual, clear that carnal means don't result in spiritual results. Born again, first, then discussing theology is useful. But, until then, it's preaching the cross, Jesus Christ and Him crucified, and nothing else that will save, lead to the baptism of the Holy Spirit and, only then, understanding. My primary objection to message boards is seeing the likes of 7 pages or more of continuous disputing, insults and people repeating themselves. Neither do I know anybody who can argue such things are spiritual, are Christian. Actually, I don't see why many don't find it an utterly boring waste. I know I heard some people the first time, and that was quite enough, thank the Lord for vertical scroll bars.

Galatians 5

19 Now the works of the flesh are manifest, which are these; Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness,
20 Idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies,
21 Envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like: of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God.
22 But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith,
23 Meekness, temperance: against such there is no law.

 

[nikolai_42]

The receiving God’s own life_is the starting point of all spiritual life of the born again Christian. How useless is of all our exhortation, persuasion, argument, explanation and study, purposed to induce some understanding in the mind, some determination in the will, some feeling in the emotion if, in the end it has not assisted people to receive God’s life into their spirit. But if we who are responsible for preaching/teaching the gospel truly perceive that unless people receive God’s life into the depths of their beings we have not done anything profitable, what good then has been the Reformation to us who swear by its precepts?

The ground of belief has never been the intellect - with that much I agree. But it is (I think) the ground of unbelief. It is the critical element of our makeup. So the purpose of all this talk, argument, persuasion, explanation and study is to tear down imaginations and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God - bringing every thought captive into the obedience of Christ. We are not responsible for creating belief in anyone - that can only be the work of the Holy Spirit. So in that sense, the more polemic, dogmatic, unflinching, fearless, thoroughgoing and unapologetic one's apologetic is, the less room there is for question and compromise. And as long as it proposes what is objectively true and founded squarely on the scriptures, then what results will be a "dumbfounded mind" (so to speak) that has no comeback for the truth and a man whose very heart is exposed for what it is. At that point, argument and persuasion has no more place and the man broken can be led to the cross.

Having said all that, I also don't believe we need to be deriving the truth from nothing and arguing in that way because it only serves to feed the unbelieving mind by using rationalism to counter rationalism. Instead, there has to be some presupposed ground that is assumed if we believe scripture's assertion that there is no one who is a legitimate atheist (and certainly none who have a foundation for being so) but that men suppress the knowledge of God - wittingly or not. So if those things are presupposed, we are (in fact) working on a more spiritual than rational level with our arguments because we are assuming that the man who is fighting the gospel is doing so out of resistance to the Truth. Not out of an air-tight reasoning that rejects God.

 

[Nihilo]

Oh. OK. I left that part out.

Glad to see you agree with it.

Now, do you have answer to the OP?

The receiving God’s own life_is the starting point of all spiritual life of the born again Christian. How useless is of all our exhortation, persuasion, argument, explanation and study, purposed to induce some understanding in the mind, some determination in the will, some feeling in the emotion if, in the end it has not assisted people to receive God’s life into their spirit.

Scripture says that faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God. And the hearer must respond in faith.

But if we who are responsible for preaching/teaching the gospel truly perceive that unless people receive God’s life into the depths of their beings we have not done anything profitable, what good then has been the Reformation to us who swear by its precepts?

I don't swear by the Reformation's precepts, and I am not responsible for preaching/teaching the gospel; that's the clergy's job.

 

[heir]

The receiving God’s own life_is the starting point of all spiritual life of the born again Christian. How useless is of all our exhortation, persuasion, argument, explanation and study, purposed to induce some understanding in the mind, some determination in the will, some feeling in the emotion if, in the end it has not assisted people to receive God’s life into their spirit. But if we who are responsible for preaching/teaching the gospel truly perceive that unless people receive God’s life into the depths of their beings we have not done anything profitable, what good then has been the Reformation to us who swear by its precepts?

We're not born again and you do not preach the gospel that is the power of God to save anyone. You cannot be used of the Lord until you are saved!

 

[nikolai_42]

As to all the arguing, anyway, it is unprofitable, is forbidden in scripture (1 Timothy 6:4-5, Philippians 2:14): nobody is saved by arguing. There is nothing wrong with exhortation, strong preaching, or a discussion to try and address issues, accept or reject, but the disciples were to dust off their feet when rejected, move on to somebody else who may listen. You don't camp on a heathen's doorstep, spend your life disputing with the spiritually blind, any more than it makes sense to beat your head against a brick wall. A person is saved by coming to the cross of Christ, in repentance before God, believing in the Lord Jesus for salvation, which is the result of preaching the word of God and responding to the conviction of the Holy Spirit, a spiritual work of God, not an intellectual work of man. As a matter of fact, nobody is going to understand scripture, to properly discuss it, absent the Holy Spirit.

If you look at Acts (19, to start) you find that there was persuading and disputing going on in advance of the gospel. I think the problem is the way battles are chosen and fought. Accepting the premise of the unbeliever is probably a very common problem (something that I am sure I do often) and is where a lot of dissension comes in. But if strategic points of weakness in arguments are addressed and one focuses on the critical points and keeps at the heart of the matter, then there is little fodder for empty arguing that comes when all sorts of tangents are permitted (forum threads are a good example of this, I venture to say). And while arguments can get heated, that can be because there is a lot at stake and the issue at hand is vital. So I am more and more of the thought that well-chosen battles are good. Where there's light, there's heat. But the reverse is definitely not always true.

 

[Cross Reference]

I believe, and also believe most Protestants would agree, a primal benefit of the Reformation was getting back to a reliance on the Holy Bible, the inspired word of God, as the only, ultimate authority, in all matters Christian. Publishing the Bible in native tongues was the death nail to what had become a universal slavery to the doctrines and agendas of corrupt men. So, just having a Bible in our own tongues has been, by far, the greatest blessing of the Reformation, that I can see in my life, anyway, nothing else coming close to having a whole, reliable book of the mind of God.

Thank you. However, understanding the OP would cause you to eventually conclude the scriptures do NOT reveal the Mind of God that only the Holy Spirit is only able to perform. To believe as you have it would make our new birth from above unnecessary. Certainly it is the reason why we have the argument on these forums.

To understand this, one need only understand how it was that Jesus succeeded in His wilderness temptation by calling upon his human memory as to what the written word had to say about the temptations presented Him. Then came His obedience to What He understood to be the truth in doing the WILL of His Father.

In summation, I offer this by Geo. MacDonald, that has been a confirmation for me, who wrote this that I hope you or anyone else, might glean from:

#1 "We must keep in mind when working through this that God will not go against our will for our life.

The patience of God labors for the converted mind of the saved person whose child-heart has not yet been born in him by the power of God now imputed him, that he might pursue further the Source of so great salvation to be made complete by the promise of His new birth able now to be offered Him; that he might pursue to know God the only True God in an intimate way and Jesus Christ, his lifelong Justifying lover, the beginning and the end of his seeking."

That really was a summation of John 17:3.

In conclusion, the scriptures are about God. They are NOT God. They reveal Him on the printed page purposed when read, to bring about confidence in the one reading the various accounts unto becoming, in the fullest sense of the "written word", a son of God per Heb.2:10 KJV..

 

[WonderfulLordJesus]

If you look at Acts (19, to start) you find that there was persuading and disputing going on in advance of the gospel. I think the problem is the way battles are chosen and fought. Accepting the premise of the unbeliever is probably a very common problem (something that I am sure I do often) and is where a lot of dissension comes in. But if strategic points of weakness in arguments are addressed and one focuses on the critical points and keeps at the heart of the matter, then there is little fodder for empty arguing that comes when all sorts of tangents are permitted (forum threads are a good example of this, I venture to say). And while arguments can get heated, that can be because there is a lot at stake and the issue at hand is vital. So I am more and more of the thought that well-chosen battles are good. Where there's light, there's heat. But the reverse is definitely not always true.

Yes, would heartily agree with your expansion that a well chosen battle is a different matter, though I don't find any usefulness in repeating one's self, over and over, which you see a lot of, or gratuitous insults, which is sociopathic behavior, an anger management and/or trolling issue of no relationship to positive spirituality. But, yes, a well chosen battle is good, if it's in the interest of truth. Good point.

 

[WonderfulLordJesus]

Thank you. However, understanding the OP would cause you to eventually conclude the scriptures do NOT reveal the Mind of God that only the Holy Spirit is only able to perform.

You're most welcome, and thank you for the interesting thread. The gospel itself, preaching, is expressing the mind of God to unbelievers, who accept or reject His thoughts. Generally speaking, I don't see what purpose words even have, beyond expressing one's mind on some matter. I see the Lord's thinking in the Bible from cover to cover, and at least a small subset of that thinking unsaved people do come to understand, for better, or worse. So, the Bible is all about God expressing Himself, communicating His thoughts to man, a revealing of the mind of God, but if you're saying we need the mind of God, first, the Holy Spirit, to understand the deeper things of God in a receptive way, this is true, though that mind of God is still in the thoughts expressed on the printed page, regardless what people make or don't make of those words.

 

[chrysostom]

It in part helped the Church to know how important it is to preach, protect and defend the right to religious freedom, and to keep the Church separate from the State.

did the reformation do that?

well good for it

 

[Cross Reference]

You're most welcome, and thank you for the interesting thread. The gospel itself, preaching, is expressing the mind of God to unbelievers, who accept or reject His thoughts. Generally speaking, I don't see what purpose words even have, beyond expressing one's mind on some matter. I see the Lord's thinking in the Bible from cover to cover, and a subset of that thinking unsaved people do come to understand, for better, or worse. So, the Bible is all about God expressing Himself, communicating His thoughts to man, a revealing of the mind of God, but if you're saying we need the mind of God, first, the Holy Spirit, to understand the deeper things of God in a receptive way, this is true, though that mind of God is still in the thoughts expressed on the printed page, regardless what people make or don't make of those words.

No, I am saying we need the mind of God in particular matters in our lives lived unto Him that the written word does not provide for. If it did Jesus would not have said this, which I have personally experienced: "But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you."John 14:26 (KJV) Notice Jesus didn't say, Study the written word. That was a given. Of course, one cannot be a cessationist to appreciate how this is so.

 

[WonderfulLordJesus]

No, I am saying we need the mind of God in particular matters in our lives lived unto Him that the written word does not provide for. If it did Jesus would not have said this, which I have personally experienced: "But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you."John 14:26 (KJV) Notice Jesus didn't say, Study the written word. That was a given. Of course, one cannot be a cessationist to appreciate how this is so.

I'd also say it's a given the Holy Spirit is a living presence in us that is involved in many things, every day, He very spiritual awareness that guides our minds. I was merely saying that scripture expresses the mind of God, would further state that Holy Scripture is, indeed, alive, of spiritual power, the very words of God a powerful living force on that page, that reading scripture is mystical, different from reading some novel or history book. In any event, I don't find the statement that scripture doesn't reveal the mind of God a valid concept, would not say this, but whatever.

 

[Cross Reference]

I'd also say it's a given the Holy Spirit is a living presence in us that is involved in many things, every day, He very spiritual awareness that guides our minds. I was merely saying that scripture expresses the mind of God, would further state that Holy Scripture is, indeed, alive, of spiritual power, the very words of God a powerful living force on that page, that reading scripture is mystical, different from reading some novel or history book. In any event, I don't find the statement that scripture doesn't reveal the mind of God a valid concept, would not say this, but whatever.

I take it you are a cessationist?

 

[WonderfulLordJesus]

I take it you are a cessationist?

To some degree, am not Pentecostal, put it that way, but I've not completely identified with a lot of -ists or -isms, actually don't pay many divisions much mind, don't really like anything that divides people into cultish camps, avoid this like the plague.

 

[Cross Reference]

To some degree, am not Pentecostal, put it that way, but I've not completely identified with a lot of -ists or -isms, actually don't pay many divisions much mind, don't really like anything that divides people into cultish camps, avoid this like the plague.

But that only says you won't allow yourself to "think outside the [religous] box", so to speak. In order to understand what have tried to convey, that Jesus spoke of, requires it.

 

[WonderfulLordJesus]

But that only says you won't allow yourself to "think outside the [religous] box", so to speak. In order to understand what have tried to convey, that Jesus spoke of, requires it.

Wouldn't it be fair to say you don't know me to know what "box" I think in, or don't? But have it your way. To be frank, and I don't mean disrespect, but launching into what I do or do not understand, some requirements you're finding lacking in me: you're not making any sense, just rambling about something you apparently think you're special and have that I'm lacking. A little too much familiarity, without any factual basis, for me. I don't do these sorts of communications well.

 

[Nihilo]

did the reformation do that?

I think so. Vatican II didn't happen in a vacuum, and Vatican II is where the Church finally addressed the Reformation once and for all.

well good for it

Good for the Church.

 

[Cross Reference]

Wouldn't it be fair to say you don't know me to know what "box" I think in, or don't? But have it your way. To be frank, and I don't mean disrespect, but launching into what I do or do not understand, some requirements you're finding lacking in me: you're not making any sense, just rambling about something you apparently think you're special and have that I'm lacking. A little too much familiarity, without any factual basis, for me. I don't do these sorts of communications well.

But I know what you have been posting that reveals such as I believe about you. What do I do with that information? One can't readily hide that sort of thing, can they? I don't think so.