What is born again and saved?

[Johann]

@TheologyNerd

But neither do I believe that faith is intra nos, on the contrary: faith is extra nos, it comes from outside of ourselves–it is something God gives, works, and strengthens. Faith is God’s work, not our own. It is precisely because faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word (Romans 10:17) that we cannot attribute faith to ourselves, but rather “it is the gift of God” (Ephesians 2:8). Further we read that it is not by our own will, but God’s will, that we have been born anew (John 1:13).

Couple of problems here @TheologyNerd

Absolutely appreciate the thoughtfulness of your post—especially your clear desire to exalt the grace of God as the initiator and sustainer of saving faith. But I’d like to offer a response that both affirms what Scripture says about God’s work in salvation while also challenging some of the assumptions embedded in the “faith is not of ourselves” model as it’s often interpreted.

You rightly point out that faith is not mere intellectual assent, and I agree entirely—James 2:19 indeed shows us that even demons “believe” (πιστεύουσιν) in a propositional sense, yet have no saving relationship. The biblical concept of saving faith involves trust, loyalty, and surrender—a relational fidelity grounded in God’s covenantal invitation.

However, the repeated emphasis you make that faith is wholly extra nos—entirely outside ourselves and purely the work of God, such that the human response is entirely passive—runs into several exegetical and theological problems when examined closely against the full witness of Scripture and the understanding of the pre-Augustinian Fathers.

Let me respond to a few key points:

1. Romans 10:17 – “Faith comes by hearing” does not mean faith is passively implanted
   Romans 10:17 – “So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of Christ” – refers to the means by which faith is born, not the mode of its operation. It shows that the message heard enables a person to believe, but it does not imply that the hearer plays no volitional role. Many hear and yet do not believe (Acts 28:24), suggesting that the hearing makes faith possible, but not inevitable or irresistible.

2. Ephesians 2:8 – “It is the gift of God” refers to salvation, not faith itself
   The Greek grammar of τοῦτο – “this” in Ephesians 2:8 is neuter, while πίστις – “faith” is feminine. Greek grammar requires agreement in gender, and thus τοῦτο does not refer back to πίστις directly. Many commentators (including F.F. Bruce, NICNT) understand “this is not of yourselves” to refer to the entire process of salvation, not to faith as a distinct gift implanted without response.

If anything, it supports the idea that we do not earn salvation–but it doesn’t negate the human responsibility to respond to God’s initiative in faith.

3. John 1:13 – Being born of God is a result of belief, not a prerequisite to it

You referenced John 1:13 to support the idea that we are born not of human will, but of God. However, the previous verse (John 1:12) must be included: “But to all who received Him, who believed in His name, He gave the right to become children of God.” The order is important–believing leads to becoming children of God, not the reverse. Thus, the new birth (v.13) is not what enables faith but is what follows genuine belief and reception.

4. The demons do not “trust” because they reject God’s will, not because they are incapable
   You rightly say that demons do not “trust”–but that is due to rebellion, not inability.

Nowhere does Scripture teach that spiritual beings (or humans) are ontologically incapable of trusting God. Rather, they refuse to do so. This is why so many calls in Scripture appeal to the will: “Choose this day whom you will serve” (Joshua 24:15), “Seek the Lord while He may be found” (Isaiah 55:6), “You refuse to come to Me that you may have life” (John 5:40). These are not rhetorical performances—they are genuine invitations requiring human response.

5. The Parable of the Sower contradicts monergistic passivity
   The soil does not receive life before the seed is sown. In the parable, the difference lies not in the external act of sowing, which is uniform, but in the condition of the heart to receive and retain the Word. The stony ground, the thorny ground, and the good soil all hear—the outcomes differ not because of divine selective grace, but because of how the Word is received and whether it is retained in faith and obedience (Luke 8:15). This cannot be explained in a purely monergistic framework without undermining the plain narrative Jesus gives.

6. Pre-Augustinian Fathers do not teach total inability
   You cite Augustine’s post-412 writings, but earlier Christian teachers—including Justin Martyr, Clement of Alexandria, Origen, and even early Augustine—affirmed free will as a God-given capacity that enables faith. Justin Martyr wrote:

“We have learned from the prophets… that punishments and chastisements and good rewards are rendered according to the merit of each man’s actions. Otherwise, if all things happen by fate, then nothing is in our own power.” (First Apology, 43)
The very passage you quoted from Justin’s Apology is against the Stoic determinism which modern Calvinism mimics under different terminology.

7. Infants and faith – a separate category
   Jesus’ welcome of infants in Luke 18:15–17 does not necessitate that infants exercise personal faith in the same way as adults. His point is about receptivity and dependence—not cognition. To say infants have saving faith in the same mode as conscious believers is a category error. God certainly receives them, but not based on an indistinguishable “gift of faith” implanted without awareness. Infants are under the mercy of God—yes—but the normative call to believe is given to those who can respond (Mark 1:15).

8. Romans 3:10–12 – “No one seeks God” is descriptive, not prescriptive
   Romans 3:10–12 is a compilation of Psalms and wisdom literature that describes the condition of fallen humanity under sin. It does not mean no one can seek God; it means that left in sin, people do not. This aligns perfectly with the idea that God initiates, draws, convicts—and that people are then responsible to respond. Acts 17:27 says God arranged the world so that people “might seek God… and find him.”

Conclusion:
Faith is indeed a gift in the sense that the opportunity, the revelation, and the drawing are from God. But Scripture consistently treats belief as something for which humans are held responsible. If faith were entirely “extra nos” in the sense that God causes it unilaterally without human volition, then none of the appeals to repent, believe, or resist unbelief make any rational or moral sense. God enables, but we must respond.

Let me leave you with a word from Origen, who wrote extensively before Augustine shifted the consensus toward predestination:

“It is our part to believe and choose; God gives the increase to our faith and the strength to persevere.”
(Commentary on Romans 2.9.3)

Johann.