Were Men Born Again Before Pentecost?

[ladylynn]

the ot saints had eternal life not because of the animal sacrificesbut because of THE ETERNAL SACRIFICE
Shed before the foundation of the world. You are thinking in natural terms of Christ sacrifice. His was a sacrifice with eternal reach, so it was no problem to be applied to the ot saints then.

I don't see it as thinking in natural terms at all. The old covenant insisted on the blood offerings and following the laws. How can you say these OT saints were saved under the grace covenant when they were under the covenant of law? That shows no acknowledging that God had different covenants for different people at different times. If the OT saints didn't have to do the blood sacrifices that would have been good for them to know since it sure would have saved tons of time and a whole lot of blood!!!

 

[crossnote]

Thanks Buddy. I will have to read a little closer.

No it was my garbled writing, your reading was fine

 

[crossnote]

I don't see it as thinking in natural terms at all. The old covenant insisted on the blood offerings and following the laws. How can you say these OT saints were saved under the grace covenant when they were under the covenant of law? That shows no acknowledging that God had different covenants for different people at different times. If the OT saints didn't have to do the blood sacrifices that would have been good for them to know since it sure would have saved tons of time and a whole lot of blood!!!

It shows the opposite.
The Promises were always received by faith not law whether to Adam (Gen 3:15)or Abraham.
The law never made void the promises nor did they impart Life.

 

[ladylynn]

Want to find out how many people are covenant theology?

Start a Scofield thread!!!! You will come out bloody, I promise.

I was saved in a Baptist church in which each member had a Scofield Bible. Again, it's hard to grasp why people are so mad at the Dispensational truths being taught. I found them to be quite helpful I'm no longer a Calvanist but I do hold to many of the teachings because many are Scriptural. We were taught to be 5 point Calvanists. Am not now but am aware of the teaching.

 

[Gr8grace]

I don't see it as thinking in natural terms at all. The old covenant insisted on the blood offerings and following the laws. How can you say these OT saints were saved under the grace covenant when they were under the covenant of law? That shows no acknowledging that God had different covenants for different people at different times. If the OT saints didn't have to do the blood sacrifices that would have been good for them to know since it sure would have saved tons of time and a whole lot of blood!!!

Lynn, from my studies..............being under the law made the person realize they were a sinner and couldn't do it. And the animal sacrifice was the shadow of the Gospel........Christ dying for your sin and us not being able to follow the law. the Law shows us our sin, it was never meant to save anyone.


Technically none have been under the law for salvation. It has always been faith alone in Christ alone for salvation.

 

[Gr8grace]

ok, Not sure how they can think the church is Israel? wow. And there are many here on CC who do not believe in the catching away (rapture) of the church before the tribulation and when the anti Christ is revealed. How the persecution will be so bad for those believers. And I can see why because the HolySpirit will no longer be on the earth when all the Church has left already bringing in the whole tribulation period. And there is another question., When people get saved during the tribulation, they will have the Holy Spirit correct?

Personally I do not believe that tribulational saints will be indwelt with the Holy Spirit. I believe that the indwelling of the Holy Spirit is a church age only gift.

Tribulational saints look forward to the promise of the second coming and I believe they have the Spirit UPON them and not IN them. Still saved and eternally secure, but on a promise and not a sealing of the Spirit...............like OT saints.............................................................................Or like it was in the days of ISRAEL. Hes going back to Israel in the tribulation.

 

[crossnote]

I was saved in a Baptist church in which each member had a Scofield Bible. Again, it's hard to grasp why people are so mad at the Dispensational truths being taught. I found them to be quite helpful I'm no longer a Calvanist but I do hold to many of the teachings because many are Scriptural. We were taught to be 5 point Calvanists. Am not now but am aware of the teaching.

I find that dispensational teaching though not fully water tight is the best approach at navigating the biblical waters especially as far as keeping a coherency between Scriptures that apply to Israel and those that apply to the Church.

 

[ladylynn]

Lynn, from my studies..............being under the law made the person realize they were a sinner and couldn't do it. And the animal sacrifice was the shadow of the Gospel........Christ dying for your sin and us not being able to follow the law. the Law shows us our sin, it was never meant to save anyone.


Technically none have been under the law for salvation. It has always been faith alone in Christ alone for salvation.

Well yes the law was a schoolmaster but Israel said they could do all that God required so He gave them the law (10 Commandments) and they put a yoke around their own necks based on their human pride. They chose to be under law. So instead of God allowing them to live a life of grace, they had to live under the law. They still had to do the requirements of the law didn't they? Yes. It didn't matter if they looked forward to Jesus coming, in the mean time they had to follow the law in order to be ok with God.

So 'technically' they were under the old covenant of law and had to do what that covenant required. It was not just faith alone for them, they had to have works too. I don't understand you and crosswalk since the OT saints were UNDER a covenant. Explain please what would have happened if one of the Israelite's bypassed the blood sacrifice and went into the Holy of Holies.
What would have happened if they acted on grace and believed in the coming Savior alone for their acceptance before a Holy God?

I really look forward to both of your answers.

 

[james57]

King David lived under the old covenant. God said he was a man after his own heart. David not hinge his hope of heaven on a law of righteousness, for he knew no one living was truly righteous in Gods sight(psalm143:2)
David ultimately hinged his hope of heaven on Gods unfailing love. (psalms52:8)
That unfailing love was shown to us under the new covenant by Christ dying for our sins at Calvary. For the God who ushered in the old covenant also ushered in the new one

 

[P1LGR1M]

the ot saints had eternal life not because of the animal sacrificesbut because of THE ETERNAL SACRIFICE
Shed before the foundation of the world. You are thinking in natural terms of Christ sacrifice. His was a sacrifice with eternal reach, so it was no problem to be applied to the ot saints then.

While from an eternal perspective we understand the Cross was always the means of Redemption, we also recognize that the Cross and the Provision of the Cross has a decided place in time. The best example of this truth is in fact the Promise of the Spirit, which Christ taught could not come if He did not depart. That makes it certain the Comforter was not ministering in that Age or the ages prior. And the real distinction of this age is the revelation of the Mystery of the Gospel. That is what he ministers. Christ did not reveal the Gospel concerning Himself. He spoke about it a few times, but it was not received.

Eternal salvation was a result for the Old Testament Saint, but that does not mean they were eternally redeemed nor born again.

On the last forum I was on I came under fire for this statement: no one in Israel was eternally redeemed; everyone in the Church is.

The saved of the Old Testament were not members of the Church.

Here is an important distinction concerning regeneration I will present for discussion: regeneration applies only to those physically alive.

That fact makes it a moot issue for the OT saints, who having died in a state of saved by grace through faith, still needed to be made perfect in regards to remission of sins. Hence the point of Hebrews 9:12-15; 11:13 & 39-40; and 12:23.

God bless.

 

[P1LGR1M]

I would have been then and was a Gentile when I accepted Christ. What about the old testament gentiles?

Kefa

Could you clarify your question? Not sure what you are asking.

God bless.

 

[valiant]

Jesus told Nicodemus that a flesh and blood mortal, visible person ,
could not enter into the kingdom, Jesus knew he did not know anything about it

well that's not how I read it. 'Are you a teacher in Israel and do not know these things?' The new birth was clearly taught by Isaiah (32.15; 44.1-45; 55.10-13) and Ezekiel (18.31; 36.26). So Nicodemus SHOULD have known.

Lots of flesh and blood people entered under the Kingly Rule of God in Jesus' day, but only when they had been born of the Spirit.

It would have been hypocritical of Jesus to say to Nicodemus, 'you must be born from above' if it was not a possibility for him.

 

[crossnote]

While from an eternal perspective we understand the Cross was always the means of Redemption, we also recognize that the Cross and the Provision of the Cross has a decided place in time. The best example of this truth is in fact the Promise of the Spirit, which Christ taught could not come if He did not depart. That makes it certain the Comforter was not ministering in that Age or the ages prior. And the real distinction of this age is the revelation of the Mystery of the Gospel. That is what he ministers. Christ did not reveal the Gospel concerning Himself. He spoke about it a few times, but it was not received.

Eternal salvation was a result for the Old Testament Saint, but that does not mean they were eternally redeemed nor born again.

On the last forum I was on I came under fire for this statement: no one in Israel was eternally redeemed; everyone in the Church is.

The saved of the Old Testament were not members of the Church.

Here is an important distinction concerning regeneration I will present for discussion: regeneration applies only to those physically alive.

That fact makes it a moot issue for the OT saints, who having died in a state of saved by grace through faith, still needed to be made perfect in regards to remission of sins. Hence the point of Hebrews 9:12-15; 11:13 & 39-40; and 12:23.

God bless.

I never made the case that ot saints were regenerated, I hardly think so. I was only saying that when they died believing in the promises they received them in Christ who is eternal as they entered into His presence...including eternal life. We'll just have to disagree agreeably on this one.

 

[crossnote]

Well yes the law was a schoolmaster but Israel said they could do all that God required so He gave them the law (10 Commandments) and they put a yoke around their own necks based on their human pride. They chose to be under law. So instead of God allowing them to live a life of grace, they had to live under the law. They still had to do the requirements of the law didn't they? Yes. It didn't matter if they looked forward to Jesus coming, in the mean time they had to follow the law in order to be ok with God.

So 'technically' they were under the old covenant of law and had to do what that covenant required. It was not just faith alone for them, they had to have works too. I don't understand you and crosswalk since the OT saints were UNDER a covenant. Explain please what would have happened if one of the Israelite's bypassed the blood sacrifice and went into the Holy of Holies.
What would have happened if they acted on grace and believed in the coming Savior alone for their acceptance before a Holy God?

I really look forward to both of your answers.

IMHO, Israel was a chosen people to be God's representatives on earth to the other nations. They were given the adoption, the glory, the covenants, the law, the promises and the service (Rom 9:4)

This brought with it a greater responsibility and to misuse it may mean physical death but for those Israelites who clung to God's mercy and Promises, still had eternal life. The conditional Law never abrogated the unconditional Promises.

Romans 9:4 KJVS
[4] Who are Israelites; to whom pertaineth the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God , and the promises;

 

[Gr8grace]

Well yes the law was a schoolmaster but Israel said they could do all that God required so He gave them the law (10 Commandments) and they put a yoke around their own necks based on their human pride. They chose to be under law. So instead of God allowing them to live a life of grace, they had to live under the law. They still had to do the requirements of the law didn't they? Yes. It didn't matter if they looked forward to Jesus coming, in the mean time they had to follow the law in order to be ok with God.

So 'technically' they were under the old covenant of law and had to do what that covenant required. It was not just faith alone for them, they had to have works too. I don't understand you and crosswalk since the OT saints were UNDER a covenant. Explain please what would have happened if one of the Israelite's bypassed the blood sacrifice and went into the Holy of Holies.
What would have happened if they acted on grace and believed in the coming Savior alone for their acceptance before a Holy God?

I really look forward to both of your answers.

I will fully endorse crossnotes answer on this one.

Anyone who saw the animal sacrifice, and understood what that meant(Gospel) and trusted in the coming perfect sacrifice was saved and eternally secure in that faith.

I always thought of just a bunch of hapless, ignorant men slitting an animals throat and standing around asking ,"Now what are we doing this for?" But they knew exactly what they were doing, and knew about the coming Messiah. The Gospel was clearly represented to them and to others in the message.

Bypassed the blood sacrifice? Death. We can't bypass Christ and be saved.

 

[P1LGR1M]

I will fully endorse crossnotes answer on this one.

Anyone who saw the animal sacrifice, and understood what that meant(Gospel) and trusted in the coming perfect sacrifice was saved and eternally secure in that faith.

I always thought of just a bunch of hapless, ignorant men slitting an animals throat and standing around asking ,"Now what are we doing this for?" But they knew exactly what they were doing, and knew about the coming Messiah. The Gospel was clearly represented to them and to others in the message.

Bypassed the blood sacrifice? Death. We can't bypass Christ and be saved.

There is a difference between being eternally secure from the eternal perspective of the Eternal God...and being eternally redeemed.

Sure the OT Saint was secure, just as those who have fallen prey to a loss of salvation camp are, but, in view is the fact that those sacrifices, though they provided atonement and remission of sins, did not do so on an eternal basis.

Only Christ's Sacrifice did that. They had to wait until He died to be made perfect in regard to remission of sins. This was just promise in those days: "...and their sins and iniquities I will remember no more."

They were saved from the eternal perspective, just as we were before being saved. But just as I pointed out to Cross note, we were not eternally redeemed until our sins were forgiven. The same is true for the OT Saint.

God bless.

 

[P1LGR1M]

I never made the case that ot saints were regenerated, I hardly think so. I was only saying that when they died believing in the promises they received them in Christ who is eternal as they entered into His presence...including eternal life. We'll just have to disagree agreeably on this one.

It's just in my nature to agree to disagree, lol. Especially when it comes to Biblical Doctrine.

So you feel men went to heaven when they died? Hebrews 9 states the way into Heaven was not yet made manifest, which was only seen in figure in the Tabernacle and its services.

We would have to assume that people could go into God's presence without having their sins forgiven, wouldn't we?

God bless.

 

[P1LGR1M]

well that's not how I read it. 'Are you a teacher in Israel and do not know these things?' The new birth was clearly taught by Isaiah (32.15; 44.1-45; 55.10-13) and Ezekiel (18.31; 36.26). So Nicodemus SHOULD have known.

Lots of flesh and blood people entered under the Kingly Rule of God in Jesus' day, but only when they had been born of the Spirit.

It would have been hypocritical of Jesus to say to Nicodemus, 'you must be born from above' if it was not a possibility for him.

Name one person that was born again a a member of the Body of Christ pre Pentecost.

And could you post the Scripture references above? On a tablet and at a disadvantage right now.

In regards to Nicodemus, he should have known what the Lord meant, but he ascribes the Lord's statement to physical birth. Rather than what was promise d in the Old Testament.

As far as the hypocrisy argument, we don't have to suggest that, for the Lord also told them to abide when He knew they couldn't at the time. In fact, in the end of John 16 we see the Lord question their claim to "now believe" and He did so by telling them they would all abandon Him.

Let me ask you this: would you have sought to keep the Lord from the Cross as Peter did? Would you have taken up a sword and sought, through physical force...to keep Him from the Cross?

God bless.

 

[Gr8grace]

There is a difference between being eternally secure from the eternal perspective of the Eternal God...and being eternally redeemed.

Sure the OT Saint was secure, just as those who have fallen prey to a loss of salvation camp are, but, in view is the fact that those sacrifices, though they provided atonement and remission of sins, did not do so on an eternal basis.

Only Christ's Sacrifice did that. They had to wait until He died to be made perfect in regard to remission of sins. This was just promise in those days: "...and their sins and iniquities I will remember no more."

They were saved from the eternal perspective, just as we were before being saved. But just as I pointed out to Cross note, we were not eternally redeemed until our sins were forgiven. The same is true for the OT Saint.

God bless.

I agree. I am a little slow, but I believe we are saying the same thing, just with different words?

 

[P1LGR1M]

well that's not how I read it. 'Are you a teacher in Israel and do not know these things?' The new birth was clearly taught by Isaiah (32.15; 44.1-45; 55.10-13) and Ezekiel (18.31; 36.26). So Nicodemus SHOULD have known.

Lots of flesh and blood people entered under the Kingly Rule of God in Jesus' day, but only when they had been born of the Spirit.

It would have been hypocritical of Jesus to say to Nicodemus, 'you must be born from above' if it was not a possibility for him.

I would point out that the Gospel of Christ which includes the doctrine of Gentile Inclusion was also clearly taught in the Old Testament, but it is only clear to us because understanding has been given to us but not to them.

Peter had to have a few personal lessons in regards to Gentiles, even after being born again. First by the Lord, then by Paul.

So I agree we can see the Promise taught, but, a promise is just a promise until it is fulfilled.

God bless.