Many times after I have written an article I think of things I could or should have added. Sometimes I will go back to the article and make those additions, especially if it is not too long after publishing the article. Sometimes, however, there are so many things that came to my mind about what I could have added that I simply make a follow up post. The above text I added to yesterday's posting, but want to add a few more thoughts about that text and so I give this addendum.
In that previous post I cited Adrian Rogers (a preacher I love hearing preach) who argued as have many others about how one of the proofs that a person cannot lose salvation is that you can only be born once. But, I also cautioned against making these types of arguments, including those who say that one does not choose to be born again of the Spirit. Does not the above text speak of Paul giving birth twice to the Galatians who had departed from the Gospel?
Wrote Gill in his commentary:
"of whom I travail in birth again; he compares himself to a woman with child, as the church in bringing forth souls to Christ sometimes is; and all his pains and labours in the ministry of the word to the sorrows of a woman during the time of childbearing, and at the birth...however, as he hoped he was the means of their being born again, of the turning of them from Heathenism to Christianity, and from serving idols to serve the living God, and believe in his Son Jesus Christ; but the false apostles coming among them had so strangely wrought upon them, and they were so much gone back and degenerated, that they seemed to be like so many abortions, or as an unformed foetus..."
Notice how Gill believes that he, like other Gospel ministers, are "means" in others "being born again," which shows that those Hardshells who say Gill denied means in regeneration or rebirth are wrong. Gill seems to think that the first spiritual birth of the backsliding Galatians was an "abortion" of a dead fetus. Is that what Paul is alluding to in his analogy?
John Calvin in his commentary says:
"The Galatians had already been conceived and brought forth; but, after their revolt, they must now be begotten a second time."
This is one reason why we as Calvinists who believe one cannot lose salvation, or cease to be a child of God, should be reluctant to argue as did Rogers who argued by saying:
"Birth is a one-time event Some people think you can get saved and then lost, then saved again—and this can happen multiple times. No baby is ever born twice. In the spiritual realm, too, it’s a once-for-all experience. That’s one of several reasons I believe in the eternal security of the believer. I can never be unborn."
I can just imagine an Arminian, who believes that a born again child of God can so sin as to lose his salvation and cease to be a child of God, using this text to refute that idea.
So, let us just stick with what the scriptures plainly say about eternal security or spiritual birth.
In this posting (here) I dealt at length with the idea that there were stages in the new birth as there is in natural birth and I cited this text:
"Before she travailed, she brought forth; before her pain came, she was delivered of a man child. Who hath heard such a thing? who hath seen such things? Shall the earth be made to bring forth in one day? or shall a nation be born at once? for as soon as Zion travailed, she brought forth her children. Shall I bring to the birth, and not cause to bring forth? saith the LORD: shall I cause to bring forth, and shut the womb? saith thy God." (Isa. 66: 7-9)
This text does give a distinction between being "born" and being "brought forth" in the final stage in the birth process. God says that there are no abortions in his work, affirming that all who are conceived will be brought to the birth. On this John Gill wrote the following his his commentary:
"As in the natural birth it is he that gives strength to conceive, forms the embryo in the womb, ripens it for the birth, and takes the child out of its mother's womb; so he does all that answers hereunto in the spiritual birth...God will not shut the womb of conversion until they are all brought to faith in Christ, and repentance towards God....this is to be understood of the pains which Gospel ministers take in preaching the word, which is the means of regeneration, and they the instruments of it; and so are called fathers, who through the Gospel beget souls to Christ; and of their anxious concern for the conversion of sinners, and the formation of Christ in them, which is called a travailing in birth; see (1 Peter 1:23) (James 3:18) (1 Corinthians 4:15) (Galatians 4:19) (Romans 8:22 Romans 8:23) and it may also design the earnest prayers of the church and its members, striving and wrestling with God, being importunate with him, that the word preached might be useful for the good of souls..."
The point is this: there is no perfect likeness between natural birth and spiritual birth. It is true that no one can be physically born twice, and it is true that no one can cease to be a child of God so as to need to be born of the Spirit over and over again. But, one must explain Galatians 4: 19. Is Paul saying that the backsliders were never born of God the first time? That he had false labor pains in regard to some of them?
No comments:
Post a Comment