Are todays reformers 'Sola Scriptura' or 'Sola Systema'?

[Dave123]

In my opinion, the reformation became stagnant soon after it's inception, and a lot of error still remained. The reformation was never meant to stop reforming. To quote Banner of Truth...Writer I. John Hesselink ...

"It is rather audacious to claim that we are reformed. It can also be misleading when we call ourselves Reformed Churches. For this might imply that we believe that our denominations are truly reformed; or, even worse, that at some point in the past we were or became reformed and that the task of reform is basically finished. Whenever we imagine that the word “reformed” refers to an accomplishment rather than a perpetual obligation, we are presumptuous and deluded".

“Ecclesia reformata semper reformanda est” – “A reformed church must always be reforming itself.” Luther, Calvin, Knox, they gave us a lot, but they were not infallible. There was still huge chunks of the Bible missing from their theology. There was obvious error. This was a direct result of the Catholic church that they came out of. While their understanding of Scripture gave us a lot to be thankful for, that same theology had error in it. These theological errors continue to poison Bible translations and the church today. Elevating their writings to a status where they can never be corrected turns those theologians into the very type of unquestionable authority the Reformers sought to dismantle.

"always reforming" does not mean changing core doctrines to fit modern cultural trends. But we must consider things like the Reformers "flattened" the transition between the Testaments and minimized the New Covenant reality of the Holy Spirit, and this is one place of many where the 16th-century Reformation fell short. This needs to be fixed, not worshipped.

Do you think that the acronym T.U.L.I.P., as the fixture that it is today, would be counter productive to “A reformed church must always be reforming itself."? It's like a fixture that should not be one. Scripture is sufficient to interpret Scripture. Martin Luther would have considered infant baptism a fixture, so would Calvin, though not for justification. This is the problem with fixtures outside the Bible defining itself. They aren't Scripture. But most of todays Calvinists treat T.U.L.I.P. that way.

I wouldn't call todays reformers 'Sola Scriptura'. They are more 'Sola Systema'. The system is the fixture that defines Scripture, and in my opinion, has become an idol in and of itself.

Try to get a Calvinist to see Scripture apart from using the systems interpretation of total depravity as a foundation to interpret it. They won't, and they can't, It just won't happen. Their definition of total depravity is off. This is simply replacing the Catholic church with the system. And that's not allowing for any reformation of the opinions of Scripture from the first reformers. It stonewalls any corrections.

Thoughts?

 

[OMC]

In my opinion, the reformation became stagnant soon after it's inception, and a lot of error still remained. The reformation was never meant to stop reforming. To quote Banner of Truth...Writer I. John Hesselink ...

"It is rather audacious to claim that we are reformed. It can also be misleading when we call ourselves Reformed Churches. For this might imply that we believe that our denominations are truly reformed; or, even worse, that at some point in the past we were or became reformed and that the task of reform is basically finished. Whenever we imagine that the word “reformed” refers to an accomplishment rather than a perpetual obligation, we are presumptuous and deluded".

“Ecclesia reformata semper reformanda est” – “A reformed church must always be reforming itself.” Luther, Calvin, Knox, they gave us a lot, but they were not infallible. There was still huge chunks of the Bible missing from their theology. There was obvious error. This was a direct result of the Catholic church that they came out of. While their understanding of Scripture gave us a lot to be thankful for, that same theology had error in it. These theological errors continue to poison Bible translations and the church today. Elevating their writings to a status where they can never be corrected turns those theologians into the very type of unquestionable authority the Reformers sought to dismantle.

"always reforming" does not mean changing core doctrines to fit modern cultural trends. But we must consider things like the Reformers "flattened" the transition between the Testaments and minimized the New Covenant reality of the Holy Spirit, and this is one place of many where the 16th-century Reformation fell short. This needs to be fixed, not worshipped.

Do you think that the acronym T.U.L.I.P., as the fixture that it is today, would be counter productive to “A reformed church must always be reforming itself."? It's like a fixture that should not be one. Scripture is sufficient to interpret Scripture. Martin Luther would have considered infant baptism a fixture, so would Calvin, though not for justification. This is the problem with fixtures outside the Bible defining itself. They aren't Scripture. But most of todays Calvinists treat T.U.L.I.P. that way.

I wouldn't call todays reformers 'Sola Scriptura'. They are more 'Sola Systema'. The system is the fixture that defines Scripture, and in my opinion, has become an idol in and of itself.

Try to get a Calvinist to see Scripture apart from using the systems interpretation of total depravity as a foundation to interpret it. They won't, and they can't, It just won't happen. Their definition of total depravity is off. This is simply replacing the Catholic church with the system. And that's not allowing for any reformation of the opinions of Scripture from the first reformers. It stonewalls any corrections.

Thoughts?

Your core point is thoughtful and worth taking seriously: the Reformation was never meant to freeze doctrine in the 16th century, and any system — including TULIP — becomes counter‑productive the moment it stops being a tool and starts functioning as an untouchable fixture.
The Reformers themselves insisted that Scripture reforms us continually, not that their own conclusions should become permanent boundaries.
When a system becomes the lens through which every passage must be interpreted, it stops being Sola Scriptura and becomes what you called Sola Systema — Scripture filtered through a framework that cannot be questioned.
And you’re right that this can prevent believers from re‑examining assumptions, especially where the Reformers carried over categories shaped by the medieval church.
“Always reforming” doesn’t mean chasing trends; it means letting Scripture correct even our most cherished theological structures.
In that sense, yes — treating TULIP as a fixed, unquestionable grid can hinder the very ongoing reformation the Reformers believed was essential.

 

[NOV25]

In my opinion, the reformation became stagnant soon after it's inception, and a lot of error still remained. The reformation was never meant to stop reforming. To quote Banner of Truth...Writer I. John Hesselink ...

"It is rather audacious to claim that we are reformed. It can also be misleading when we call ourselves Reformed Churches. For this might imply that we believe that our denominations are truly reformed; or, even worse, that at some point in the past we were or became reformed and that the task of reform is basically finished. Whenever we imagine that the word “reformed” refers to an accomplishment rather than a perpetual obligation, we are presumptuous and deluded".

“Ecclesia reformata semper reformanda est” – “A reformed church must always be reforming itself.” Luther, Calvin, Knox, they gave us a lot, but they were not infallible. There was still huge chunks of the Bible missing from their theology. There was obvious error. This was a direct result of the Catholic church that they came out of. While their understanding of Scripture gave us a lot to be thankful for, that same theology had error in it. These theological errors continue to poison Bible translations and the church today. Elevating their writings to a status where they can never be corrected turns those theologians into the very type of unquestionable authority the Reformers sought to dismantle.

"always reforming" does not mean changing core doctrines to fit modern cultural trends. But we must consider things like the Reformers "flattened" the transition between the Testaments and minimized the New Covenant reality of the Holy Spirit, and this is one place of many where the 16th-century Reformation fell short. This needs to be fixed, not worshipped.

Do you think that the acronym T.U.L.I.P., as the fixture that it is today, would be counter productive to “A reformed church must always be reforming itself."? It's like a fixture that should not be one. Scripture is sufficient to interpret Scripture. Martin Luther would have considered infant baptism a fixture, so would Calvin, though not for justification. This is the problem with fixtures outside the Bible defining itself. They aren't Scripture. But most of todays Calvinists treat T.U.L.I.P. that way.

I wouldn't call todays reformers 'Sola Scriptura'. They are more 'Sola Systema'. The system is the fixture that defines Scripture, and in my opinion, has become an idol in and of itself.

Try to get a Calvinist to see Scripture apart from using the systems interpretation of total depravity as a foundation to interpret it. They won't, and they can't, It just won't happen. Their definition of total depravity is off. This is simply replacing the Catholic church with the system. And that's not allowing for any reformation of the opinions of Scripture from the first reformers. It stonewalls any corrections.

Thoughts?

Good post. Would you mind elaborating on your statement: Their definition of total depravity is off

How do Calvinists define it, how do you define it?

 

[Dave123]

Good post. Would you mind elaborating on your statement: Their definition of total depravity is off

How do Calvinists define it, how do you define it?

Thanks for the reply. I'll try to keep it simple.

Calvinism defines total depravity as man having all evil thoughts and evil desires all the time from his flesh unless he is born again. Not as evil as he can be, or thinking as evil as he can think, but evil none the less. From that thinking, they reason, that only the 'life' can bring a pure, thus a genuine faith that God would accept. From that, they also reason, that man must have the 'life' already in him, being indwelt, before he can initially believe the Gospel. They see the initial belief and the the ongoing faith as the same.

I believe that the initial faith and the ongoing faith, called the life are distinct, yet both can be from God's grace. Follow...

Anything good that we do by the righteous standards of the Law, God's character, is from the Spirit of God in us, a gift, and our flesh cannot produce that same good, thus be righteous, by those same standards, that's what total depravity is. When separated from God, which is what we inherited from Adam, we are unplugged from the source of good, and incapable of doing anything that would be called righteous, by God's standards, from the flesh, and are incapable of justifying ourselves.

The missing element in these discussions is God grace given to man before he believes, the Light, His presence, and His Word, which could be seen as the same power. A prevenient grace. It can be rejected. The grace that we're given as a result of our initial belief, is the life, the Holy spirit indwelling, the gift, this is what is eternally secured, and what Jesus started and promises to finish.

Being born again is simultaneous to receiving the indwelling Holy Spirit. We receive that indwelling as the result of believing. At that moment we first trust in Christ Jesus, we're placed into Christ's death (Galatians 2:20), and raised up with Him (Ephesians 2:6), born again. Romans 6:3-11 shows the whole thing, explained nicely, starting with the spiritual baptism with/by the Holy Spirit by faith.

Think of the Light that draws a person, not as putting goodness into them, so that they can respond likewise, rather it's more like truth being illuminated, so that a dull, hardened heart which has become hard of hearing can see and understand, and thus respond, with a desire to know that Light, or a desire to put that Light out. Negatively or positively.

So in the OT, as recorded in John, when Jesus spoke in parables to the so that they would not believe, along with a judicial hardening, thus fulfilling Isaiah, one must ask why it also says that Jesus spoke in parables "lest they hear and believe"? How could they believe? The light, Jesus, God's presence was there (John 12:35-36), that's how. If the Word was spoken plainly without a veil, they could have believed, even dull hard of hearing judicially hardened, could have heard and believed if the Word was not veiled. John 6:63 says God's Word is spirit and life. Some might say that if the veil were lifted, the sheer weight of God’s glory standing right in front of them would compel faith in the Gospel, rather than fostering the genuine, loving faith that Jesus sought.

I'm out of time.

 

[NightTwister]

I have yet to see someone who disagrees with reformed doctrine correctly represent it. What's represented here isn't it.

 

[GWH]

In my opinion, the reformation became stagnant soon after it's inception, and a lot of error still remained. The reformation was never meant to stop reforming. To quote Banner of Truth...Writer I. John Hesselink ...

"It is rather audacious to claim that we are reformed. It can also be misleading when we call ourselves Reformed Churches. For this might imply that we believe that our denominations are truly reformed; or, even worse, that at some point in the past we were or became reformed and that the task of reform is basically finished. Whenever we imagine that the word “reformed” refers to an accomplishment rather than a perpetual obligation, we are presumptuous and deluded".

“Ecclesia reformata semper reformanda est” – “A reformed church must always be reforming itself.” Luther, Calvin, Knox, they gave us a lot, but they were not infallible. There was still huge chunks of the Bible missing from their theology. There was obvious error. This was a direct result of the Catholic church that they came out of. While their understanding of Scripture gave us a lot to be thankful for, that same theology had error in it. These theological errors continue to poison Bible translations and the church today. Elevating their writings to a status where they can never be corrected turns those theologians into the very type of unquestionable authority the Reformers sought to dismantle.

"always reforming" does not mean changing core doctrines to fit modern cultural trends. But we must consider things like the Reformers "flattened" the transition between the Testaments and minimized the New Covenant reality of the Holy Spirit, and this is one place of many where the 16th-century Reformation fell short. This needs to be fixed, not worshipped.

Do you think that the acronym T.U.L.I.P., as the fixture that it is today, would be counter productive to “A reformed church must always be reforming itself."? It's like a fixture that should not be one. Scripture is sufficient to interpret Scripture. Martin Luther would have considered infant baptism a fixture, so would Calvin, though not for justification. This is the problem with fixtures outside the Bible defining itself. They aren't Scripture. But most of todays Calvinists treat T.U.L.I.P. that way.

I wouldn't call todays reformers 'Sola Scriptura'. They are more 'Sola Systema'. The system is the fixture that defines Scripture, and in my opinion, has become an idol in and of itself.

Try to get a Calvinist to see Scripture apart from using the systems interpretation of total depravity as a foundation to interpret it. They won't, and they can't, It just won't happen. Their definition of total depravity is off. This is simply replacing the Catholic church with the system. And that's not allowing for any reformation of the opinions of Scripture from the first reformers. It stonewalls any corrections.

Thoughts?

I agree completely!
That is why I identify as a Christian Truthseeker as the most comprehensive (includes general revelation)
yet fundamental term regarding God's requirement or condition for salvation (John 8:32, 2Thes. 2:10, 1Tim. 2:3-4).

 

[JohnDB]

https://twitter.com/x/status/2100964313070522503

 

[Dave123]

Calvin was right to a point, but then when it was time to continue to ask questions from Scripture, he turned to total depravity for his conclusion.

On Hebrews 9:16-17, Calvin was on the right track. He claimed that the OC was held 'in suspense'. That the NT begins at the cross. He also recognized the promise, which is what was held in suspense. Bingo!

"In his Institutes of the Christian Religion, Calvin specifically noted that while the Old Covenant was temporary and held "in suspense," it was finalized and made new by the shedding of Christ's blood. Commenting on Jesus' words at the Last Supper, Calvin wrote:

"Then only did it become new and eternal when it was consecrated and established in the blood of Christ. Hence the Saviour, in giving the cup to his disciples in the last supper, calls it the cup of the new testament in his blood; intimating, that the covenant of God was truly realised, made new, and eternal, when it was sealed with his blood."

For Calvin, the cross was the historic, legal ratification of the New Covenant. Just like the human wills and testaments he commented on in Hebrews 9:16–17, the legal force of the New Testament required the actual death of the testator to go into effect."

https://heidelblog.net/2014/11/calvin-on-the-distinction-between-the-old-and-new-covenants/

He said this also....

"Calvin believed that the New Testament was ratified and historically enacted at the cross. However, he also believed that Old Testament believers were spiritually saved by the exact same New Covenant grace, experiencing it as a future promise rather than a completed historical reality."

John Calvin: Commentary on Hebrews - Christian Classics Ethereal Library​

Saved in Promise. Bingo! A future promise! How can he go wrong from there?

"Calvin taught that you cannot have salvation without being united to Jesus Christ. Because Christ is in heaven and we are on earth, the only way to be united to Him is if the Holy Spirit physically links us to Him by dwelling inside of us. Since Old Testament saints were saved by Christ, they must have been indwelt by the Spirit to be united to Him."

Were Old Testament Believers Born Of and Indwelt By the Holy Spirit?​

So close. They were saved in Promise. A future promise. Calvin believed that the future promise was realized the moment that promise was made, just the act was future. But it clearly wasn't. That promise was realized in the promised "Seed", and His work on the cross, His life as a man, completely sinless, completely righteous. It had to actually happen as Scripture makes very clear.

Calvin goes on to say that he believed that OT believers, like Abraham, David and Moses, because they had faith, proved that they were born again, because total depravity would not allow them to believe otherwise.

The promise removed. That's Calvinism. Total depravity defines his conclusions. He acknowledges the promise. Then he completely disregards it for total depravity. Folks, the cross never saves anyone until it actually happened.

"Calvin pointed out that the disciples already had saving faith before Jesus was glorified. Since true faith is exclusively a fruit of the Holy Spirit, they undeniably possessed the Spirit already."

John Calvin: Commentary on John - Volume 1 - Christian Classics Ethereal Library​

He gets so much right, but is unable to connect the dots.. instead of continuing to follow Scripture, he stops short, and inserts Total depravity to complete the picture. So sad. this is what I'm talking about. "Sola Systema".

 

[GWH]

Calvin was right to a point, but then when it was time to continue to ask questions from Scripture, he turned to total depravity for his conclusion.

On Hebrews 9:16-17, Calvin was on the right track. He claimed that the OC was held 'in suspense'. That the NT begins at the cross. He also recognized the promise, which is what was held in suspense. Bingo!



He said this also....



Saved in Promise. Bingo! A future promise! How can he go wrong from there?



So close. They were saved in Promise. A future promise. Calvin believed that the future promise was realized the moment that promise was made, just the act was future. But it clearly wasn't. That promise was realized in the promised "Seed", and His work on the cross, His life as a man, completely sinless, completely righteous. It had to actually happen as Scripture makes very clear.

Calvin goes on to say that he believed that OT believers, like Abraham, David and Moses, because they had faith, proved that they were born again, because total depravity would not allow them to believe otherwise.

The promise removed. That's Calvinism. Total depravity defines his conclusions. He acknowledges the promise. Then he completely disregards it for total depravity. Folks, the cross never saves anyone until it actually happened.



He gets so much right, but is unable to connect the dots.. instead of continuing to follow Scripture, he stops short, and inserts Total depravity to complete the picture. So sad. this is what I'm talking about. "Sola Systema".

Yes, it is too bad Calvin was led astray by Augustine. I am not sure how his problematic tulip theory gained so much support
since then.

 

[Dave123]

Yes, it is too bad Calvin was led astray by Augustine. I am not sure how his problematic tulip theory gained so much support
since then.

It's funny, He's right there, Calvin is right at the threshold to make the proper and Biblical conclusion, but it's like he has a gun pointed at his head, or he's afraid to do so, or, the Catholicism that he was raised in, in which he had still seen Scripture through, would not allow him to see it. Maybe he is the greatest atheist theologian of all time? He has all the pieces, but for some reason, cannot, or will not put them together. Listen to what he says in his commentary of Hebrews 11:39-40, where it says that the heroes of faith were not perfected apart from "us". "Us" being the writer of Hebrews and the first believers placed into Christ. He has the correct understanding, all the pieces, but then makes the false final observation that falls short of understanding what those promises are.

He sees "perfected" as eternal, heavenly state, that's were he believes the promises are fulfilled. While that is the final result, the being united with OT believers, and being perfected, happens in Christ. When we're indwelt with the Holy Spirit, and only after the death, resurrection and ascension. Only then are we 'perfected' legally, or even perfected practically for that matter. Hebrews, in verse 11:39-40 is speaking of justification. In Christ we're united with these OT believers. That's why nobody had yet ascended (John 3:13-14). They were not yet perfected, justified, as Romans 3:24-26 says. They had to wait. The promise didn't justify, the realization of the promise did, in the promised "Seed", literally.

In Hebrews 11:39-40, they were "perfected" along with NT believers.

Old Testament saints (like Abraham, Moses, and David) had genuine faith and won God's approval, but their redemptive hope was left incomplete until the historical work of Jesus Christ was accomplished. This is why it is called a promise. Being made perfect begins only in Christ, after the DRA. Those OT believers needed to wait for the promise realized, the promise realized that that placed them in Christ, the baptism with the Holy Spirit, and the Promise realized that results from being placed into Christ. It was the actual fulfillment of that promise, it was salvation that came to the Gentiles in Acts, just like the Jews. The OT believers who were in physically dead, in prison, Abrahams bosom, which was in Hades, waited for that moment in time, the DRA, which afterwards, when Jesus, who had the Keys to Hades and death, descended, and preached to those same spirits in prison (the heroes of faith Hebrews 11 included). When Jesus ascended, he took "captivity captive" and gave gifts to men. What gifts? Gifts of the Holy Spirit. No one could have these gifts without the indwelling that placed them into Christ. The giving of the Spirit is the giving of the gifts also.

What happened to the true OT believers still alive?

Read the book of Acts, those are all genuine OT believers who were also due the promise. Some were true OT believers who had not yet heard the Gospel. There was no more holding cell for them to go to when they die, Paradise (Abrahams bosom) was taken out from Hades and moved to the third heaven when Jesus ascended and took the physically dead OT believers (captivity captive) to be with the Father. These are those same ones that Jesus preached to in Paradise when He descended for three days into Hades. It was only at that time, after the cross, that all the ingredients which save were given to them through Christ Jesus. The true OT believers who had not heard the Gospel before the cross, but were still living, that's what Acts records. When they heard the Gospel and believed, which they were predestined to do, they received the Holy Spirit, and thus, all the promises are then secured and realized 'in Christ'.

The OT believers who heard the Gospel and believed before the cross, mainly the disciples, were owed that promise, even though they already believed the Gospel. This too had to wait for the cross.

All of these true believers, in various states of faith, both the living and the dead, weather they heard the Gospel yet or not, were given to the Son by the Father. He would not lose one of them. The Sheep who will hear His voice and believe. And they did believe the Gospel both before and after the cross, and both were owed the promise, and those who already beoievd the Gosple recieved that promise after the cross. And those who still needed to hear the Gospel to recieve that promise were predestined to do so, and did, as recorded in Acts.

They were placed in Christ with the promised indwelling. When all true OT believers were upgraded in faith, so as to be placed in Christ and receive those promises, the transition recorded in Acts from the OC to the NC is compled. The NT is all that's left. No more remenants of OT believrs living without the promise that was owed to them.

Even the disciples had to wait for the DRA. listen to Jesus' Words just before the cross. It's extremely relevant. He's telling Peter that he cannot be in heaven right now, that only after the cross can be there.

John 13:36-38, *** John 14:1-6 Simon Peter said to Him, "Lord, where are You going?" Jesus answered him, "Where I am going you cannot follow Me now, but you shall follow Me afterward." Peter said to Him, "Lord, why can I not follow You now? I will lay down my life for Your sake." Jesus answered him, "Will you lay down your life for My sake? Most assuredly, I say to you, the rooster shall not crow till you have denied Me three times. *** "Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in Me. In My Father's house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also. And where I go you know, and the way you know." Thomas said to Him, "Lord, we do not know where You are going, and how can we know the way? "Jesus said to him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me.

With the right context, a very profound passage indeed.





God planned that the believers of the Old Testament and the New Testament Church would not reach their final, eternal state separately. Instead, everyone is brought to completion together through the finished sacrifice of Christ.

 

[Dave123]

Here's the same post cleaned up a little more. Sorry, I thought I had spell checked the whole thing but missed the end. And I also cleared up some more of my scatter brained dyslexia writing too.

It's funny, He's right there, Calvin is right at the threshold to make the proper and Biblical conclusion, but it's like he has a gun pointed at his head, or he's afraid to do so, or, the Catholicism that he was raised in, in which he had still seen Scripture through, would not allow him to see it. Maybe he is the greatest atheist theologian of all time? He has all the pieces, but for some reason, cannot, or will not put them together. Read what he says in his commentary of Hebrews 11:39-40, where it says that the heroes of faith were not perfected apart from "us". "Us" being the writer of Hebrews and the first believers placed into Christ. He has the correct understanding, all the pieces, but then makes the false final observation that falls short of understanding what those promises are.

He sees "perfected" as eternal, heavenly state, that's were he believes the promises are fulfilled. While that is the final result, the being united with OT believers, and being perfected, happens in Christ. When we're indwelt with the Holy Spirit, and only after the death, resurrection and ascension. Only then are we 'perfected' legally, or even perfected practically for that matter. Hebrews, in verse 11:39-40 is speaking of justification. In Christ we're united with these OT believers. That's why nobody had yet ascended (John 3:13-14). They were not yet perfected, justified, as Romans 3:24-26 says. They had to wait. The promise didn't justify, the realization of the promise did, in the promised "Seed", literally.

In Hebrews 11:39-40, they were "perfected" along with NT believers.

Old Testament saints (like Abraham, Moses, and David) had genuine faith and won God's approval, but their redemptive hope was left incomplete until the historical work of Jesus Christ was accomplished. This is why it's called a promise. Being made perfect begins only in Christ, after the DRA. Those OT believers needed to wait for the promise realized, that promise realized which placed them in Christ. It's the baptism with the Holy Spirit, and the Promise realized that results from being placed into Christ. It was the actual fulfillment of that promise, it was actual salvation that came to the Gentiles in Acts, just like the Jews. The OT believers who were in physically dead, in prison, Abrahams bosom, which was in Hades, waited for that moment in time, the DRA, which afterwards, when Jesus, who had the Keys to Hades and death, descended, and preached to those same spirits in prison (the heroes of faith Hebrews 11 included). When Jesus ascended, he took "captivity captive" and gave gifts to men. What gifts? Gifts of the Holy Spirit. No one could have these gifts without the indwelling that placed them into Christ. The giving of the Spirit is the giving of the gifts also.

What happened to the true OT believers still alive?

Read the book of Acts, those are all genuine OT believers who were also due the promise. Some were true OT believers who had not yet heard the Gospel. There was no more holding cell for them to go to when they die, Paradise (Abrahams bosom) was taken out from Hades and moved to the third heaven when Jesus ascended and took the physically dead OT believers (captivity captive) to be with the Father. Those were the same ones that Jesus preached to in Paradise when He descended for three days into Hades. It was only at that time, after the cross, that all the ingredients which save were given to them through Christ Jesus. The true OT believers still living who had not heard the Gospel before the cross, that's what Acts records. When they heard the Gospel and believed, which they were predestined to do, they received the Holy Spirit, and thus, all the promises are then secured and realized 'in Christ'.

The OT believers who heard the Gospel and believed before the cross, mainly the disciples, were owed that promise, even though they already believed the Gospel. This too had to wait for the cross.

All of these true OT believers, in various states of faith, both the living and the dead, whether they heard the Gospel yet or not, were given to the Son by the Father. He would not lose one of them. The Sheep who will hear His voice and believe. And they did believe the Gospel both before and after the cross when it was presented to them. Both were owed the promise due to their OT faith, and those OT believers who already believed the Gospel before the cross received that promise just after the cross. And those who still needed to hear the Gospel to receive that promise were predestined to do so, and did, as recorded in Acts.

These were all placed in Christ with the promised indwelling. When all true OT believers were upgraded in faith, after the DRA, so as to be placed in Christ and receive those promises, the transition recorded in Acts from the OC to the NC is completed. The NT is all that's left. No more remnants of OT believers living without the promise that was owed to them.

Even the disciples had to wait for the DRA. listen to Jesus' Words just before the cross. It's extremely relevant. He's telling Peter that he cannot be in heaven right now, that only after the cross can be there.

John 13:36-38, *** John 14:1-6 "Simon Peter said to Him, "Lord, where are You going?" Jesus answered him, "Where I am going you cannot follow Me now, but you shall follow Me afterward." Peter said to Him, "Lord, why can I not follow You now? I will lay down my life for Your sake." Jesus answered him, "Will you lay down your life for My sake? Most assuredly, I say to you, the rooster shall not crow till you have denied Me three times. *** "Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in Me. In My Father's house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also. And where I go you know, and the way you know." Thomas said to Him, "Lord, we do not know where You are going, and how can we know the way? "Jesus said to him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me."

With the right context, a very profound passage indeed.

 

[Dave123]

All those OT believers recorded in Scripture were save/perfected by the same Jesus, by the same Gospel, at the same time. It all had to wait for the cross. That's why it was a promise in the OT.

Hebrews 9:15 And for this reason He is the Mediator of the new covenant, by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions under the first covenant, that those who are called may receive the promise of the eternal inheritance.

Galatians 4:4-7 But when the fullness of the time had come, God sent forth His Son, born of a woman, born under the law, to redeem those who were under the law, that we might receive the adoption as sons. And because you are sons, God has sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts, crying out, "Abba, Father!" Therefore you are no longer a slave but a son, and if a son, then an heir of God through Christ.

Galatians 3

 

[Dave123]

John 13:36-38, *** John 14:1-6 "Simon Peter said to Him, "Lord, where are You going?" Jesus answered him, "Where I am going you cannot follow Me now, but you shall follow Me afterward." Peter said to Him, "Lord, why can I not follow You now? I will lay down my life for Your sake." Jesus answered him, "Will you lay down your life for My sake? Most assuredly, I say to you, the rooster shall not crow till you have denied Me three times. *** "Let not your heart be troubled; you believe in God, believe also in Me. In My Father's house are many mansions; if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again and receive you to Myself; that where I am, there you may be also. And where I go you know, and the way you know." Thomas said to Him, "Lord, we do not know where You are going, and how can we know the way? "Jesus said to him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me."

Context...

John 14:16-21 And I will pray the Father, and He will give you another Helper, that He may abide with you forever-- the Spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it neither sees Him nor knows Him; but you know Him, for He dwells with you and will be in you. I will not leave you orphans; I will come to you. "A little while longer and the world will see Me no more, but you will see Me. Because I live, you will live also. At that day you will know that I am in My Father, and you in Me, and I in you. He who has My commandments and keeps them, it is he who loves Me. And he who loves Me will be loved by My Father, and I will love him and manifest Myself to him."