Does Regeneration Precede
Faith?
Introduction
One of the fatal flaws of Calvinism (i.e., Reformed
theology) is its twisting of the Biblical concept of faith.
Calvinism reckons faith as a work that man does, and therefore
constitutes a contribution by the sinner to his salvation. The
reasoning is that since faith is a work, and works are the fruit of
salvation, then faith exercised must be the result of regeneration.
The argument is made that since lost men are spiritually dead in
sins, they have no capacity for faith. Regeneration in the elect
grants them the ability to believe, and they embrace Jesus Christ by
faith as a result of regeneration. The example cited as the
strongest proof of this is the resurrection of Lazarus from the
dead. He was summoned to life, and then came forth.
Calvinism also insists that placing regeneration
before faith excludes man as a contributor to his salvation, and
therefore preserves all the glory for God. The Reformed argument
juxtaposes monergism (God is the only one who works in bringing
salvation) over against synergism (God and man both work to bring
about salvation), and insists that monergism alone is Biblical. The
reasoning is that if regeneration is contingent upon faith, then man
has worked to bring it about, and God does not get all the glory.
Analysis
Faith is Pleasing to God
The problem with this erroneous logic that continues
to be propagated by R. C. Sproul and others is that faith pleases
God (Hebrews 11:6). The Bible suggests that the stronger a man is in
faith, the more God is glorified (Romans 4:20). Biblical faith
speaks of man casting himself upon the mercy of God with an
awareness of his total and absolute inability to contribute one iota
to his salvation.
In passages such as Romans 4:5, 16, the apostle Paul
paints a stark contrast between faith and works, and excludes faith
from the works category altogether. Paul taught that it was faith
that enabled grace to make the promise sure to all the seed (i.e.,
the elect). Reformed theologians who label as synergists and
semi-Pelagians those who defend the Biblical position of faith
before regeneration have absolutely no foundation upon which to
stand!
Insight from John Wesley
John Wesley, in a message entitled The New Birth,
speaks of the two great works of justification and regeneration in
connection with our salvation. He rightly reasons that though both
of these Divine acts take place instantaneously in a moment of time,
justification must logically precede regeneration. His thought is
that in justification God does something for us, clearing away our
sin and guilt, so that in regeneration He is free to do something in
us. It is admittedly a fine point to argue since the Scriptures
represent faith as prerequisite to both righteousness and life. The
point is that Wesley properly understood the relationship between
faith and regeneration. Belief precedes birth!
Jesus and Nicodemus
Jesus Himself taught that this was the case. In John
3, Nicodemus had asked: "How can these things be?" in response to
our Lord's teaching on the new birth. In His answer, Jesus reached
back to the Old Testament incident involving a snake-bitten people,
and a brass serpent on a rod in the middle of the camp (John
3:14-15). The word went forth that a provision had been made for
snakebite. Those who had the death sentence in themselves could
receive healing and life for a look of faith! So which came first,
the look or the life? Jesus taught that in the new birth (i.e.,
regeneration) the believing set the stage for the birthing!
John concluded this chapter saying: "He that
believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth
not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth upon
him" (John 3:36). Did you catch that phrase in the middle? He that
believeth not the Son shall not see life!
For the intellectually honest student
of scripture, That single phrase alone
slams the door shut on the regeneration-before-faith doctrine, and
essentially destroys the entire system of Calvinism!
According to the Calvinistic view of depravity, a
sinner must receive life before he can
believe. According to Jesus and John, a man must believe before he
can receive life! Who do you trust on the matter?
Jesus and Lazarus
The argument from John 11 regarding Lazarus appears
rather formidable if you assume that Jesus meant it as a picture of
the new birth. But did he? The problem with this assumption is the
conflict it creates with John 3. The fact is Lazarus'
resurrection was intended to portray a physical resurrection in the
future, not spiritual regeneration. When Jesus called Lazarus by
name, he was not addressing the dead corpse. He was summoning the
spirit of this saved man from Abraham's bosom in order to reunite
body and spirit. In so doing, He demonstrated His power and glory as
the Resurrection and the Life! Regeneration, on the other hand,
takes place under an entirely different set of circumstances; that
is, with soul and body still in tact.
Paul and the Ephesians
The apostle Paul wrote to the Ephesians concerning
"all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ" (Ephesians
1:3). The operative phrase is "in Christ" or its equivalent. He
included the relationship between the work of the Spirit and their
faith, saying: "In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the
word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in who also, after that
ye believed, ye were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise"
(Ephesians 1:13). The word trusted is italicized in the Authorized
Version. The verb itself is not there, but the Greek construction
implies that the Ephesians had trusted Christ in like manner as did
Paul and his associates (1:12). The phrase after that ye heard is
the translation of an aorist active participle. The literal
rendering is, "having heard, ye also trusted in Him." The phrase
after that ye believed is also an aorist active participle. The
literal rendering is, "having believed, ye were sealed." In Paul's
mind, the hearing comes first, then the believing, and then the
sealing.
Three observations from Ephesians 1:13 are in order.
First, both of the aorist (past) participles are active voice. Paul
as easily could have used the passive voice in both instances to
convey the sense of "having been made to hear" and "having been made
to believe." That certainly would have played into the hands of
Calvinism. But Paul employed the active voice under Spirit
inspiration to indicate that sinners are active participants (not to
be confused with contributors) in their salvation. Secondly, the
Ephesians had heard the word (logos) of truth. It appears that, in
Paul's mind, the logos and the rhema were interchangeable, both
having the ability to ignite faith in the hearers.
Lastly, we have the sealing of the Spirit taking
place after faith is exercised. This fact creates a serious dilemma
for the Calvinist. If regeneration (i.e., the new birth) takes place
in the elect prior to their exercise of faith, at what point do they
become sons? Is not regeneration synonymous with sonship? Is it
possible to have an unbelieving and unsealed son without the earnest
of his inheritance? Galatians 3:6 says: "ye are all the children
[sons] of God by faith in Christ Jesus." In John 1:12, the power
(authority) to become a son of God was granted to as many as
received (aorist) Him. Sonship in Scripture is always the
consequence of faith.
Conclusion
Let it be said that the regeneration-before-faith
doctrine cannot be supported by the truth of Scripture. It is
nothing more than philosophical rationalism—the child of human
reason! The Calvinist is forced to take this position in defense of
total depravity (i.e., total inability) and unconditional election.
God's eternal decree and sovereign good pleasure with
regard to redemption is to save them that believe! The elect are
those who have believed through grace (Acts 18:27). There is nothing
meritorious or synergistic about their faith! God's work of
regeneration takes place in response to faith wrought by grace in
the heart of a believing sinner! This in no way detracts from the
glory that God receives in redeeming His elect from the hand of the
enemy! It rather affirms and promotes that glory!
Top |
