Dr. Robert Sumner passed away in December 2016. The Biblical Evangelist newspaper is no longer being published and the ministry of Biblical Evangelism has ceased operation.

The remaining inventory of his books and gospel tracts was transferred to The Baptist Tabernacle of Los Angeles and may be ordered here.

Is a Sinner “Made Alive” Before Being Born Again?
Evangelist Robert Sumner - Editor

Is a Sinner “Made Alive” Before

Being “Born Again”?

By the Editor

“And you hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and sins:

“Wherein in time past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience:

“Among whom also we all had our conversation in times past in the lusts of our flesh, fulfilling the desires of the flesh and of the mind; and were by nature the children of wrath, even as others.

“But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us,

“Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved).”

– Ephesians 2:1-5

Some brethren whom we call hyper-Calvinists (meaning they go beyond Calvin in their Calvinism) have been teaching and preaching that, in the working of the Holy Spirit upon the elect, they must be born again before putting their faith and trust in the Lord Jesus Christ. They base this argument on the fact, as verse 1 of our text insists, all men are “dead in trespasses and sins.” The argument goes that a dead man cannot do anything, to say nothing of believe.

This kind of death, of course, is not a biblical death but a practical annihilation of the individual. In the Word of God, death is simply separation (not annihilation). Physical death is the separation of the soul and spirit from the body. Spiritual death is the separation of the individual from God (in biblical terminology he is ‘lost’). The second (or final) death is the eternal separation of the individual from God and everything that comes from God. That person is doomed, damned, separated from God forever.

But is one who is “dead in sins” incapable of any kind of response? While we quickly acknowledge that in the spiritual realm there can be no response without the drawing power of the Holy Spirit, the Word of God is plain that He works this way in all men everywhere. For example, John 12:32, 33 clearly record Jesus as saying, “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me. This he said, signifying what death he should die.” Since He was lifted up at Calvary (the death He should die), it means He does draw all men to Himself. That doesn’t mean all men are saved, but merely that the Holy Spirit enlightens to some degree everyone born into the world.

John 1:8, 9 tell us about John the Baptist, the forerunner of Christ, “He was not that Light, but was sent to bear witness of that Light. That was the true Light, which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.” John was not the Messiah, but the Messiah he heralded was to give “light” to “every man that cometh into the world.” Our God is not a respecter of persons; He gives light to every individual – not just to some “elect” individuals.

But can a dead person respond? Contrary to the deadness visualized by hyper-Calvinists, a biblical corpse is very lively. An illustration of this is seen in the dead rich man of Luke 16:19-31. This dead man could see: “And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham…” (Vs. 23). This dead man could talk: “He cried and said, Father…” (Vs. 24). This dead man could hear: “Abraham said, Son, remember…” (Vs. 25). This dead man could feel: “cool my tongue” (Vs. 24). This dead man could taste: “dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue…” (Vs. 24). In short, all five of the human senses of this dead man are declared as still active, other than the sense of touch – and based on the other senses, it is logical to assume it was active as well. This dead man could even pray: “Father Abraham, have mercy on me…” (Vs. 24). Yes, that is a very lively corpse!

So the dead man of the hyper-Calvinist is merely a figment of his imagination. But the hyper has still got to make his dead man alive so he can respond to the Gospel. How can he do it?

Let me answer by using the teaching of one such Calvinist, Arthur W. Pink (born in England in 1886; died in Scotland in 1952, where he spent his last years without attending any church). He was a strange man who got mixed up in Theosophy (an Eastern religion) early in life and became one of its chief speakers, even being hand-picked to become one of its leaders, although he was raised in a godly home.

After he got saved, in 1910 he traveled to the United States and enrolled in the Moody Bible Institute. He lasted 6 weeks and quit, telling an administrator he was “wasting his time,” implying he already knew all the Institute had to offer. (Humility was never one of Pink’s strong points and his treatment of others was sometimes atrocious.) There followed several small pastorates in Colorado, California, Kentucky, and South Carolina. [Later he pastored in Australia where, again, he did not fare either well or long; in fact, on leaving ‘down under’ he determined never to join another church as long as he lived. And he didn’t!]

Not succeeding as a pastor, he became an itinerant Bible teacher in 1920. Warren W. Wiersbe said of him: “He never remained in one place for very long, either geographically or theologically.” And Wiersbe noted that unsuspecting readers of his books might “conclude that there were two Arthur Pinks” because of some of his theological flip-flops. His lack of formal training might have been the cause of some of his being “tossed to and fro, and carried about with every wind of doctrine” (Ephesians 4:14). David L. Larson adds that he was given to “frequent bouts of discouragement and depression.”

Although early in his ministry he was both dispensational and premillennial, he moved into amillennialism (he said Fundamentalist leaders like Arno C. Gaebelein, James M. Gray and William L. Pettingill were doing as much harm to the cause of Christ as the high priest of modernism, Harry Emerson Fosdick, and the higher critics!) and he repudiated a book he had previously written, The Redeemer’s Return, because it was premillennial.

As the years progressed he became more and more narrow in his Calvinistic views until he wound up a hyper-Calvinist who claimed even a fly couldn’t land on an individual unless God told it to do so, and added reprobation to his doctrinal beliefs (that God “elected” some to be damned, just as he “elected” some to be saved; he has an entire chapter devoted to trying to prove this in his Sovereignty of God). Most of his writing was in his little paper Studies in the Scriptures that never had as many as 2,000 subscribers even in its glory days and during its low spells dropped to perhaps a few hundred. Nearly all of his books are reprints from his writings in it.

Before looking more closely at Pink, I ask readers to re-read the text at the start of this item. For 20 centuries men of God have considered this a reminder to the Ephesians of their salvation – that they had been raised from spiritual death to spiritual life. That is the idea Paul was setting forth and we subscribe to it wholeheartedly.

We also subscribe to the fact that the Holy Spirit deals with individuals prior to their conversion, convicting them through the Word of God regarding their sinfulness, lostness and need of redemption. So when we criticize what Pink has written and promoted, we are not minimizing these truths. We believe them!

Pink was a champion of those offering a system of giving spiritual life to a dead man before he had saving faith. For example, in his book, Spiritual Union and Communion (published by Baker Book House), in berating those he called “Arminians” who make man “the center of their system” (sic), he wrote, “They fail to recognize that there must be a vital union before there can be a fiducial one, that the soul must first be made alive spiritually before it is capacitated to trust savingly in Christ” (italics his; boldface mine).

He is saying one must be made spiritually alive (we call that being born again) before he or she can put faith in Christ. No matter how many times you read it, you can arrive at no other honest conclusion. Notice that he is not talking about some things happening at the same time, like repentance and faith, but one thing happening before another thing.

He went on: "One who is dead in trespasses and sins has no more ability to perform spiritual acts – and appropriating the Lord Jesus as his own is a spiritual act – than a corpse in the grave is qualified to perform physical acts. Life itself must be present before there can be any evidences and exercises of it." He continued by saying Calvinists “do not fall into this error,” because they “perceive that the sinner must first be quickened before he can savingly believe the gospel.” In short, he says one cannot believe until after he has been “quickened” (see our text above; all agree that quickened means “made alive”; see also what we said early in this article about death).

Pink went on to repeat his point, "[Calvinists] ... perceive that the sinner must FIRST be quickened ["made alive"] BEFORE he can SAVINGLY BELIEVE the gospel. They insist that the Holy Spirit MUST UNITE THE SOUL VITALLY TO CHRIST ERE [i.e., before] there can be any drawing from the fulness which is in Christ. We must be LIVINGLY UNITED TO HIM BEFORE any of His benefits become ours." Notice that he is saying a lost sinner must have a “vital union” with Christ prior to exercising saving faith.

Then he said, to clear up any misunderstanding that he might just be talking about the Holy Spirit "convicting" a person prior to salvation, he said, "I MUST BE A SON BEFORE I CAN BE AN HEIR."

 He went on in that same paragraph, "It is not sufficient to point out that FAITH necessarily PRESUPPOSES spiritual life, for that spiritual life itself presupposes something else prior to the communication of it. The Holy Spirit does not regenerate all. Who are the ones He brings from death unto life? Galatians 4:6 tells us, 'Because ye are sons, God hath sent forth the Spirit of His Son into your hearts.' There is, then, A RELATION to God prior to regeneration."

In short, he is saying one must be a son of God before he can be brought "from death to life." Yet how can one be a son of God apart from the new birth? While he seems to be referring to the fact the saints were chosen in Him before the foundation of the world (which we believe), that is begging the point here. He is talking about the process of the here and now in salvation.

Later in the book, to make sure everyone understands, he says, "The Spirit supernaturally quickens [i.e., makes alive] the soul in order to capacitate it unto a saving faith in Christ. It is the Spirit's quickening [that is, making alive] of us into newness of life which lays the foundation for feeling our deep need of Christ and casting ourselves upon Him." So this making alive is just the foundation for conviction, for feeling our deep need of Him.

And he added, so no one would think he was talking about conviction of sin in this making alive, "UNTIL WE ARE BROUGHT FROM DEATH UNTO LIFE THE GOSPEL FALLS UPON DEAF EARS." In short, the sinner must have spiritual life before he can even be convicted of sin! Notice that he clearly says this “quickening” is “into newness of life.” (We agree that this quickening is into newness of life, but it does not happen before saving faith!)

One of Pink’s defenders said, “I think any time the Word of God is blessed by the Spirit to convict a sinner, you could say that is a sort of ‘quickening,’ but it is not the new birth.” Sort of quickening? Where do you find a sort of quickening, a sort of being made alive in Scripture? Paul told the Ephesians in our text “you were quickened,” not “you were sort of quickened.” And, remember, Pink said the Hoy Spirit couldn’t even convict a sinner until the sinner had spiritual life.

In fact, he made it even plainer that he was talking about the new birth when he spoke of being quickened since he said elsewhere, in his infamous work (Dr. A. C. Gaebelein called it “totally unscriptural,” “akin to blasphemy,” “a monstrous thing”) The Sovereignty of God, “The will of man is opposed to God and he has no will Godward until he has been born again.” Obviously, if one has been “made alive spiritually” and has “a vital union with Christ,” he is born again.

Don’t misunderstand. The Holy Spirit of God, through the Word of God, brings conviction to sinners through the living Word of God (see my commentary of Hebrews). But that conviction is not the reception of “spiritual life.” Is this conviction of the Spirit a sort of pre-faith "spiritual life," since it is an influence by the Holy Spirit through His Word upon the sinner? Of course not! Some are so deeply convicted by the Holy Spirit of God through the Word of God that they cannot sleep – sometimes for days or weeks – but then go on and reject Christ, die and go to Hell. Are recipients of “spiritual life” in Hell? The thought is inane!

Which comes first, the chicken or the egg? The chicken, obviously, because God created it and it produced the egg. So, which comes first, spiritual life or faith? Faith, obviously, because it produces spiritual life. [“Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved” Acts 16:31, John 3:16, John 5:24, etc., etc.] But Pink and others of his school say spiritual life comes before faith and produces faith. That is wrong, inconsistent with what the Bible teaches. (Some argue that faith doesn’t precede the new birth because both happen at the same. While this is true, it is begging the point since believing is always given before salvation in Scripture. It never says, “Be saved and believe,” but always, “Believe and be saved!”)

Do we or do we not receive spiritual life only when we are born again? Does one have spiritual life before he is born again? One good brother, trying to defend Pink, said he did not mean the new birth when he spoke of the sinner receiving spiritual life. Alas, that is like Jimmy Carter and the neo orthodox theologians putting their own definition to the biblical term “new birth” (they don’t mean what I mean and what Bible believers through the centuries have always meant). And Alice in Wonderland comes to mind here, too. The author, Lewis Carroll, had one of his characters note that words as he used them were defined as he meant them. Pink seems addicted to the same disease.

This same defender of Pink argued to me, “Whatever you call it, if you believe there is such a work by the Spirit, it is probably just about the same thing Pink believed,” adding, “The bottom line is, Pink did not believe that anyone was ever born again who did not believe in Christ, and I think that is the same thing you believe.”

In the first place, Pink and I do not believe the same thing, because I don’t believe a lost sinner has “spiritual life” and a “vital union” with Christ while still dead in trespasses and sins. And if Pink didn’t believe one who had that “spiritual life” and that “vital union” with Christ wasn’t born again, he was playing word games. For one to say he didn't believe a sinner was born again prior to believing – even though he had a "vital union with Christ" and was the recipient of "spiritual life" – would be the equivalent of arguing that one didn't 'receive' Christ because he only 'believed' on Him. Believing and receiving are the same spiritual act in conversion.

That Pink taught one is born again before trusting Christ is clear. In his The Sovereignty of God, after noting that “the Spirit does not ‘quicken’ everybody – why?” he writes, “The usual answer returned to this question is, Because everybody does not trust in Christ. It is supposed that the Holy Spirit quickens only those who believe. But this is to put the cart before the horse. Faith is not the cause of the new birth, but the consequence of it.” In short, one cannot believe until he has been born again, since the new birth is the cause of faith.

Notice carefully that Pink didn't say the Word of God wielded by the Holy Spirit produces saving faith; he said the new birth is the cause of faith; it produces faith (and since it causes it, it must come first). Yet according to Jesus (whom I accept not only as an authority, but the FINAL one), the cause of the new birth is faith/believing (not the effect). See the great new birth chapter of the Bible, John 3 – park on any one of the passages there.

Or you might like John 5:24 where our Lord guaranteed, “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life.” He started with a double “this is true” – a double “amen” – and promised that anyone who heard His Word and accepted it (“believed”) immediately received everlasting life and was therefore assured he would never be brought “into condemnation.” Note that such a one passes “from death unto life” (is born again) the moment he believes. Faith is the cause, not the consequence of that new birth.

A defender of Pink noted that B. H. Carroll, the founder of Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary (SBC; Dr. Paige Patterson is currently president) summed up the matter as follows:

(1)  Every one born of God has the right be called a child of God.

(2)  But no one has the right until he believes in Jesus.

(3)  Therefore the new birth is not completed without faith."

This contradicts Pink, of course, since he said faith follows regeneration.

Charles Haddon Spurgeon, a strong 5-point Calvinist, said for the morning of August 10^th in his Morning and Evening, “Paul’s marvelously rich expression indicates, that Christ is the source of our life. ‘You hath he quickened who were dead in trespasses and sins.’ That same voice which brought Lazarus out of the tomb raised us to newness of life.” He understood being quickened from trespasses and sins as being the new birth, “raised to newness of life,” not mere conviction of sin.

Again, preaching a New Year’s message on life in Christ, Spurgeon said: “We also, being heirs of wrath even as others, are through the fall dead, dead in trespasses and sins; and if ever we are to possess spiritual life, it must be said of us, ‘And you hath he quickened.’ We must be as ‘those that are alive from the dead’. … The world is the valley of dry bones, and grace raises the chosen into newness of life. The fall brought universal death, in the deep spiritual sense of that word, over all mankind; and Jesus delivers us from the consequences of the fall by implanting in us a spiritual life. By no other means can this death be removed: ‘He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.’ The work of regeneration, in which the new life is implanted, effectually restores the ruin of the fall, for we are born again, ‘not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God which liveth and abideth for ever.’”

Spurgeon clearly taught that when one who was dead in trespasses and sins was “quickened” he became the possessor of spiritual life. He was thereby made “alive from the dead” and the “means” of that removal from death was believing in the Son of God. That is exactly what the Scripture is saying. We concur totally.

One of Pink's defenders inadvertently helped me here by sending me some of Spurgeon's quotes on the subject – all of which I agreed with, incidentally. Here is one of them (my italic is what he underlined): "Where there is no faith, there has been no quickening of the Holy Spirit, for faith is of the very essence of spiritual life; and so the man who has no faith can no more commune with the living God, and give him pleasure, than can a stock or a stone, a horse or an ox, hold converse with the human mind." So Spurgeon and I both disagree with Pink; we believe faith is the cause of the quickening and insist that without faith there can be no spiritual life. Pink, of course, wrongly taught that faith was a result of the quickening, not the cause, and that the quickening was prior to salvation.

A companion passage to our text says: “And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses; blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross” (Colossians 2:13, 14). As soon as one is made alive (i.e., quickened) his sins are blotted out. No receiving of “spiritual life” or “vital union” or new birth comes prior to the believing and blotting out of sins. One who is “quickened” (i.e., has spiritual life) is born again the moment he receives that life.

Spurgeon said: "If I am to preach faith in Christ to a man who is regenerated, then the man, being regenerated, is saved already, and it is an unnecessary and ridiculous thing for me to preach Christ to him, and bid him to believe in order to be saved when he is saved already, being regenerate."

Let me paraphrase that: “If I am to preach faith in Christ to a man who already has spiritual life and a vital union with Christ and is born again, then the man, having spiritual life and a vital union with Him, being born again is already saved and it is an unnecessary and ridiculous thing for me to preach Christ to him, and bid him to believe in order to be saved when he is saved already, having spiritual life, a vital union with Christ and a new birth experience.”

There is a phrase in athletic circles, “it ain’t over until the fat lady sings.” Well, the fat lady sings [actually, it is all the hosts of Heaven who sing; Luke 15:7, 10 – and don’t give me that jazz about angels not singing; we doubt they could say “Good Morning” without it sounding like the Hallelujah Chorus), speaking of salvation, the moment one receives spiritual life and the individual receiving it is instantly born again into the family of God, the possessor of a vital union with Christ! That is not a pre-saving faith work; it is salvation plain and simple!

Pink, early in his ministry, wrote some acceptable things. As a preacher novice fresh out of seminary I was blessed by his Gleanings in Genesis. Alas, he strayed from that with the many changes in theology he made over the years. Up to the end (he died in 1952) he wrote some good things, but there is so much bad in them one untrained in the Word would do well to look elsewhere for blessing and instruction.