PDA

View Full Version : Repentance


Ramesh Deosarran
5th June 2008, 11:32 AM (11:32)
Repentance

In “Introduction to Christian Theology” Wiley and Culbertson stare: “Awakening is a term used in theology to denote that operation of the Holy Spirit by which men’s minds are quickened to a consciousness of their lost estate … Conviction is that operation of the Spirit which produces within men a sense of guilt and condemnation because of sin. To the idea of awakening there is added that of personal blame.”

Repentance carries the idea of a change of mind in relation to sin. Every person who wants to be in the fold of God must repent. It is an act of man enabled by prevenient grace. It is a change of mind in regard to sin.
In the Old Testament repentance addresses a return after being rebellious or unfaithful. It was not just a return after worshipping idols or false gods. It was a total reorientation of the whole person. We may recall that God does not require sacrifice but a clean heart.

In the New Testament repentance addresses a radical change of personality. So, what are we turning from? We turn from sin to God. In the middle of this process there is regret, confession and submission. There is a change in the whole person. If repentance is only about regret and making amends then we have the idea of penance. It cannot even be only about sorrow and regret. It must be a complete break from sin and turn to God.

Repentance points to the entrance of the kingdom of God. Jesus began His ministry with the words, “Repent, and believe the gospel” (Mark 1:15). Why is repentance so important? It is addresses the nature of sin. Sin is rebelling against God. It is contrary to holiness. According to Luke 13:3, we perish unless we repent.

As mentioned before, repentance is an act of man but is made possible by God. It implies sin, sorrow and wrong. Where there is an admission of guilt, confession is necessary. There is reformation and restoration. Luke said in 3:8 “bear fruits that befit repentance.” It is a gift of God.

Charles W Christian
5th June 2008, 04:45 PM (16:45)
Thanks for this....
Yeah, our friend Randy D. on the other forum seems to believe that you can make a word say simply what its "word parts" say and call that the definition. And then, according to him, you can apply those word parts however you wish, regardless of the usage of the word throughout the NT, etc. You have demonstrated that his method is flawed, which wouldn't be too big of a deal if his version of Jesus's "repentance" didn't sound like the ancient heresy of "adoptionism" whereby Jesus "became" the Son of God/Messiah through the process of baptism (in Randy's case through the process of repentance). I'm sure he doesn't mean to make it sound that way, but his haphazard usage of a term that has a clear identification with turning from sin in the NT makes his usage fatally flawed, despite his arrogant refusal to see any other view but his own....Oh, well, you know what they say about pride and what it comes before...I do pray that he avoids the second part of that Scripture....

We do have "repent" applied to God in the OT, in the sense of God "changing his mind" about a particular plan. However, in the NT, the idea of repentance is about turning one's thinking/mindset away from the ways of the world and its power and turning TO God's new kingdom brought about through the coming of Jesus. Therefore, of course, Jesus could not have "repented" in that sense, since He was already a part of (the initiator of!) God's new Kingdom.

Anyway, don't let guys like that bother you. He reminds me of a guy down in Arizona who pastors -- they could be brothers in fact: slightly skewed views with lots of rhetoric to back it up, no desire to dialogue just to dictate, and they go on personal attacks if they are corrected or even questioned. . . . Now that would probably be something worth repenting of. We all do it from time to time -- some much more than others, I guess.

Thanks again, Ramesh....

Charles

PS -- Don't be surpised if, since he feels he outranks the folks you've cited, he accuses you of turning to "man" instead of to God or to the Bible for the context. You are actually utilizing good tools to find the proper context of that term, but since it doesn't match his, he will attack it and make fun of it. I'll just get my popcorn and watch the unusual show....:-)

CWC