Justified but not regenerated

This was touched on a few years ago in a huge thread regarding Baptism in the Holy Spirit and its distinction from fillings. It was not really pursued, though.

Is it possible to be justified and not regenerated? What would this look like?

I know the Calvinist would say "no" because they believe that regeneration starts the whole process. But I think the weight of OT scripture (God's picture book) and the NT application (Heb, Rom) says otherwise. What do y'all think?

To be honest, this question seems Roman Catholic to me. As I remember in conversations with a Catholic friend, he was ever trying to pry justification apart from salvation. This is the low view of justification that keeps people under bondage in my opinion.

It is possible to be justified and yet immature. Yet even an immature Christian has a change of heart that accompanies justification. This is the high view of justification that needs to be defended in not only Calvinism but all true Christianity.

No less an Arminian than John Wesley, in his sermon "Almost Christian" esteems the precious inward sense of forgiveness that comes with justification as the culminating event in his devout religious life. For a man that had already proven his spiritual rigor in both public service and private devotion, it is quite a high view indeed of forgiveness that it was this alone that assured him he was at last, 'altogether Christian.' Wesley's testimony, as well that of Hebrews, is that resting in forgiveness is the ultimate fruit of being a Christian...and true rest can only come from justification.

However, I fear this topic has no end. New Perspectives on the doctrine of Justification are rampant today. The premise is that the reformers didn't understand Paul, and so maybe we need to revisit aspects of Roman theology once again. I think we are making things too hard without...dare I say... justification to do so. ;-)

I'll be curious what others might say here.

Blessings,

MC

My understanding of this issue goes like this... God created the world simply through speaking. He said, "Let there be light!" and there was light. God's word is creative and powerful. It does something. Thus, when God declares us righteous, that same powerful and creative word which created the heavens and the earth when God spoke does a powerful and creative work in us. That is, when God declares us righteous, we actually become what God declares us to be. A regenerative change in nature thus is accomplished merely through His declaring us just. For God's word does not return void. It accomplishes whatever it says.

BeYeDoers, for the sake of clarity would you please define some terms as you understand them?

What is regeneration? What does it accomplish, and what is different about a regenerate person versus an unregenerate one?

You mentioned Old Testament passages which seem to imply justification proceeding regeneration. Could you please cite these for consideration?

Lastly, are you aware that the Old Testament often portrays examples of of civil/ceremonial justification, as opposed to spiritual justification? For instance, the Mosaic Covenant primarily levied [b]temporal consequences[/b] for sins. Because these temporal consequences were [i]on top[/i] of the eternal consequences, God could graciously withdraw the temporal consequences while leaving the eternal guilt untouched. For instance, in 1 Kings 21:20-29, God confronted wicked Ahab and promised temporal judgments for his many sins. Ahab "rent his clothes, and put sackcloth upon his flesh, and fasted, and lay in sackcloth, and went softly" and so the Lord removed the temporal judgments for a time. This was not the same thing as eternally justifying someone. Frequently in the Old Testament the temporal curses of the Law are lifted without actual regeneration, which gives the appearance of justification.

Any related scriptures will be beneficial. Thank you.

Compton, I can assure you my question has nothing to do whatsoever with Romanism!

Jimmy, just to clarify, you stand that the imputing of righteousness by its very nature imparts righteousness? But you are NOT saying that God gives us righteousness and this is what justifies us, correct?

Theopenlife, My definitions:
Justification: The declaration by the Judge as "not guilty". Abraham was justified by faith. Results in "when I see the blood I will pass over you." Christ is the propitiation supplied by God. Faith in Christ applies the blood and God reckons us "right".

Regeneration: The birth from above that results in a "new creature". New spirit, new heart, new mind, etc. I see this in the OT in the flood (Noah had already been declared righteous, but God took 8 people to put in the ark covered in pitch and bring them safe through the waters that killed all wickedness on the earth, such that it was a "new creation"). Same thing with the Israelites passing through the Red Sea, when they had already been passed over by the Angel of Death b/c the blood from the propitiation had been applied.

I believe Wesley said that in thinking, the order is justification, then regeneration; but that it plays out virtually simultaneously in real-time.

Jimmy, just to clarify, you stand that the imputing of righteousness by its very nature imparts righteousness? But you are NOT saying that God gives us righteousness and this is what justifies us, correct?

Correct. Imputing righteousness from God instantaneously yields the fruit of imparted righteousness... not the other way around.

I believe Wesley said that in thinking, the order is justification, then regeneration; but that it plays out virtually simultaneously in real-time.

That is also correct. Wesley also believed that righteousness is actually imparted when righteousness is imputed. Contrary to Calvinistic/Reformed views, God doesn't keep His fingers crossed when He declares you righteous. Instead, when God declares you righteous, He actually makes you what He says you are.

1Co 6:11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.

Regeneration is Sanctification begun. Many times people try to separate justification, regeneration, sanctification, from the person of Christ. The scripture tells us that he is made unto us all these things. For example people have been debating for years about these things and when they take place. Apart from the living Christ we can only have dead doctrines.

God does the regeneration of our spirit when our faith has been accepted. In other words, we are justified by faith in the Lord Jesus and sanctified by the washing of regeneration by the spirit.

When our faith has been accepted by God then we are justified and have peace with God. The very moment we have the peace of Justification, we are also experiencing regeneration by the spirit which is also sanctification begun. This is the new birth that we must receive in order to enter into the kingdom of God.

They cannot be completely separated from one another they compliment each other. They also can never be separate from the person of Christ or we will only be religious, and be teaching dead doctrine.

rbanks

Contrary to Calvinistic/Reformed views, God doesn't keep His fingers crossed when He declares you righteous.

Brother I do not wish to split hairs, but can you please tell me which Reformed folks actually say this or present this?

Reformed belief is that a saint will persevere in their faith, and grow in the likeness of Christ. God does not nervously hope that the child makes it home at all, if He did, then Paul is in error to say the following-

Romans 8:30 And those whom he predestined he also called, and those whom he called he also justified, and those whom he justified he also glorified.

I do not see any mention of a nervous God here. In fact the verbs are aorist active verbs which indicate that at one point an action was started and it has continuing effects that are being acted out now.

KingJimmy wrote,

Contrary to Calvinistic/Reformed views, God doesn't keep His fingers crossed when He declares you righteous. Instead, when God declares you righteous, He actually makes you what He says you are.

This statement is baseless and needlessly offensive. In the first place, Calvinists do not believe God "crosses His fingers" over anything; He is sovereign over all things and can bring to pass whatsoever He desires.

Secondly, the Reformed view is that the imputation of righteousness is simultaneous with the impartation of the Holy Spirit, thereby beginning true sanctification, which is improved and maintained over the rest of one's life.

It is not my intention to defend Reformed doctrine any further than it is my desire to dispel blatant misunderstandings and caricatures.

Justification: The declaration by the Judge as "not guilty". Abraham was justified by faith.

I think this question is a bit tricky. We have had this discussion before and perhaps we can try to reconstruct some of the thoughts:

At what point was Abraham justified? When he left Ur of the Chaldees or at some later point? All we know for sure is that it was [i]before[/i] God gave him the covenant of circumcision. Abraham 'believed' and that belief yielded obedience.

[color=000066](Rom 4:8) Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.

(Rom 4:9) Cometh this blessedness then upon the circumcision only, or upon the uncircumcision also? for we say that faith was reckoned to Abraham for righteousness.

(Rom 4:10) How was it then reckoned? when he was in circumcision, or in uncircumcision? [u]Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision.[/u]

(Rom 4:11) And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:
[/color]

Notice that the 'proof' of Abraham's justification was that he received the 'sign' or the 'seal' of circumcision. Circumcision of the flesh was symbolic of circumcision of the heart. We learn this from a few passages:

[color=000066]
Col 2:11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:

Php 3:3 For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.

Rom 2:29 But he is a Jew, which is one inwardly; and circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, and not in the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of God. [/color]

Now, we know that for Abraham circumcision of the flesh came [i]after justification[/i]. Why? because he received [i]the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised:[/i]

What is that [u]seal[/u] today? It seems clear that the 'seal' is the signet of the Holy Spirit (Eph 1:14, 4:30). Abraham's circumcision of the heart was a type or shadow of the future receiving of the Holy Spirit. So we have to ask ourselves; what is 'imparted righteousness' biblically?

It can be none other than the receiving of the Holy Spirit; the born again experience. We are baptized into the body Jesus Christ by the Holy Spirit (I Cor. 12:13). It is this baptism that allows us to leave off from the Old man and become part of the one New Man (Eph. 2:15). Circumcision of the heart takes place in that the Sin is dealt with and the mortal body is 'quickened'

[color=000066]
In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:

Col 2:12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.

Col 2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; [/color]

Notice how this seems to be a package deal.

(Rom 8:11) But [u]if[/u] the Spirit of him that raised up Jesus from the dead dwell in you, he that raised up Christ from the dead shall also quicken your mortal bodies by his Spirit that dwelleth in you.

[color=000066]
(Rom 8:12) Therefore, brethren, we are debtors, not to the flesh, to live after the flesh.

(Rom 8:13) For [u]if[/u] ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: but [u]if[/u] ye through the Spirit do mortify the deeds of the body, ye shall live.[/color]

So we see then that the 'seal' of the [u]justification[/u] in Abraham's time was physical circumcision; but the proof or seal in our times is the indwelling presence of the Holy Spirit that yields the fruit of the Spirit. The love of God is shed abroad in the heart and God works in the person both to [i]will[/i] and to [i]do[/i] His good pleasure. I believe this is circumcision of the heart- the fulfillment of the figure of physical circumcision.

Again, at what point was Abraham justified? he did not as much as know that there be any 'circumcision' before God revealed it in Gen. 17. (compare also Acts 19:2). So the question becomes, were the folk in Acts 19:2 'justified'? In other words, if they died before hands were laid on them would they have went to heaven?

Robert, according to Gen/Romans, Abraham's justification took place when he believed God for the promised son (Isaac). According to James, the "proof" of Abraham's justification was when he lay Isaac on the alter. Circumcision was the outward identification that he was part of the Covenant. Circumcision was not the "proof"...for circumcision or uncircumcision is nothing. Like water baptism, it was being obedient (toward a good conscience) to a command of God to be publicly identified with the covenant. I guess the question here would be is do we see a type (or shadow) of regeneration with Abraham? Regeneration itself seems to be entirely a new covenant entity, so Abraham wasn't truly regenerate, but is there a type to look at?

RobertW wrote:
So the question becomes, were the folk in Acts 19:2 'justified'? In other words, if they died before hands were laid on them would they have went to heaven?

Brother, do you believe in the separate experiences of regeneration of the spirit and the baptism of the Holy Spirit with power?

Just wondering because regeneration is the new birth. Whereas baptism in the Holy Spirit is the enduement of power from on high.

It is clear from scripture that the disciples were regenerated when they were waiting in the upper room for the outpouring of the holy Ghost with power.

We are baptized into the body of Christ by the Holy Spirit, before we are baptized in the Holy Ghost with power from on high.

Joh 20:22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:

Ac 1:8 But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.

rbanks

Robert, according to Gen/Romans, Abraham's justification took place when he believed God for the promised son (Isaac). According to James, the "proof" of Abraham's justification was when he lay Isaac on the alter.

You are citing Gen. 15:6 in part; however, Hebrews 11:8-10 tells us that Abraham's response to God's call to leave Ur was also faith. In fact, his whole life was a journey of faith as he looked for a city. This is not a one-off faith event, but a lifetime walk with God. I think this is an important point to make because the old timers did not suggest that folk were 'saved' after a single act of faith. they were known as 'hopefully converted'. There is always a sense of:

[color=000066](Col 1:21) And you, that were sometime alienated and enemies in your mind by wicked works, yet now hath he reconciled.

(Col 1:22) In the body of his flesh through death, to present you holy and unblameable and unreproveable in his sight:

(Col 1:23) [u]If ye continue in the faith[/u] grounded and settled, and be not moved away from the hope of the gospel, which ye have heard, and which was preached to every creature which is under heaven; whereof I Paul am made a minister;
[/color]

Those dreaded '[u]if's[/u]'!! The event with Isaac and the altar was another faith 'event' in a lifelong process that began in Ur and continued until death. James mentions Isaac. We could site several other faith spots perhaps. James was more trying to emphasize obedience than draw a time line of what 'point' Abraham was justified, I think.

Circumcision was the outward identification that he was part of the Covenant. Circumcision was not the "proof"...for circumcision or uncircumcision is nothing. Like water baptism, it was being obedient (toward a good conscience) to a command of God to be publicly identified with the covenant.

Water baptism don't really have the same effect as Spirit Baptism. Follow me for a minute:

[color=000066](Rom 4:11) And he received the sign of circumcision, [u]a seal[/u] of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also:[/color]

Circumcision made Abraham a 'marked man'. but his progeny did not always walk in the steps of the faith of Abraham so their circumcision was made 'uncircumcision'. The physical act was meaningless without faith, but for Abraham it was given as God's response to Abraham's ongoing right response to God (faith). Notice that the 'proof' of Abraham's justification was that he received the 'sign' or the 'seal' of circumcision; this is understood by the 'and' in the text; [i]And he received the sign of circumcision...[/i]

Circumcision was the 'earnest of his inheritance' as it were (See Ephesians 1). This was a picture of the future coming of the Spirit and circumcision of the heart (see previous post).

I guess the question here would be is do we see a type (or shadow) of regeneration with Abraham?

Yes. As I mentioned above. Regeneration is our being baptized into Jesus Christ by the Holy Spirit. I know I am making a very uncomfortable connection, but I think it is clear that when a person responds rightly to God in Abrahamic type faith, they are 'circumcised in heart by the Holy Spirit' as a fulfillment of the type and shadow of physical circumcision.

but is there a type to look at?

Yes. ;-)

Brother, do you believe in the separate experiences of regeneration of the spirit and the baptism of the Holy Spirit with power?

Yes, but sorting it all out is very challenging. ;-)

It is clear from scripture that the disciples were regenerated when they were waiting in the upper room for the outpouring of the holy Ghost with power.

I know this is a classical Pentecostal view, but can it be sustained biblically?

[color=000066]

(John 16:7) Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.

(Joh 16:8) And when he is come, he will reprove the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment:
[/color]

The ingredients we needed for genuine repentance came [i]after[/i] Christ ascended. Pentecost signaled the Spirit filled life. Also, a look at the work of the cross, as appropriated by the Holy Spirit was impossible to implement before they were actually accomplished (death to Sin, death to the Law, etc.).

We are baptized into the body of Christ by the Holy Spirit, before we are baptized in the Holy Ghost with power from on high.

I'm not disagreeing here, I just do not believe this was possible before Pentecost.

Joh 20:22 And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:

I think this was symbolic. They received the Holy ghost in Acts 2 as Peter testified to. John 20:22 helps us out of some difficulties if we take it literally, but it creates other problems.

This statement is baseless and needlessly offensive.

No offense was intended by my illustration.

Secondly, the Reformed view is that the imputation of righteousness is simultaneous with the impartation of the Holy Spirit, thereby beginning true sanctification, which is improved and maintained over the rest of one's life.

It is not my intention to defend Reformed doctrine any further than it is my desire to dispel blatant misunderstandings and caricatures.

I'm not seeking to make inappropriate caricatures of reformed doctrine. I have the utmost respect for my reformed brethren.

I'm simply saying that in the Calvinistic/Reformed point of view, so far as I have understood it, there is no room for the notion of imparted righteousness that accompanies imputed righteousness. Indeed, the idea of imparted righteousness, where the believer is actually made righteous as a result of imputed righteousness, is entirely foreign to Calvinistic/Reformed thought.

The idea of imparted righteousness that accompanies imputed righteousness, is a Wesylean notion. Calvin only understood righteousness in the forensic, legal, and positional sense of the term. Wesley understood it in the legal sense as well, however, he also understood it as effecting man's actual constitution and nature. So far as I understand Calvin, he didn't see justification as effecting man's constitution and nature. It was purely a legal transaction in his eyes. Thus, even after a man was justified, he might sin a thousand times a day in his heart. Thus, notions of eternal security arose. For he saw no change in the actual constitution of man as a result of justification. Thus, while man continues to sin, God continues to justify. Whereas Wesleyan notions of justification see justification as resulting in a change of nature, and therefore, if a man continues to sin a thousand times a day in his heart, it is evidence that he is not presently saved. Thus, eternal security is conditional in nature.

Thus, I believe the illustration I offered, where Calvin's notion of justification involves God crossing His fingers behind his back when declaring man righteous, isn't that off. For the crossing of the fingers behind one's back signifies that what one is saying is not true. Calvin's notion of justification is purely legal, not actual, and in my opinion, is the same thing as offered in the illustration. Indeed, I have known some Calvinist who while they did not overly appreciate such an illustration as representing their views, ultimately thought it to not be inaccurate in regard to what they teach.

Have you stopped sinning?

I think it is important to recognize that we need constant fillings of the Holy Spirit in order to walk in real victory over sin. It seems as though sometimes we get the idea that spiritual growth is some mysterious thing that we really have no control over. That is not true. We are as Christlike as we are full of the Holy Spirit. when we grieve the Holy Spirit by resisting Him and we do not cultivate good desires that He works in us; then we start slipping.

Christ in you the hope of glory, etc. Our attitudes, things we might entertain, all have an effect on how 'welcome' we make the Holy Spirit in us. He is the 'Holy Guest' and when He cannot rest in us (Isaiah 66:1, 2) then we have no means of producing the fruit of the Spirit. We need to make sure we make Him welcome, because it is God that works in us to will and do His good pleasure. Having 'begun' in the Spirit, we must also 'walk' in the Spirit. That is the key to victory over sin.

There is very much a place for imparted righteousness within reformed theology; it is the life-long process called sanctification.

Thanks for the correcting my misunderstanding of Reformed theology/categories.

To define justification as imparted righteousness is not only Wesleyan it is also very much Roman Catholic (which is why they have he categories of venial and mortal sins)

Wesley, so far as I have studied, was the first to bring imputed and imparted righteousness together in the justification experience. It's a double-edged sword in Wesleyan thought. His view is different than Rome's view though. Rome understands justification/righteousness to be something that is earned. They shun the entire notion of a passive righteousness that is received entirely on the basis of faith. They are looking for a day in which they will be justified on the basis of their being just. And whatever they lack in being just, they seek to receive from the treasury of the saints, who have some extra righteousness to spread around and make up for one's own deficits.

Again Reformed Theology also teaches IMPARTED righteousness, but it is categorized as sanctification. The process of being conformed into the image of Christ.

Correct. They view sanctification as the means by which one has righteousness imparted to them. They do look at justification however, purely in a legal/forensic sense. Wesleyan thought looks at it in the legal sense, as well as the imparted sense.

Have you stopped sinning?

I sinned yesterday. But I'm not presently living in any unrepentant sin, because I repented of it. I'm not sinning right now, however.

Having 'begun' in the Spirit, we must also 'walk' in the Spirit.

Amen!

...the life-long process called sanctification.

It should be noted, however, that contrary to popular theology in both Reformed and Wesleyan camps, that nowhere in Scripture is it ever taught that sanctification is a progressive process. Nor is it ever taught that sanctification is the process whereby we sin less and less.

Rather, sanctification is always seen as a definite act that happens in a single moment. In regard to our salvation, we were sanctified in full the moment we believed. That is, we were set apart, and transfered from death to life. All our sins were forgiven, and the power of sin was given a fatal blow. We were cleansed from all unrighteousness. Just as God "sanctified" the Sabbath day instantly at the end of the creation, so we were "sanctified" when we believed.

What remains then, and the only thing we see of "progression" in the Christian life, is not sanctification, but glorification. Glorification is the process whereby we bear more and more fruit for Christ. You see, we don't grow more like Christ by sinning less and less. Rather, we grow more like Christ in the same manner in which He grew in wisdom and stature in His earthly days. We, like Him, go on from glory to glory. We bear more and more fruit.

Sinning less and less is not the object of the Christian life. We should not sin at all. Though if we do, we have and Advocate with the Father, Christ Jesus the Righteous. Rather, we seek to apply the work that Christ completed on the cross and the moment we believed. We seek to walk out in the thing God has created us as. For I can never be holier than I am the moment I believed. I can never be cleaner than when Jesus cleansed me of my sins. The blood didn't miss anything when it took away my sins. It covered and cleansed all of me.