Regeneration - Devil in the Definition

Hyper Calvinists who say "regeneration precedes faith" oftentimes, in explaining that proposition, will equate it with an act of God that produces faith and repentance, or evangelical conversion. What others call a pre-regeneration act of God, or "prevenient" grace and action, Hypers call "regeneration." This is their error. They have defined "regeneration" as 

1) the first act that God does to bring about regeneration, by the cause alone, and  

2) excluding any acts done by the one regenerated (or the effects)

By this definition, there are no preliminary acts of God prior to regeneration. However, it is an extreme view. Many of those who so define it believe that there are things that God providentially does in the life of a sinner prior to and for the purpose of his regeneration. Some also allow for some kind of "prevenient grace" (grace that precedes) and "common grace" operating upon the sinner prior to his regeneration. I wrote about this in this posting (here) and I cite from it.

Another error of those who separate regeneration from conversion, faith, and repentance, is to define "regeneration" simply as respects the "cause," whereas biblical "regeneration" includes both causes and effects, and primarily focuses upon the effect.  On this point the great head of Princeton Seminary, Archibald Alexander, wrote:

"Evangelical repentance, conversion and regeneration, are substantially the same. They all signify a thorough change of views, affections, purposes and conduct; and this change is every where declared to be essential to salvation."

This is in keeping with the view of Edwards.

Alexander wrote:

"Curious inquiries respecting the way in which the word is instrumental in the production of this change are not for edification. Sometimes regeneration is considered distinctly from the acts and exercises of the mind which proceed from it, but in the Holy Scriptures the cause and effect are included; and we shall therefore treat the subject in this practical and popular form. The instrumentality of the word can never derogate from the efficient agency of the Spirit in this work. The Spirit operates by and through the word. The word derives all its power and penetrating energy from the Spirit. Without the omnipotence of God the word would be as inefficient as clay and spittle, to restore sight to the blind."

Alexander pinpoints the error of those Hyper Calvinists who restrict the definition of regeneration to include only the "cause."  He correctly states that the scriptures include what is effected in the definition.  A man cannot then be said to have been "regenerated" who lacked the "effects," or constituent elements of regeneration.  In other words, a man cannot be said to have been "saved" who lacks the "things which accompany salvation."  Thus, to say a man is regenerated before he believes and repents is to define regeneration strictly by the cause to the exclusion of the effect.

Alexander also wrote:

"Ezekiel was commanded to prophesy over the dry bones in the valley of vision. Thus ministers are now sent to call upon those who are dead in trespasses and sins, to awake and arise from the dead, but none will obey their voice, unless a divine power accompanies their words...That the word of God is indeed the instrument or means of producing this change is evident from many plain testimonies of Scripture..."  See Here

Those Hyper Calvinists who limit their definition of the word "regeneration" to the cause of the change, to the exclusion of the effect, or actual change, greatly err.  Alexander is correct to affirm that scripture defines the experience of regeneration in such a way as to include the effect, or to what is actually effected by the cause of regeneration. 

The bible no where defines regeneration as excluding evangelical conversion (repentance and faith) but rather sees conversion as the first instance of regeneration, or regeneration begun, as the birth of the Spirit. 

We have a blog filled with citations from Calvinists of the past who said, for instance, that the bible does not restrict the definition of regeneration as do the Hypers so as to exclude faith and repentance. I challenge the Hypers to show us the texts where it is clear that regeneration (or its equivalent terms) is shown to be some kind of giving of ability prior to possessing faith and repentance, that is, apart from conversion. I predict that every text brought forward to try to show that regeneration does not include conversion will be shown by the context to speak of conversion. 

New life does not begin until Christ, who is "the Life," is received by faith. 

The authors of the 1689 London Baptist Confession of Faith say that it is an error to believe that sinners must have ability to believe before they believe. They agreed with John Owen (as previously cited by me here) who wrote:

First, The work of conversion itself, and in especial the act of believing, or faith itself, is expressly said to be of God, to be wrought in us by him, to be given unto us from him. The Scripture says not that God gives us ability or power to believe only,—namely, such a power as we may make use of if we will, or do otherwise; but faith, repentance, and conversion themselves are said to be the work and effect of God. Indeed, there is nothing mentioned in the Scriptures concerning the communicating of power, remote or next unto the mind of man, to enable him to believe antecedently unto actual believing. A “remote power,” if it may be so called, in the capacities of the faculties of the soul, the reason of the mind, and liberty of the will, we have given an account concerning; but for that which some call a “next power,” or an ability to believe in order of nature antecedent unto believing itself, wrought in us by the grace of God, the Scripture is silent. 

Those words destroy the idea that "regeneration" is a giving of power to believe, repent, or be converted. It also destroys the idea that regeneration is defined by what God does alone.