Thank you for reading this. I’m trying something a little different here. I am speaking into text while at work, so I will most certainly need to edit this later. If you find anything totally crazy or uncharacteristic, please extend a little grace—or kindly let me know.
The last thing I want to do is make a theological assertion that crosses into heresy.
Some of my Calvinist and Reformed friends (and I could rightly call them brethren) will likely never read this. I wish they would. The ones who do rarely comment, perhaps for fear of starting a debate.
Let me be clear: I do not want to debate, argue, fight, hurt feelings, or start a war. None of that advances the cause of Christ (2 Timothy 2:24–25).
But I do want to address what appears to me to be an inconsistency in the way many of my Calvinist friends present the gospel. I doubt they are aware of it. If they are, that would be more concerning.
Let me explain.
A Little Personal Background
The first 26 years of my life were spent in churches that identified as IFB (Independent Fundamental Baptist). My father was a preacher and pastor. My mother was always the pianist or organist. If the church doors were open—even for cleaning—I was there.
Because of that upbringing, I am deeply familiar with the words of Jesus to Nicodemus:
“Ye must be born again.” (John 3:7)
Those words were printed on tracts, painted above pulpits and choirs, and preached in countless sermons. Everyone knew what they meant. They were synonymous with being “saved.”
Jesus came “to seek and to save that which was lost” (Luke 19:10).
He came as the propitiation for our sins (1 John 2:2), the Lamb of God (John 1:29), so that we might be reconciled to the Father (2 Corinthians 5:18–19).
It is no wonder that “Ye must be born again” became a well-worn phrase among those who could sing all 50 verses of Just As I Am during an invitation.
When Nicodemus was confused—imagining a second physical birth—Jesus gently corrected him:
“Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.” (John 3:7)
The new birth was not a return to the womb, but the work of the Spirit:
“That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.” (John 3:6)
What “Born Again” Means in Baptist Theology
Whether IFB or now SBC (which I am), Baptists have never implied that being born again involves re-entering a physical womb. Rather, we teach that to be saved, one must be born again.
The phrases are interchangeable.
To be born again is:
- To become a new creature (2 Corinthians 5:17)
- To pass from death unto life (John 5:24)
- To be adopted into the family of God (Romans 8:15)
- To be redeemed (Ephesians 1:7)
- To be grafted in (Romans 11:17)
- To be justified (Romans 5:1)
We are not saved by baptism or by partaking of communion.
We are not saved by works, “lest any man should boast” (Ephesians 2:8–9).
We are saved by grace, through faith in Jesus Christ.
And once saved, we are secure (John 10:28–29).
Spirit baptism places us into Christ (1 Corinthians 12:13), and water baptism pictures that reality.
In short, in this theological framework, being born again is salvation.
The Calvinist Distinction
Here is where the tension arises.
In Calvinist theology, being born again is not synonymous with being saved. It is the prerequisite to salvation.
Regeneration precedes faith.
In that system, one does not believe and then receive new life. Rather, one receives new life so that he can believe.
The terms are not interchangeable.
Yet when listening to a Reformed Baptist or Presbyterian preacher call sinners to repentance—to “seek and save the lost,” to “compel them to come in” (Luke 14:23)—you will often hear the same words:
“Ye must be born again.”
But here is my question: is that consistent with their theology?
If a Calvinist were to frame his appeal strictly according to his system, it might sound something like this:
“If you have been regenerated by God, you will believe on the Lord Jesus Christ as evidence that you were chosen before the foundation of the world” (cf. Ephesians 1:4).
But that is not how the appeal is typically made.
Instead, the language used is almost identical to that of the non-Calvinist evangelist.
Where the Difference Shows
The greatest visible difference between the Calvinist and the non-Calvinist emerges in the appeal to the lost.
The non-Calvinist genuinely believes the lost man can respond. He urges him to repent (Acts 17:30), to believe (Acts 16:31), to receive the free gift of salvation (Romans 6:23). He speaks to him as one who is spiritually dead but able—by grace—to respond to the gospel call.
The Calvinist, however, believes the lost man cannot respond unless first regenerated.
Yet the language in the pulpit often sounds the same.
My concern is this: if regeneration and salvation are not the same thing in one’s theology, should they be spoken of as though they are?
A Plea for Consistency
I write this with hope—not hostility.
If a professing Calvinist happens to read this, perhaps he might consider whether using one set of terms in one setting while defining them differently in another creates confusion.
At best, it may be inconsistent.
At worst, it may blur important theological distinctions.
We owe the lost clarity.
We owe our brethren honesty.
And we owe Christ precision in the proclamation of His gospel (Titus 2:7–8).
The Recovering Legalist 
A Mini Commentary, Pt. 16 (Ephesians 4:16)
Sorry for the delay, but here is the final instalment of the mini commentary on Ephesians 4:1-16. I pray the whole series has been informative and a blessing in some way.
4:16 From whom the whole body fitly joined together and compacted by that which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the body unto the edifying of itself in love.
From whom the whole body fitly joined together
Here is where the metaphor of the body can get a little tricky, at least compared to the way things naturally work. When a human is conceived, his DNA is already present, passed from both the mother and the father. The “blueprint of life” dictates how a child will look, how big he will be, his color of skin, etc. But Jesus, the Head of the Body, is the one who oversees the construction and placement of body parts. The mind, the Person of God, is eternal; the Body – both when He walked the earth and when He left and sent His Spirit – came into being by the will of God. There is no accidental deformity withing the Body of Christ! There are no mutations, missing parts, or inadequate ones! The WHOLE body is FITLY joined together! Hallelujah!
Are you intimidated, discouraged, or feel out of place in the Body of Christ? Don’t feel that way! You were designed and created to fit exactly where the Head wants you. You have a purpose for which no other part in the body can fill. You are unique and designed by God.
and compacted by that which every joint supplieth,
Here we see that not only is every person who is part of the Body a specially designed member created for a particular purpose in the overall growth of the Body, but each has a part in the unifying of the Body into a cohesive whole.[1] Paul implied this same thought in his letter to the Colossians: “That their hearts might be comforted, being knit together in love, and unto all riches of the full assurance of understanding, to the acknowledgement of the mystery of God, and of the Father, and of Christ” (Colossians 2:2).
according to the effectual working in the measure of every part,
Now, despite the lofty example of Jesus, God “knows our frame,” that we are nothing but dust (Psalm 103:14). Therefore, notice that Paul says, “…the measure of every part.” The measure of one part of the Body, one Christian, is not going to be the same measure of another one. Too often we find ourselves comparing our spirituality to that of other more “godly” believers. In doing so we often find ourselves discouraged from not measuring up to their likeness. Look, we are all dust, and the most that we can ever be is only because of God’s grace.
But the encouraging hope is this: what we have and all that we are, yielded to the will of the Head of the Body, is guaranteed to be effective toward the purpose for which we have been designed.
maketh increase of the body
Simply put, a healthy member of the body, no matter the importance, will, if effectually being used, make increase to the Body. Does that mean that one must lead others to Christ in order to “make increase”? Possibly, but whatever the purpose, if doing what it’s designed to do, will contribute to the other members’ edification.
unto the edifying of itself in love.
Herein lies the overall purpose of the gifts God gives in Christ through the Spirit: the edifying of the Church – the building up into the image and likeness of Jesus Christ. Unfortunately, there are many within the Body of Christ who think the edification of the individual member takes precedent over the body as a whole. This can be seen in the doctrine that promotes “prayer language,” or private times of prayer that consist of ecstatic speech, unknown tongues, or what is technically referred to as glossolalia. Yet, Paul addressed this very topic in 1 Corinthians 14:14-19.
Paul said in 1 Corinthians 14:14: “For if I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth, but my understanding is unfruitful.” He did not argue that it could never happen; he just said that if he did pray in such a way, he would not understand what was being said. Furthermore, in verses 15 and 16 he states that he would rather speak and sing in an understandable language so that everyone could benefit, especially those who “understandeth not” (v. 16). But it is in verse 17 where the letter to the Ephesians and the letter to the Corinthians cross paths: speaking in a prayer language might encourage the one praying, but “the other is not edified.” He gave (v. 11) … for (v. 12) … till (v. 13) … that (v. 14) … may (v.15) … edify (v. 16).
[1] Henry George Liddell et al., A Greek-English Lexicon (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1996), 1675.
Share this:
Leave a comment
Filed under Bible, Bible Study, Theology
Tagged as Bible, bible study, Christianity, commentary, Ephesians, faith, Theology