Born Again Vs. Saved
- Thread starter KJV1611
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I said I was done here, but you brought up something I have to address.
Is there another Spirit that made them born again? No.
Here's the thing. Being birthed in by the Spirit and being indwelt are two entirely different things. The birth from above, being born again, is the Spirit of life giving life to the dead in sins sinner. They are given faith and repentance and are saved. That has always been the case. Abraham was declared righteous before God. None can be born again and not be declared righteous.
Yes, they had the Spirit, but not in the plenitude we have it today. I think Adam Clarke's commentary on John 7:51 is really good...
Was not yet given - Δεδομενον, given is added by the Codex Vaticanus, (B.) the Syriac, all the Persic, later Syriac with an asterisk, three copies of the Slavonic, Vulgate, and all the Itala but three; and several of the primitive fathers. The word seems necessary to the completion of the sense.
Certain measures of the Holy Spirit had been vouchsafed from the beginning of the world to believers and unbelievers: but that abundant effusion of his graces spoken of by Joel, Joel 2:28, which peculiarly characterized the Gospel times, was not granted till after the ascension of Christ:
2. It was to supply the place of Christ to his disciples and to all true believers; and therefore it was not necessary till after the removal of his bodily presence from among them. See our Lord's own words, John 14:16-18, John 14:26; John 15:26; John 16:7-15.
Is there another Spirit that made them born again? No.
Here's the thing. Being birthed in by the Spirit and being indwelt are two entirely different things. The birth from above, being born again, is the Spirit of life giving life to the dead in sins sinner. They are given faith and repentance and are saved. That has always been the case. Abraham was declared righteous before God. None can be born again and not be declared righteous.
Yes, they had the Spirit, but not in the plenitude we have it today. I think Adam Clarke's commentary on John 7:51 is really good...
Was not yet given - Δεδομενον, given is added by the Codex Vaticanus, (B.) the Syriac, all the Persic, later Syriac with an asterisk, three copies of the Slavonic, Vulgate, and all the Itala but three; and several of the primitive fathers. The word seems necessary to the completion of the sense.
Certain measures of the Holy Spirit had been vouchsafed from the beginning of the world to believers and unbelievers: but that abundant effusion of his graces spoken of by Joel, Joel 2:28, which peculiarly characterized the Gospel times, was not granted till after the ascension of Christ:
- Because this Spirit in its plenitude was to come in consequence of his atonement; and therefore could not come till after his crucifixion.
2. It was to supply the place of Christ to his disciples and to all true believers; and therefore it was not necessary till after the removal of his bodily presence from among them. See our Lord's own words, John 14:16-18, John 14:26; John 15:26; John 16:7-15.
P
yes, not recreates, but creates. Ty for that, I wouldn't last long here in the BF. now you know why I"m not here that much.. 
Did you know Billy gram practiced his preaching on a boat floating down a river talking to the trees?...true that.
You fit right in, besides you need to thicken your skin a bit saint....we all do...lol
Blessings...potter
L
I believe they were also and to the extent where Paul was questioning if they were even saved.
But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?
Galatians 4:9 KJV
Notice Paul changes his original statement that they knew God to rather known of God. There is a distinction and Paul makes it.
But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?
Galatians 4:9 KJV
Notice Paul changes his original statement that they knew God to rather known of God. There is a distinction and Paul makes it.
You should slow down your typing so as not to garner typos showing your haste as if you have an irrefutable answer. Stop trying to put words in others mouths, I've stated no such thing.
Paul is making a philosophical argument concerning sonship. This does not mean he thinks they are saved, he is making an argument about sonship and using them as the subject. Your literalism is killing you thus you don't understand and wreck havoc on much of Scripture in your KJVO sectarianism.
He later says he stands in doubt of them; 4:19. He was looking for evidence of conversion, as he was not convinced. He also shows this in 4:11.
"...he did not know what to think of them, and their state; sometimes he hoped well of them, at other times he was ready to despair; nor did he well know what course to take with them, whether to use them roughly or smoothly, and what arguments might be most proper and pertinent, in order to reclaim them." - Gill
Paul is making a philosophical argument concerning sonship. This does not mean he thinks they are saved, he is making an argument about sonship and using them as the subject. Your literalism is killing you thus you don't understand and wreck havoc on much of Scripture in your KJVO sectarianism.
He later says he stands in doubt of them; 4:19. He was looking for evidence of conversion, as he was not convinced. He also shows this in 4:11.
"...he did not know what to think of them, and their state; sometimes he hoped well of them, at other times he was ready to despair; nor did he well know what course to take with them, whether to use them roughly or smoothly, and what arguments might be most proper and pertinent, in order to reclaim them." - Gill
Last edited:
It's amazing that KJVO would preach some as saved who are bewitched by a false gospel. It's all good as long as they can force one of their heresies into a text. "They were born again but not saved, even though they were believing in a false gospel."
That's right, they do this.
They would preach the lost into heaven if they could use it to support KJVO error. Everything must submit to KJVO sectarianism.
That's right, they do this.
They would preach the lost into heaven if they could use it to support KJVO error. Everything must submit to KJVO sectarianism.
I don't know man I just read the words below and it makes sense to me that those people are saved. Why do you think they are not?
Galatians 4:6-8 KJV
And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.
[7] Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.
[8] Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods.
Galatians 4:6-8 KJV
And because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of his Son into your hearts, crying, Abba, Father.
[7] Wherefore thou art no more a servant, but a son; and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.
[8] Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods.
I've already offered that argument, but you'll have none of it. Your literalism has blinded you. Let's use your literalism in Romans 2. Go read it. Take it literally, don't see it as an argument from Paul, take it literally. When you do that you'll be preaching people into heaven by their works, and no need of Christ to die for them.
You don't use critical thinking because of your literalism, which you cannot apply consistently across Scripture as a hermeneutical principle of interpretation.
This shows the fallacy of how you interpret and that since it is inconsistent it cannot be true.
But, you won't care about this, you'll carry on in error and will refuse to see it and accept it.
You don't use critical thinking because of your literalism, which you cannot apply consistently across Scripture as a hermeneutical principle of interpretation.
This shows the fallacy of how you interpret and that since it is inconsistent it cannot be true.
But, you won't care about this, you'll carry on in error and will refuse to see it and accept it.