The truth of God demands ALLEGIANCE.

It is a dangerous thing to be shown the truth.

The truth of God demands ALLEGIANCE.

March 31, 2011

Dear Brother,
Concerning admission into church membership, let me share my thoughts:

Amitting older (age-wise) Christians from other church backgrounds must be done with much prudence, otherwise, it would cause sorrow and grief to the church. Such people often have very set views about things that differ from the beliefs of the church. It is best for them to be honest and transparent when they apply for membership.

The church must be honest and transparent too, saying with firmness. "These are the present beliefs of the church. Do you understand and hold to them? If you do, then we welcome your desire to join with us. If you don't, and you still desire to join with us, then you are also welcome on the condition that you refrain from raising those issues. Otherwise, just continue with us, as a non-member. We will extend our fellowship and minister to you as best we can as a brother in Christ. Meanwhile, consider and inquire and study why the church's view differs from yours. We are willing to listen to you... but you must also be ready to listen to the church. The basic and fundamental principle of fellowship is laid down by Amos, "Can two walk together, except they be agreed?", 3:3

Admitting a new convert into the church has fewer potential problems. See how quick Michael grasped the truth of grace compared to the RB pastor-theologians!!! I stand amazed at the abundant grace of God.

Emphasis on doctrine and truth DOES NOT have to be hard and cool. In fact, doctrines should be warm and passionate... because it has to do with the comfort, hope, assurance and peace of God's children. False doctrines and errors are injurious and harmful to God's children... they are to be warned against such with passion and conviction. Ever since the Lord has shown me those precious truths, my view towards those in error have changed... they are brethren to be loved... not to be denounced and written off. They are to be laboured with... and ministered to, and be led back to the truth of their salvation. The Lord is gracious to me. The basic thesis of the RBs is this: only those who are clear-minded like them, believing as they do are true children of God. Those who are muddled, are NOT God's children.... so they are denounced and written off as alien. But they are God's children... even though their head is muddled. The gospel ministry is the very means ordained to set them straight in doctrines and practice!

There is a helpful paragraph from the Confession of Faith concerning the church government: 1689.26.7

"To each of these churches thus gathered, according to His mind declared in His Word, He hath given all that power and authority, which is in any way needful for their carrying on that order in worship and discipline, which He hath instituted for them to observe; with commands and rules for the due and right exerting, and executing of that power."

The PRECISE wordings are very helpful.
To EACH church that is properly gathered (i.e. constituted) in accordance to Christ's mind as declared in the Scriptures, Christ has given ALL that power and authority, which is in any way needful/required for their carrying on what an NT church is called to do. All the authority is vested by Christ with the CHURCH... not the elders. How that power and authority vested in the church is to be administered has been determined by Christ. The congregation (elder part of the congregation) decides in subjection to Christ, and the elder administers what the congregation has decided. Christ ALONE is above the congregation, NOT the elders! Both congregation and elders are equally under subjection to Christ... I teach SDC these things. I expect them to be subject to Christ, they have the same right to subject me to Christ. This is the safest policy because it is the biblical principle. Headship of Christ over the church must be seen to be done within a church...

I fear that over time, Paul von Saint's way becomes more authoritarian than anything else. The church is relegated to the role of a rubber stamp. I tell you, I had bad experiences of his 'lording' over other churches... even though he preaches about Independency. Because of his 'strong' leadership, he virtually made decisions for other churches. In those days, he 'appointed' himself as the point-man with overseas people, and discouraged other men from corresponding with Christian leaders overseas. Those were the days.

I have this distinct personal experience. When Paul Von Saint ceased fellowship with us, it was actually a great blessing in disguise for me personally. Without his so-called stifling 'leadership', I felt a great sense of relief and freedom... it was from then that I began to get to know people, and started learning and thinking for myself. With the newfound freedom, the Lord was pleased to lead me to some good men from whom I learned to rightly divide the word of truth! Those far more able elders among the Old School Particular Baptists graciously and patiently converted a staunch and haughty RB to the truth of the gospel of grace. I asked questions ferociously... and they assisted me and directed me to the truth of the gospel of grace! Bless the Lord!

But Brother Jonathan was one of them who helped me... it all began when I read his article 'When was Paul saved?' posted by someone else on a discussion forum. That article opened my mind to rejoice in the truth stated in it. My mind was already beginning to wrestle with what I perceived as inconsistencies and deficiencies (these are apt adjectives) of the RBs doctrines of salvation. And the Lord was pleased to grant me light.

I regularly warn the SDC... when we reject the truth that the Lord want to show to us, the truth of these passages will begin to operate:
Mt 13:12 For whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he shall have more abundance: but whosoever hath not, from him shall be taken away even that he hath.
Mt 25:29 For unto every one that hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be taken away even that which he hath.

He who has a desire to know and receive the truth, more shall be given, and he shall have abundance.

Note the SOLEMN warning... BUT from him that DOES NOT have the desire to receive the truth, even the little that he has SHALL BE TAKEN AWAY. I fear that this has taken place with the folks in xyzC... from the little that I gather from you and Kaylong. I am grieved and saddened. The little truth that the RBs brethren did believe inconsistently and deficiently is disappearing fast... they are morphing into Arminians.

It is a dangerous thing to be shown the truth.

The truth of God demands ALLEGIANCE.

But ignorance is no bliss; it's far worse.

 It must not be treated with indifference or contempt. It has costly consequences for God's children in the way they deal with it. Show me my error and set the truth before me... and I would be ready to abandon the error and embrace the truth... for I am greedy and want to have more abundance in the grace and knowledge of our Saviour Jesus Christ. Amen and amen.

Sorry, I have rambled a bit. Thanks for a listening ear! The Lord bless you and your better half.

Thankful for your fellowship in Christ,
sing

Regenerated but unconverted?

Regenerated but unconverted is like a flat tyre!

Dear Brother Nuer,
Greetings from us in Kayel. Pray that every step we take is a measured one and pleasing in the sight of our great Lord, the only Savior Jesus Christ!

As we are clearing hurdles to a better understanding of the subject of phases of salvation, Wifey and I often come to grapple with certain points that need assistance. We thank God for Bro Sing and his ever willingness to help us.

Wifey, the other day asked as she picked a point from Tom Hagler Jr's 'Rightly Dividing the Truth'.

It sounded like this: Can children of God never be converted and come to faith in their lifetime and yet be saved eternally? Meaning that these people live very ungodly lives till their last breath. Is this just a hypothesis or is there truth? I have yet to read the book.

We would appreciate it if you could help us here.

Thank you
In His Mercy
Ehsan

==========

February 27, 2011, 8:22 PM

Dear Brother Ehsan,

The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you and sister Poh King!  I pray that you are both in good health and rejoicing in the Lord's goodness to us!

When I mentioned your letter to Brother Jonathan he wanted me to especially pass on his commendations to Sister Wifey for asking about the subject of "unconverted elect".  It is a topic which has a variety of meanings and implications which must be carefully defined from Scripture.  As I mentioned in my previous email, I am familiar with Brother Tom Hagler from 30 years ago.  He is a member of a Primitive Baptist church, and as you are aware, they hold to much the same position on the phases of salvation as we do.  But there can be significant differences as well, as I hope to show. 

I will attempt to explain our understanding of this topic with the Scriptures that support it.  Please read through to the end to obtain a complete picture.  I have confidence that as you both love the Scriptures that you will find what they say to be both adequate and a blessing.

First, let us understand that the salvation of Jesus Christ is without any human works involved whatsoever.  Numerous passages could be used to prove this point.  The first chapter of Ephesians, verses 3-12 are some of my favorites to point to the will, purpose and actions of God as the sole source and foundation for our salvation to heaven & eternal glory.  The fact that a man's ability to come to Jesus is only because he was given to Him by the Father is elegantly stated by our Lord in John 6:37-40, 44-47.  The inability of man to come to Jesus without being given the ability to see and hear spiritual matters is plainly taught in John 8:42-47.  The bottom line is that salvation of the elect is wholly and completely the work of the Godhead and dependent on no works of man.

Think back to the Calvinistic scheme of salvation for a moment.  It depends on the salvation of Jesus Christ on the cross to be communicated to the elect and the elect to respond to it in faith in order for that salvation to be real & actual, correct?  Yet the Scriptures clearly point out that belief in Jesus is a work (John 6:28-29).  James goes further to say that faith that does not have works is a dead thing that cannot profit (James 2:17-20)!  And this same system, Calvinism, has to come up with a separate system of salvation for certain classes of people, those incapable of rational thought (infants dying in infancy and mentally handicapped individuals).  This scheme must have multiple means of salvation, some dependent on God alone while the larger portion are dependent on many men (the sinner to believe, the minister or witness to present the gospel, etc.)

One of the problems of Calvinism is that it is confused on the terms used in Scripture.  Regeneration and conversion (at least in the Presbyterian group I was raised in) are said to be different aspects of the same thing.  This makes the new birth dependent on hearing & believing the Gospel.  Other high Calvinists understand the terms represent different events and say that there can be some gap in timing between the regeneration and conversion of an individual.  Yet they say that both events, regeneration and conversion, will of necessity occur to ALL of the elect at some point in their life.  (This position retains the difficulties with infants dying in infancy and the mentally handicapped, not to mention the men & women who have never heard the Gospel at all.)

Now, consider 1Corinthians 10:1-5.  Here we have Paul's account of the nation of Israel that came out of Egypt with Moses.  His purpose in chapter nine has been to instruct the brethren at Corinth on the importance of living a dedicated, holy life in serving the LORD.  He now points to their Jewish fathers as an example of men who did not do that and were severely punished by God for their sins.  These men heard God's message of blessing preached to them repeatedly, and their doubting of the LORD caused them to miss going into the promised land of blessing.  They ended up wandering in the desert for 40 years until all of them died except for two faithful men, Joshua and Caleb.  Notice carefully the wording Paul uses in verses 3 & 4: "And did all eat the same spiritual meat;   And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ."  They were partakers of Jesus Christ, yet their carcasses dropped in the desert because of their unbelief.  These were unconverted elect.  They were partakers of Jesus Christ spiritually, but they were not converted and obedient to God's commandments.

Another example is a portion of the Jewish nation at the time of the apostles' ministry in establishing the New Testament church.   Romans 11:28 says of them, "As concerning the gospel, they are enemies for your sakes: but as touching the election, they are beloved for the fathers’ sakes."  Here we have Jews, like Paul before the Lord blinded him on the road to Damascus.  They are open enemies of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.  Yet Paul tells us that they are elect and beloved.  This is an instance of God allowing a portion of His elect children at that time to remain in blindness of the truth of the Gospel.  This is a second major example of unconverted elect that we see in Scripture.

Beyond this, there are numerous examples of elect children of God whose conversion, their belief and obedience to the commandments of God, was spotty and incomplete. 

Consider Lot.  The Old Testament Scriptures leave him in a sad state in Genesis 19.  His married children laughed at his exhortation to leave Sodom and Gomorrah and were destroyed in the fire of God that fell upon that wicked place.  His wife didn't obey the angels' instructions and was turned into a pillar of salt.  We last see him in a cave with his two unmarried daughters getting him drunk so they can bear children by him.  And those children would become thorns in the sides of God's covenant people all their days, Moab and Ammon.  If it weren't for Peter's testimony that he was a just man (2Peter 2:7), what would we have considered him?   How much perseverance did he demonstrate?

Consider Samson.  The Spirit of God would come upon him to do mighty deeds.  But throughout his life, he only sought pagan women in clear violation of God's commands.  And at the end, it cost him his eyesight and his life in the temple of the Philistines.  Yet he made it to the hall of faith (Hebrews 11:32).

Consider the Corinthians. Because of their abuse of the Lord's supper, many of them were weak, many were sick, and many had died (1Corinthians 11:30).  Yet Paul addressed this body as "them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus" (1Corinthians 1:2).

Consider the Whore of Rome.  We see in the prophecy of Mystery Babylon the Great the Roman Catholic Church and its persecution of God's saints under the power of Satan in Revelation 17.  Yet during her fall, a voice calls from heaven saying, "Come out of her, my people, that ye be not partakers of her sins, and that ye receive not of her plagues" (Revelation 18:4).  This indicates that there are some blinded children of God even in the midst of papal Rome.

From these passages and more that could be brought to bear, we see that there can be elect children of God who are unconverted or whose conversion is partial & incomplete, sometimes grossly so.  This testifies to the fact that the Lord is sovereign in ALL aspects of our salvation, including our deliverance from error, which conversion is.  We must be grateful to Him for the fact that we have seen and believed His glorious Gospel of peace!  From that standpoint we and many of the Primitive Baptists such as Brother Tom Hagler are in agreement.

BUT this is not all that Scripture has to say on the matter.  The fact is that Jesus Christ and His apostles, including our beloved apostle to the Gentiles, Paul, never used this fact as some Primitive Baptists do.  Everywhere that Paul and the other apostles preached, they commanded men to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and follow His commandments.  The only way by which a man can know if he is elect of God is by his belief in the Gospel and continuance therein. 

What kind of nature does the Scripture indicate that we receive at the New Birth, in regeneration?  It is a nature like Jesus Christ, correct?  It is a new man, a holy man (Eph 4:24), made in the image of the Holy God of heaven (Col 3:10).  As such, it desires to walk in holiness, even as He walked (1Peter 1:15-16).  Whereas the old man was hateful and hating others (Titus 3:3), the new man loves and walks in love (Eph 5:1-2).  There is a change in desire and action from carnal to spiritual, a new orientation from earthly to heavenly.  And whether Paul or Peter, the message of God's ministers exhorts that all of the godly character traits should be actively made a part of the believer's life (Eph 4:24; Col 3:10-14; 2Peter 1:5-10) and that he grows in all of those traits.  

The growth in grace, the active putting on of the personality traits of Jesus Christ, is the proof of election (1Thessalonians 1:4-10; 2Peter 1:10).  Good works do not make a you a child of God.  But they give evidence to others and assurance to your own soul that you are a child of God.  And the design of God is that there is no fine line between the elect & the damned.  There is a night and day difference between the two.

So, while we declare that God is TOTALLY sovereign in the salvation of the soul and the examples of unconverted or partially converted elect testify to God's grace in salvation, we just as boldly proclaim that God's children who are blessed to hear the Gospel preached are under divine obligation to believe, profess and obey that Gospel in holy lives.  Those who hear the Gospel and refuse to obey it we do NOT say "are unconverted elect".  They give evidence of being children of the devil, bound for the lake of fire.  The only way ANYONE WHOSE NAME IS NOT SPECIFICALLY MENTIONED IN SCRIPTURE knows that they are an elect, blood-washed, heaven-bound child of God is to the degree that he loves God and keeps God's commandments.

Dear brother, I hope that this is concise but adequate enough and addresses your question.  If not, please let me know and I will be happy to go into more detail on any particular point.  I would also suggest that you look at this outline entitled "No Fine Line" which can be found here: http://www.letgodbetrue.com/sermons/pdf/no-fine-line.pdf  It deals with the assurance of eternal life and shows from Scripture in great detail, what I have given only a small tithe to, concerning gospel obedience as the proof of election.  In particular, it shows that there is a great difference between the life of a child of God and that of a worldling. 

One of the joys of this for me is the reconciliation of God's sovereignty & man's responsibility.  I will be in heaven because of the purpose, plan and work of God ALONE with NO addition or cooperation from me or any other man.  God and Jesus Christ will obtain ALL the glory for my salvation!  But the only way that you, I or any other man can KNOW that I am one of God's children is by me diligently following His commandments and living a holy, loving life as He defines it.  The more godly I live, the more assurance I have that I am one of His elect.  It is a system of doctrine where God gets the maximum glory and we have the highest incentive to lead holy lives!

Thank you, dear brother, for the opportunity to share this blessed truth with you.  Please let me know if there is more that I can do to assist your understanding of God's precious word.   My prayers are with Brother Sing as he opens God's precious word before you to rightly divide the word of truth, and that you and the brethren in KL, like the noble Bereans, search the Scriptures to confirm the truth and then hold fast to that which is true! 

Your brother in Christ, Neur

 

"Until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled"

 

Brother Sing
Luke 21:24 @And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.@

Gill's exposition on the same: "and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles; the Romans, who ploughed up the city and temple, and laid them level with the ground; and which spot has been ever since inhabited by such as were not Jews, as Turks and Papists: and so it will be, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled; that is, till the fulness of the Gentiles is brought in; until the Gospel is preached all over the world, and all God's elect are gathered in out of all nations; and then the Jews will be converted, and return to their own land, and rebuild and inhabit Jerusalem; but till that time, it will be as it has been, and still is possessed by Gentiles. The word "Gentiles," is left out in one of Beza's exemplars, and so it is likewise in the Persic version."

I have a few questions to ask of you. Luke 21:24 as I understand it, AD 70, was explained in great detail during the talks in KL and Penang in 2007. I am unsure about the explanation given by Gill - highlighted in red above

a. When shall this happen - the Jews returning to reoccupy the land occupied by the Gentiles (as seen today's Jerusalem as occupied by the Palestinians)?

b. When is the Gospel preached throughout the world and the fullness of the Gentile are brought in?

c. Will this really happen that is after the gentile are brought in, the conversion of the Jews will happen?

d. Is it really the scheme from God that the Jews would one day return to Jerusalem to dwell? Is it because of this that countries like the USA and Britain are anxious that the Jews are protected to ensure their survival so that God's scheme is brought to place?

e. No wonder many today look towards the evangelising Israel for the above interpretation to come to fruition.

And finally,

f. Can I accuse John Gill of holding the premillennialist's view?

It will be helpful if you can assist us and I appreciate your time to consider these. Thank you

God's Mercy upon us

eXunny

-----

Dear Brother eXunny,

Your question on Dr Gill reminded me of this mail!

You asked an interesting question. Dr Gill is inclined towards a pre-millennial position. And that has affected his understanding of many related passages.

I wrote this in reply to Pastor Zee, who inquired about the same passage:
========

Good morning Brother Sing,

I suspect that Christians do not rightly divide what the Bible is saying in the verse 'until the day of the Gentile be fulfilled." If you feel led to, could you post something about this subject? If you do not feel led to, or God gives no direction, that is ok. God bless you today.

I replied to Pastor Zee

Dear Brother,
I wrote this in exchange with an RB. He quoted this passage to prove that the earthly theocratic Israel (distinct from the modern secular Israel) will be re-established someday. So, I give my understanding. The full exchange is on the Facebook post.

sing

====

I wrote to the RB

Luke 21:24
"And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: ...and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled." (KJV)

'Until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled' - until the end of the gospel age... i.e. Jerusalem will never be restored again as a centre of the earthly theocratic nation.

Israel as an earthly theocratic nation is GONE for good, and forever in the purpose of God. The Jews are still around.

Do you make a distinction between Israel, the earthly theocratic nation of the old covenant, and the Jews as an ethnic nation? Maybe that's where the problem lies.

The RB replied:
Brother Sing, Luke 21:24 indicates an end to the Gentile rule and treading underfoot of Jerusalem. In fact, the context shows it as well. Jerusalem will be trodden under foot 'until'....

I responded:
"And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled."

It says "Until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled."

It does not say, as you imagined, "until the rule of Gentiles be over."

Nothing about the end of the Gentile rule as you suggested.

Everything is about the permanent end of earthly theocratic Israel represented by Jerusalem!

The state of theocratic Israel being destroyed and dissolved will remain UNTIL the time of the Gentiles be fulfilled, THAT IS, the end of the gospel age.

The OT was essentially the times of the Jews. But the times of the Jews were divinely ended in 70AD.

The NT is essentially the times of the Gentiles.

"Until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled" simply means Until the end of the gospel age. Therefore, Jerusalem will never be restored because when the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled, that will be the end of the gospel age, and the Lord Jesus Christ will return and usher in the eternal state of being.

That's my understanding.

======

Brother eXunny, I hope the above exchanges with the RB help.

May our Lord grant journey mercies, and a blessed reunion with dear ones over the week.

sing 

===============

I sounded out the same issue in a discussion group.

Luke 21:24
And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles, until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.

Gill's exposition on the same:
until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled; that is, till the fulness of the Gentiles is brought in; until the Gospel is preached all over the world, and all God's elect are gathered in out of all nations; and then the Jews will be converted, and return to their own land, and rebuild and inhabit Jerusalem; but till that time, it will be as it has been, and still is possessed by Gentiles. The word "Gentiles," is left out in one of Beza's exemplars, and so it is likewise in the Persic version.

Dear Brethren,
Please help me! What does the clause "until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled" mean?

What is "the times of the Gentiles"?

Thanks.
sing

======

Meeky
Sing, it refers to this present gospel age, extending until the end of time when the eternal state becomes a reality. In other words, God is finished with the Jews as a nation all the way to the very end of this present age.

At the end of the age, Christ will return, the dead will be raised (both just and unjust), and He will deliver up the kingdom to the Father saying behold I and the children which God hath given me.

The Jews as a special nation in God's dealings among men ended with their ultimate rejection of Christ. They did fill up the measure of their fathers' transgressions, and destruction came upon them, and they were broken off from the witness of God, and this witness was given to those bringing forth fruit.

This is a quick and a bit scattered answer to your question.

Mark
Brethren Doug and Sing,
That sounds right to me.  See Matthew 24:14, Colossians 1:6 and 23, Romans 10:18.

I remain.

sing
Brother Mark, Romans 10:18 reminds me of Romans 11:25 where it speaks of the partial blindness that came upon God's children among the Jews. Will that partial blindness be removed, and if yes, when will it happen?

Was that partial blinding restricted to the apostolic age, or through the whole gospel age to just before the end of the gospel age, when there will be many conversions among the Jews? I would appreciate your thoughts.

Mark
Dear Brother Sing, I will share my thoughts but do not set them up as a standard for anyone else.  My thoughts are not set in stone and I continue to study upon some of these things and very much appreciate the thoughts of others.

I think the partial blindness of Israel that was prophesied of and was working in the time of Christ and Paul was fulfilled by the time of the destruction of Jerusalem.  The ingathering of the Jews, I believe, came at Pentecost and the following period in Jerusalem and continued in the spread of the Apostolic Church in the diaspora.

From my point of view, there is no longer the nation of Israel that existed prior to the destruction of Jerusalem for the prophecy to include today.  Therefore, I conclude that the prophesied blindness ended in the apostolic age.  This does not preclude that individual Jews in the gospel age can be just as stiff-necked and rebellious as they were in the preceding ages.  Hope this helps.
Yours in Brotherly Bonds,

Is Gill a gospel regenerationist? Pray, help, Sir!

The gospel regenerationists WANTS TO WEAR the crown;
i.e. their preaching is instrumental for the Holy Spirit's work of regeneration.
THEREFORE, without their preaching, no regeneration. 

Jan 31, 2011, 5:40 AM

Dear Sir,
Please consider the comment made by Gill on Lydia. A couple of words he uttered need your kind discernment.

"that she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul; concerning the person and offices of Christ, concerning his truths and ordinances, concerning free justification by his righteousness, pardon by his blood, and everlasting salvation by him; these things she hearkened unto in another manner than she had done; before she heard, but did not attend to what she heard; but faith coming by hearing, now she hears with the hearing of faith, and understands what she hears, and cordially receives and embraces it, and put into practice what she heard, submitting to the ordinance of Christ, as follows"

Is Gill a gospel regenerationist? Pray, help Pastor!

In His Mercy
Xunny

========

Jan 31, 2011, 12:52 PM

Dear Brother Xunny,

You have raised a common inquiry about Gill.

I will bring a copy of a biography on Gill the next time I see you. (I handed a copy to LKM at Armada Hotel some years back, he declined. KL is witness!)

When reading Gill, please remember these basic points:
- his ministry spanned over a period of 50 plus years, 1720-1771. That means to say, his earlier work may not be as mature as his later work. This is inevitable in a man's ministry. He grows in the knowledge and grace of the Lord Jesus Christ. So, certain of his earlier teaching may appear to contradict his latter more matured teaching.
- his commentary on the bible was compilation of his expository work along his ministry. This is quite different from his latter and final Body of Divinity issued under his own supervision two years before his departure to glory.  I believe if he had the opportunity, he would have gone back to rectify some of his wordings in his earlier work.
- toward the end of his life, in 1769, he published his definitive systematic Body of Divinity. So whenever there is seeming differences among his writing, his later work would be definitive of his view.

In addition to all the above, the error of gospel regeneration was not an issue in the old school baptists of Gill time. And because of that Gill come across as being somewhat loose in his use of words. Often he used the terms 'regeneration' and 'conversion' quite interchangeably. But to him, 'conversion' is conversion from the state of sins and death to that of life and salvation. So to us who have to fight the error of gospel regeneration, Gill appears to teach gospel regeneration. It come across like that in several of his commentary in the NT.

For a classic example of this: his notes on Romans 11:14: "The ministers of the Gospel may be said to save souls, not efficiently, for the author or efficient cause of salvation is God only; the Father has chose unto it, the Son has effected it, and the Spirit applies it; BUT INSTRUMENTALLY, AS THE WORD PREACHED BY THEM IS THE MEANS OF REGENERATION, FAITH, AND CONVERSION, WITH WHICH SALVATION IS CONNECTED: and as they show unto men the way of salvation, and encourage souls to believe in Christ, in whom alone it is. Now the apostle argues from his office, and the usefulness of it, to some among the Jews, to saving purposes, to prove that their rejection was not total." Go here and click on the appropriate place:

Here is a good place to find Gill's commentary:
https://www.christianity.com/bible/commentary/john-gill/

For his Body of Divinity, go here:  
https://www.heritagebooks.org/products/a-complete-body-of-doctrinal-and-practical-divinity-gill.html

But this PLAINLY and CLEARLY repudiated in his systematic theology, the FINAL WORKS of his long ministry.

Now concerning the commentary you quoted, I don't see anything related to the issue of gospel regeneration. What may be disputed is that Gill assumed that Lydia had heard the gospel before this but did not hear with faith. But this time round she hear the preaching of Paul with faith. So, no one can label Gill a gospel regenerationist from this commentary.

Take a look here where Gill's view on regeneration was disputed:
http://things-new-and-old.blogspot.com/2010/11/how-subtle-and-devilish-is-subtle.html

Look at the part (2/5 way down) where on gospel regenerationist quoted from Gill Body of Divinity and misrepresented him in a most horrible way.

I am glad you are reading Gill - possibly the clearest theologian... certainly far excel Calvin the baby sprinkler! If only baptists read this great servant of God, it would do them so much good.

PRESS ON and FORWARD, for that's the only option for soldiers of Christ.

your brother and servant in Christ,

sing

It is easier for the camel to go through

The "Eye of the Needle" was a narrow gateway into Jerusalem,
 and camels had to be unloaded to pass through
because they were carrying riders and goods.

Feb 4, 2011, 6:50 AM

Dear Pastor,
The other day PaiKuT asked, since salvation has been granted on the premise of election, justification, regeneration, conversion* and glorification why is it the rich young ruler (Matthew 19; Mark 10) needs to do something like sell off his riches and come to follow the Lord? 
 
I remembered Bro Onathan in one of his sermons included the rich young ruler as a saved person. But then why does the Lord also in the same breath mention it is easier for the camel to go through the eye of the needle than for a rich man to achieve glorification**?
 
Thank you for your assistance.
 
Xunny
======
[Please note two things:
* eternal salvation is freely applied to an elect dead in trespasses and sins, i.e. before conversion. 
** It is “for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God”; this is vastly different from “for a rich man to achieve glorification.”]

Dear Brother
You asked An interesting question.
23 ¶ Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven.
 24 And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

The SOLUTION to the apparent difficulty can only be resolved by rightly dividing the word of truth. And this is centred on two simple principles. If you grasp them, you are 100 miles ahead of many 'theologians' in understanding this particular issue.

1. The Distinction between Eternal and Temporal salvation

There is a great distinction between 'eternal salvation' which is by the free grace of God alone PLUS NOTHING, and 'temporal salvation' which is conditioned upon the obedience of God's children. 

- If we are able to make the clear distinction between these two distinct and different of salvation, we will resolve all the apparent difficulties. The old-school Baptists like John Gill were able to make clear distinctions. The same is plainly stated in the 168CoF... but the new school Baptists have lost that entirely... which explains why they always end up mixing grace and work together in their understanding of salvation by God's free grace. 

- By 'eternal salvation' is meant salvation that is eternal in nature. This salvation involves the saving acts of God alone, such as predestination, election, justification, regeneration and glorification. The effects and nature of God's activities lead to eternal salvation. This needs to be emphasised because many, if not ALL RBs, when they hear the term 'eternal salvation', they automatically accuse that we are teaching that one is already saved in eternity. 

(They have the same problem with the term 'eternal justification' - their knee-jerk reaction is to accuse us of teaching that an elect is already personally justified in eternity, which is not true at all. Personal/vital justification takes place in time, but that justification is ETERNAL, i.e. once justified by God's free grace, that justification is ETERNAL. Sometimes the term 'eternal justification' refers to the justification that has been decreed in eternity, i.e. before time. I have digressed.)

- A man's glorification is inextricably bound up with his predestination, election, calling, and justification by God's free grace. Rom 8:29 "For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren. 30 Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified."

A man's glorification is UNCONDITIONAL. A man's well-being here on earth in his present short life, i.e. his temporal salvation, is conditioned upon his obedient responses to God's will.

By 'temporal salvation' means the salvation that pertains to the life here and here, and is obtained through the obedience of God's children to God's will for them. Our believing saves us from errors and falsehood and lies and superstition. Our believing does not save us from eternal hell... God's acts alone, based on the finished work of Jesus Christ and applied by His Spirit to us personally, save us eternally, i.e. with eternal salvation. Our obeying and believing saves us by bringing us to know the truth of our salvation, and that deliver us from worldliness, which is the cause of hell on earth... 

Only those whom God has freely bestowed eternal salvation is capable of working out their own temporal salvation with fear and trembling, by their humble obedience to God's will.

Therefore the salvation that requires any condition upon man CANNOT be eternal salvation (which is absolutely and completely by the free and sovereign grace of God while a man is dead in trespasses and sins); it has to be temporal salvation that relates to a man's WELL BEING as a child of God, and NOT to his BEING as a child of God. 

2. Entering the kingdom of God and entering heaven are distinct
Also, please note carefully that Christ actually said: "That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven... " 

a. It is a common mistake to equate 'the kingdom of heaven' or the kingdom of God with heaven itself. Once we equate the two, the confusion inconsistencies and contradictions are irreconcilable! 

- A classic example of this is found in Mt 7:13 "Enter ye in at the strait gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way, that leadeth to destruction, and many there be which go in thereat: 14 Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

This passage speaks of temporal salvation. But so many read 'life' as eternal life, therefore concluding that eternal life is obtained by man's effort of entering the strait gate and walking the narrow way... AS THOUGH a man without eternal life is capable of doing so! 

- The term kingdom of heaven is most often used in contrast to the earthly theocratic kingdom of Israel, and it is nearly exclusively used concerning the Jewish hearers. The kingdom of heaven and the kingdom of God are used interchangeably, and it is a NEW COVENANT expression of the people of God.

b. The lesson at hand for the rich young ruler is not the problem with his riches... but his riches hindered him from following Jesus Christ, from professing Christ. (Abraham had great riches, and so did Job and many others.) 
- He is already a child of God, but he is not CONVERTED yet... and his riches are hindering his conversion. He is an upright God-fearing Jew - already a man saved by God. This man's hold on his riches prevents him from following Christ. Riches have their inherent snares, and not many can handle riches well. 
- Men of riches are less inclined to enter the strait gate or walk the narrow road of the kingdom of heaven. The wide gate and broad way of religious clubs and the world are more attractive and acceptable to them. 
- Men of riches are easily put off by the command to live simply and without ostentation. Riches feed the pride of life, lusts of the eyes, and lust of the flesh. The poor also have the same temptation... but they have nothing to feed them to those evils. 
- We see many men of riches comfortably settled in churches because the STANDARD of the kingdom of God have been lowered and compromised... If churches maintained the standard, many men of riches would not want to want to enter the kingdom of God. 

I hope these thoughts help.