What's that got to do with me?  

Posted by Shawn in

So I was reading John this morning and a thought struck me (don't ask me why/how I made the connection. Between John 1 and John 12, I just did :^)


When I was born into the world in the flesh I did absolutely nothing. I wasn't and then I was...then I wasn't again. Which is to say, I died to sin and no longer lived.

Then I was again.

So...what I'm getting to is this question: 
If we can all easily understand that we had absolutely nothing to do with our conception and subsequent birth in the flesh, why do we struggle so hard against the idea that we had absolutely nothing to do with our birth in the spirit?

In precisely what way are these two concepts so different?

Sure, being born again ala John 3:16 means repentance and faith in Jesus alone, but if you'll allow me, being born in the flesh meant a certain amount of work on my part as well. I had to breath, I had to clear the birth canal. (Ok, so maybe most of the work was mom, but hopefully you get the point.)

My doing or not doing anything at my physical birth had nothing to do with the fact that I was, which was NOT something that I had anything to do with.


Now I don't really care what idealogy that would be labled. I'm just saying. It's a question. 


That's all. 









Any one have a thought on that of their own?

This entry was posted on Jan 19, 2009 at Monday, January 19, 2009 and is filed under . You can follow any responses to this entry through the comments feed .

3 comments

leahcim yvel  

Only recently was I introduced to the concept of election.For about two weeks I wrestled with the implications but I don't struggle. I believe that my being born again in spirit was completely "out of my hands." I am surprised to learn that a saved person would be involved in such a struggle.

February 4, 2009 at 4:02 PM
Shawn  

Hi leahcim,

Of course, I agree with you that our salvation is completely out of our hands, but this is precisely a point that those who identify most with Arminianism and those who identify with Calvinism find disagreement with.

I believe that Arminianism is in error, but I would never presume to declare that all those that subscribe to this doctrine are unsaved.

Thus, it is indeed an old and long-standing struggle for many saved believers.

Election is, at least to me, a terribly difficult thing to wrap one's head around. There are a WHOLE lot of implications and the flesh, which we all struggle against our entire lives, would have us lean our understanding towards works, however slight we try to make them.

February 6, 2009 at 11:03 AM
Shawn  

In reading back at my response, I believe that I should make a clarification.

I WOULD most definitely put into question the salvation of someone that believed anything apart from Christ alone. This is a core fundamental. My last post made it appear that I believed otherwise.

What I'm trying to say (terribly it seems) is that just because someone may identify with Arminiasm, as it regards election, I would not necessarily presume to declare them unsaved.

February 6, 2009 at 11:41 AM

Post a Comment

<< Newer Post
Older Post >>