sermonindex
Sep 9, 2006
Most would probably conclude, when Jesus was Glorified and that would be true, but then, when was He Glorified?
:-D
Most would probably conclude, when Jesus was Glorified and that would be true, but then, when was He Glorified?
:-D
I have heard a few different sides of this, but this is my take:
They were saved prior to Christ breathing the Holy Ghost upon them, no different than all the OT saints that went before them, and no different than anyone during this NT age. They were saved by God's grace through their faith.
Once Jesus died, was buried, and risen again, he then returned to breathe the Holy Ghost into the disciples. I believe no one had received the indwelling Holy Spirit until this point, (besides John Baptist his case being a mystery, to be filled with the Holy Ghost from the womb, I don't care what anyone says, it is a mystery), however I would be happy for someone to show me otherwise (not the Spirit upon them, but indwelling them).
So I believe the disciples were born again when they repented and put their faith in Christ, just like us. But today we are sealed with the Holy Spirit upon conversion, but they couldn't be on their conversion because Christ had not breathed the Holy Ghost yet, nor had God's Spirit been poured out (fulfillment of Joel and other Scriptures).
They were saved prior to Christ breathing the Holy Ghost upon them,
philologos wrote:They were saved prior to Christ breathing the Holy Ghost upon them,
Yes. Per Romans 5.1, being saved, was a forgone conclusion, when speaking of the disciples. Peace with God was on its way in short fashion.
I will add that if, being saved/reconcilation was the main issue, Jesus didn't need His 33+ yrs to satisfy that issue.
We must conclude there is more to His stay here than we are given to accept as the gospel.
:-D
Deleted duplicate post
"Conversion is not Regeneration"
philologos wrote:
"Conversion is not Regeneration"
Very True. However, in your referrance, O.C. is not addressing those who live with a hope, but who haven't heard of the Lord Jesus. Big difference.
Orm
Very True. However, in your referrance, O.C. is not addressing those who live with a hope, but who haven't heard of the Lord Jesus. Big difference.
philologos wrote:Very True. However, in your referrance, O.C. is not addressing those who live with a hope, but who haven't heard of the Lord Jesus. Big difference.
The only time they could, that anyone could receive; after the resurrection. cf Jn.20.22.
That was the first account of anyone who did. :-)
Does it matter?
Does it matter?
However, it does matter if we are trying to understand why the disciples behaved as they did and different times in their experience and it often matters too if we are trying to understand our own experience.
Does what matter?
What am I missing here that that question should be asked?
:-?
When I asked 'Does it matter', I was refering to the original question. God bless.
If Adam was not filled with the Holy Ghost before the fall what makes anyone think we must be in order to have peace with God ergo, what is the real reason for the born again experience?
;-)
Ormly on 2006/9/13 19:00:29 posted
what is the real reason for the born again experience?
philologos wrote:
Ormly on 2006/9/13 19:00:29 postedwhat is the real reason for the born again experience?
You are supposed to be doing that, but it looks like you all are on a tangent over there as this thread is here.. :-D
Ok.. Flat statement. Assume before the fall: The Holy Ghost was never in Adam and he had fellowship with God, in the very presence of God. Obviously the Holiness of God was not offended because if it was, the Glory of God would have killed Adam. Get my drift? So my question concerning the new birth is no longer a question but a statement. The new birth isn't what saves a person. The shed Blood of Jesus satisfies the Holiness of God concerning the issue of sin.
I will stand with that.
:-D
Ormly on 2006/9/13 21:43:56
The new birth isn't what saves a person. The shed Blood of Jesus satisfies the Holiness of God concerning the issue of sin.I will stand with that.
Oh?? :-?
Yes, the questions are 'when were the disciples born again' and ' is original sin scriptural'. Your two statements may both be accurate but how are they connected? Regeneration is only possible because of what Christ accomplished on Calvary, but what Christ accomplished on Calvary must be accomplished in me before I become a sharer in the drama of redemption.Oh??
We are back to the old puritan book title; "Redemption: accomplished and applied"
Yes, the questions are 'when were the disciples born again' and ' is original sin scriptural'. Your two statements may both be accurate but how are they connected? Regeneration is only possible because of what Christ accomplished on Calvary, but what Christ accomplished on Calvary must be accomplished in me before I become a sharer in the drama of redemption.
philologos wrote:Oh??
We are back to the old puritan book title; "Redemption: accomplished and applied"
Indeed, calvary reconciled man and made possible the new birth experience. Point being the disciples were saved when Jesus died and resurrected. That was/is an absolute; there was no need for a rebirth to bring about salvation FOR them. However, they were re-born in John 20.22, the first fruits of many son's to come, per John 17, purposed by God as a result of the indwelling experience and tutorship of the Holy Ghost. The great commission is for the single reason of bringing many son's into glory.
:-D
This discussion is locked.