Originally Posted by AC.
Interesting article about human inability/depravity and how it impacts upon how one responds to the Gospel. Is this article Biblically sound? I'm kinda agreeing with it

http://www.middletownbiblechurch.org/reformed/regenera.htm
Unfortunately, I find the author in serious error on may counts, not excluding distorting what some of whom he disagrees with have written, e.g., R.C. Sproul. From the very first paragraph one can see how the author redefines the Reformed doctrine of regeneration:

Quote
Regeneration is the sovereign act of God whereby He imparts His very life and His very nature to the believing sinner (John 1:12-13; Titus 3:5). Man’s first birth is natural; his second birth is spiritual and supernatural. His first birth makes him a member of a fallen race; his second birth makes him a member of a redeemed race. His first birth gives him a depraved nature (Eph. 2:3); his second birth makes him partaker of the divine nature (2 Pet. 1:4). The moment a person is born again he receives a new life (John 6:47; 1 John 5:12) and a new position as a child of God (John 1:12; 1 John 3:1-2). In short, he is a new creature in Christ (2 Cor. 5:17).
Here, he attributes justification and sanctification to regeneration, which none of the Reformed creeds, confessions nor catechisms teach. Regeneration is the recreating of the sinner's will, nature, soul OUT OF WHICH comes the ability and desire to repent and believe unto justification and perseverance in sanctification. Regeneration doesn't save anyone any more than God's eternal predestination and election of an individual saves. What is true is that God's predestination and election will infallibly bring about the salvation of the individual and likewise, a sinner whom the Holy Spirit regenerates will infallibly repent, believe and persevere to the end. But these things are not synonymous.

Secondly, the author confuses the "new birth" (regeneration), with those passages of Scripture which speak of "new life" (sanctification). Again, these are two separate, albeit inseparable, aspects of the Holy Spirit's work of imparting life; the first being its birth/origination and the second being its continuous expression.

It is typical of those who would reject historic Calvinism and its doctrines to label those who embrace them as "extreme", "hyper", etc., and then propose a modified form, which in essence is most always a cleverly worded form of Arminianism/semi-Pelagianism. And excellent example of this can be found here: Chosen But Free?.



[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]