Were the Old Testament saints born again?

I should think there could be no doubt that all the Old Testament saints were born of God, for how else could they have had communion with Him? The carnal mind (or the minding of the flesh) is enmity against God. How could David then have had the “desire to dwell in the house of the Lord,” or “thirst for the living God” unless he had received a new nature? The Old Testament saints were saved on the principle of faith, and no doubt God was revealed to their souls according to the measure of light bestowed. Our Lord speaks of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob sifting down in the Kingdom of Heaven with many from the east and the west (Matthew 8:11)," TARGET="_blank">Matthew 8:11), and in John 3:3," TARGET="_blank">John 3:3, he lays down to Nicodemus the law of entrance into that Kingdom, namely, th reception of the new life: “Except a man be born again he cannot see the Kingdom of God.”

Surely this shews conclusively that Old Testament saints will only enter the Kingdom as born of the Spirit. 01 course, we make a difference between that—the bestowal of new life, and the indwelling of the Spirit or the baptism in the Spirit; these belong uniquely to New Testament saints. Nor do the Old Testament saints belong to the church, but they were undoubtedly individually regenerated. As for us, it seems safer and more practical to confine ourselves to what the Word reveals. No doubt the Spirit does work on men’s souls. It is just here that the mistake arises. It is to assume that the first work of the Spirit is to communicate life, whereas it is rather to create a sense of sin or at least of need. The natural man is dead in trespasses and sins, but this does not mean that he has no conscience or responsibility or capacity to listen.

I have heard it said that the 3000 at Pentecost in Acts 2" TARGET="_blank">Acts 2: were “born of God” when they cried, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?” and, if I mistake not, that Nicodemus to whom the Lord uttered the words “Ye must be born again,” was already born again, or he would not have come to the Lord. That a theory should entail such conclusions suffices, I think, for its refutation. The reception of the new life is connected with the reception of Christ, or the revelation of God proper to the dispensation. “As many as received Him, to them gave He the power (or right) to become children of God.” John 1:11-12" TARGET="_blank">John 1:11-12 There the order seems clearly_faith first, then life, because the new words are “even to as many as believed (not “had believed”) on His name”—"believing” is only another way of saying “receiving.” I think Hebrews 6" TARGET="_blank">Hebrews 6: , for instance, shews us how far men may go in the things of God, and yet never have been born again, and so with other passages. Alas, how many have evinced some interest in the things of God, and even like the stony ground hearers have received the Word with joy, but it has proved later to have been in appearance rather than in reality. How solemn the call to each is, to make our calling and election sure!

W.H.

Other pages in this section

About this site

Is Bible prophecy literal or figurative?

What starting point enables us to put prophecy into perspective?

The prophets "searched diligently" to understand what "the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify" (1 Peter 1:11)." TARGET="_blank">1 Peter 1:11). We also need to search diligently to know who is speaking, what is spoken, to whom, and for what purpose. The time frame of the fulfillment is also vital. Prophecy has three themes: Christ, His suffering and glory; Israel's future and the nations' destiny.

The New Testament is an infallible guide in the way it interprets Old Testament prophecy. Two facts are plain: Christ is the Key to all prophecy (2 Corinthians 3:14)," TARGET="_blank">2 Corinthians 3:14), and interpretation is literal. A virgin did bear a Child in Bethlehem, who grew up in Galilee, was rejected, spit upon, His hands and feet pierced, His face and form marred. He died for sin, but His body could not see corruption and He rose from the dead. These are only ten of hundreds of literal fulfillments. We have no authority to allegorize prophecy; it is to be taken literally.

N. Crawford

Other pages in this section

About this site

Is there such a person as an ex-Christian?

Be the first to give an answer to this question. Write an answer in the comment section below. Please provide your name and if you have a website or blog, be sure to include the URL and email address in your answer.

Answers will be reviewed.

Other pages in this section

About this site

When will Jesus drink of the wine in his father's kingdom?

What did our Lord mean in Matthew 26:29," TARGET="_blank">Matthew 26:29, "when I drink it new with you in My Father's kingdom?"

The context is clear. The Lord is partaking of the last Passover supper and will soon be separated from them. He leaves them with the assurance that in the millennial day He will have the new joy (symbolized in the fruit of the vine) of celebration with them in that Messianic kingdom. The emphasis is on spiritual joy. "My Father's kingdom" expresses the intimacy of that kingdom suggested by the singular "My." These related terms are suggestive: "kingdom of God," the source of the kingdom; "kingdom of heaven," the sphere of the kingdom; "My Father's kingdom," the secrets of the kingdom; "the kingdom of their Father," the sharers of the kingdom. That last Passover anticipated the day when He would share His fullness of joy with His own in His Father's kingdom. What took place in embryo before His death will have universal fulfillment.

A. Hull

Other pages in this section

About this site

What translations of Scripture help in understanding its message?

Do other translations of Scripture help in understanding its message?

Yes, but be careful! You must know what you are reading. Is it a literal translation or a paraphrase? Does it employ "dynamic equivalence?" Were the texts in the original language reliable? God's Word was given by verbal inspiration to men who wrote down the message. Those original writings do not exist, but copies do. Our responsibility is to ensure we are reading the most accurate translation of the most accurate copies.

With God's Word, every word matters; therefore, using a literal translation is imperative (KJV, NKJV, RV, DARBY, SPURRELL, NASB). Sometimes the literal may be hard to understand because of idioms in the original language, so a paraphrase can help. Also, some versions employ a "dynamic equivalence," where the translator uses words that convey to the modem mind what was understood by readers of the original text (NIV). Be aware, however, that a paraphrase or "dynamic equivalence" includes the editing committee's own interpretation. That could introduce a bias which limits or changes what the Spirit intended in the original text.

Stan Wells

Other pages in this section

About this site

Why is the fourth commandment (the Sabbath) different?

Please say why the Fourth Commandment is dealt with as being morally different from the rest. It will be agreed that it is wrong for Christians to steal, murder, etc. Why should it not be morally wrong for Christians not to observe the seventh day of rest?

We regard the Fourth Commandment as being morally different from the others, because apart from God’s revealed will for Israel as regards it, no natural conscience could possibly know that it was wrong to work on the seventh day, as is found to be the case by missionaries in heathen lands. The nations round Israel were never put under the Sabbath law, knew nothing about it, and are never held responsible for not keeping it. At least, I know of no place in the Prophets where not keeping the Sabbath is charged home on them.

A Gentile who sets himself to keep the Sabbath is doing himself a wrong, as he is now a debtor to do the whole law. He is taking on himself that which in no way appertains to him. He is going beyond what is written, which is wrong, just as coming short is, too. The Sabbath was a sign between Jehovah and the children of Israel for ever, and was never given to the Gentiles at all (Exodus 31: 16," TARGET="_blank">Exodus 31: 16, i7). All the other Commandments are repeated in substance in the New Testament, but the Sabbath is only referred to in Colossians z. i6, to warn believers not to allow themselves to be placed under bondage in that respect—”Let no man judge you,” etc. A certain modern heretical sect, of which Sabbath-keeping is a distinguishing feature, is so far right, in maintaining that the Sabbath was never changed from the seventh day to the first. The first day of the week, on which our Lord rose from the dead, is not a Sabbath at all; it is the Lord’s Day; though believers, are glad to profit by the usual freedom from secular employment on that day, to occupy themselves with the Lord’s service. The breaking of bread was usually in the evening (e.g. Acts 20" TARGET="_blank">Acts 20: ), because believers were at work all day in those times. Really a fictitious conscience has grown up as regards this question. We ought not to violate our conscience or that of others, by forcing or disregarding it, but to get an enlightened conscience from the Word of God.

W.H.

Other pages in this section

About this site

Should a Christian wife work outside the home?

Is it right for a wife to be employed outside of the home?

Some have taken the expression, "keepers at home" (Titus 2:5)" TARGET="_blank">Titus 2:5) to mean staying at home. M. R. Vincents "Word Studies in the New Testament" disagrees with this and indicates it means of the household." There is support for translating the expression "workers at home." The other words in this series of descriptions are moral characteristics: discreet; chaste; good. The verses surrounding it are primarily the same. Rather than a command for a woman to stay at home, Paul seems to be addressing her character. In a similar setting in 1 Timothy 5:13, 14," TARGET="_blank">1 Timothy 5:13, 14, where young women are to "guide the house," this responsibility is a preservation from idleness, wandering from house to house, and being a busybody. Wholesome character in a young wife will keep her focus on her responsibilities in the home. The principle of 1 Timothy 2:15" TARGET="_blank">1 Timothy 2:15 likewise directs a sister to her domestic cares. If, therefore, a sister manages her home (1 Timothy 5:14)" TARGET="_blank">1 Timothy 5:14) and cares for her children (1 Timothy 2:15)," TARGET="_blank">1 Timothy 2:15), working outside her home does not violate the teaching of these passages. Her industriousness is commendable. She is carrying on the traditions of the virtuous woman of Proverbs 31" TARGET="_blank">Proverbs 31 and joins that noble sister who with her husband, was a tentmaker.

On the other hand, a sister who places equal or greater value on her career than on her home and family has stepped outside Scriptural guidelines.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Was the descent at the time of Pentecost gradual?

Was the descent at the time of Pentecost gradual?

If the question refers to the coming of the Spirit at Pentecost, the answer is in verses 2 to 4 of Acts 2" TARGET="_blank">Acts 2: "And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, … And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost." With unexpected suddenness (Strong’s Dictionary), the sound filled the house, divided tongues (ESV) appeared and rested on the believers, the Holy Spirit filled them, and they spoke in tongues.

However, perhaps the question addresses the descent or decline of Israel’s place of privilege. During the period covered in the Book of Acts, the gospel went "to the Jew first and also to the Greek" (Romans 1:16)." TARGET="_blank">Romans 1:16). In Ezekiel’s visions, the glory of the Lord gradually moved away from the temple, the land, and the nation. The Lord did not rush to withdraw from His people. The prophet received the message of judgment before the glory departed, but God carried out the judgment with apparent reluctance, which is both instructive and touching. So during the book of Acts, Israel’s removal from its position of privilege took place gradually. The Lord had announced it before the cross, and made it clear that the reason was the slaying of the beloved Son (Matthew 21:33-43)." TARGET="_blank">Matthew 21:33-43). He taught that after He ascended back to heaven, the nation would seal its doom by sending after Him the message, "We will not have this Man to reign over us" (Luke 19:12-14)" TARGET="_blank">Luke 19:12-14) and by declining the invitation of the King’s messengers (Matthew 22:1-7)." TARGET="_blank">Matthew 22:1-7). The same leaders who plotted the death of Christ sent their message of determined rejection ("We will not have this Man . . .") back to heaven when they stoned Stephen (Acts 7)." TARGET="_blank">Acts 7). They imprisoned and beat the messengers (ch 5). They proved that their slaying of Christ was not accidental; they were not manslayers (Deu 19:1-4)," TARGET="_blank">Deu 19:1-4), but, as Stephen said (Acts 7:52)," TARGET="_blank">Acts 7:52), were murderers (Deuteronomy 19:11, 12)." TARGET="_blank">Deuteronomy 19:11, 12). They had no refuge from the sword of judgment. As the gospel spread from Jerusalem to Rome in Acts, the Jewish leaders affirmed the nation’s rejection of Christ and His messengers, although individual Jews were saved.

The nation rejected Christ and His kingdom when they crucified Him. As the gospel spread, the nation’s rejection of the message spread; the pall of darkness and blindness (Romans 11:25)" TARGET="_blank">Romans 11:25) settled over Israel. With apparent reluctance, God gradually removed the place of privilege from the nation that had rejected His Son. That generation crucified the King and therefore would not share in His kingdom. That was settled before the beginning of Acts. During Acts, God gradually removed their place of privilege as the message went from Jerusalem to Rome. After the end of Acts, the army came from Rome to Jerusalem to destroy the city (Matthew 22:7)." TARGET="_blank">Matthew 22:7). The decline was gradual, but the result inevitable.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Why did God make Adam if He knew that Adam would sin?

Be the first to give an answer to this question. Write an answer in the comment section below. Please provide your name and if you have a website or blog, be sure to include the URL and email address in your answer.

Answers will be reviewed.

Other pages in this section

About this site

How can an assembly deal with damaging rumors about an assembly believer?

How can an assembly deal with damaging rumors about an assembly believer?

Apart from a personal confession, the Old Testament principle of "two or three witnesses" (Deuteronomy 17:6)" TARGET="_blank">Deuteronomy 17:6) applies in all assembly matters. An assembly can't act on rumors.

"Two or three witnesses" does not include two or three stories about similar incidents. Each incident must have "two or three witness" to receive consideration. In the case of drunkenness, for instance, elders would need to verify sufficient incidences of this kind before guiding the assembly to put away the individual.

In the case of serious but unsupported rumors, the assembly can take no action. The overseers would help the individual by visiting him and helping him to understand that he is responsible for the appearance of wrongdoing in his life (Romans 12:17" TARGET="_blank">Romans 12:17b). If anything he is doing contributes to these rumors, even though the rumors are not accurate, he would be wise, safe, and godly to make changes so that no one would even consider repeating such obvious lies.

D. Oliver
Other pages in this section

About this site

Main Menu