Was there any Baptist who interpreted Jonah 3: 10 that repentance of sin is a work prior to Steven Anderson?

[mbkjpreacher 13]

It could be Steven Anderson who first interpreted Jonah 3: 10 that repentance of sin is a work.  

[PastorMatt 1,094]

2 hours ago, mbkjpreacher said:

It could be Steven Anderson who first interpreted Jonah 3: 10 that repentance of sin is a work.  

There has been a few things that I've heard Steven Anderson preach that I never heard before. He seems to receive special Biblical Interpretation from God, which means the Bible is of a private interpretation. 

[Alan 3,494]

The first time that I heard that Jonah 3:10 that repentance of sin was a work was from a sermon from Anderson.

[SureWord 196]

Next Anderson will say that obeying the gospel is a work.

Romans 10:16- But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?

[Pastor Scott Markle 2,846]

Yes, with explanation.  I have heard previously that "repentance for salvation" is being made into a work IF it is being defined as a "turning from sinful behavior" for salvation.  However, those whom I have previously encountered along this line then proceed to indicate that such is a false definition for repentance; and they have further provided a definition that they believe does not make "repentance for salvation" out to be work.

(Note: I myself would also hold that "repentance for salvation" is being made into a work IF it is being defined as a "turning from unrighteous behavior unto righteous behavior."  Now, I hold strongly that repentance IS a Biblical requirement for true salvation, and when Biblically defined is NOT a work.  Even so, I also hold strongly that "repentance for salvation" should be defined as a "turning from a committed love for unrighteousness unto the only Savior from unrighteousness."  I believe that "repentance for salvation" is a "change of mind" concerning "sin, righteousness, and judgement" (as per John 16:8-11) that will lead to a change in decision; and I believe that in "repentance for salvation" the change in decision is precisely the decision to place faith in God the Son, Jesus the Christ, as personal Savior, nothing more.)

By the way, the Calvinistic system of belief has often claimed that the obedience of faith for salvation is a work IF it is defined in the non-Calvinistic manner, and that it is not work (as per the Scriptures) ONLY if it is defined according to their system of doctrine.

(Note: In my experiences above, the conversations were NOT about Jonah 3:10 per se, but about the correct definition of "repentance for salvation.")

Edited January 8 by Pastor Scott Markle
grammar

[mbkjpreacher 13]

20 hours ago, PastorMatt said:

There has been a few things that I've heard Steven Anderson preach that I never heard before. He seems to receive special Biblical Interpretation from God, which means the Bible is of a private interpretation. 

This is what I observed also, so in my conclusion that Steven Anderson is the first man to give interpretation that repentance of sin is a work and many others followed him and accepted his belief.  

[mbkjpreacher 13]

19 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Yes, with explanation.  I have heard previously that "repentance for salvation" is being made into a work IF it is being defined as a "turning from sinful behavior" for salvation.  However, those whom I have previously encountered along this line then proceed to indicate that such is a false definition for repentance; and they have further provided a definition that they believe does not make "repentance for salvation" out to be work.

(Note: I myself would also hold that "repentance for salvation" is being made into a work IF it is being defined as a "turning from unrighteous behavior unto righteous behavior."  Now, I hold strongly that repentance IS a Biblical requirement for true salvation, and when Biblically defined is NOT a work.  Even so, I also hold strongly that "repentance for salvation" should be defined as a "turning from a committed love for unrighteousness unto the only Savior from unrighteousness."  I believe that "repentance for salvation" is a "change of mind" concerning "sin, righteousness, and judgement" (as per John 16:8-11) that will lead to a change in decision; and I believe that in "repentance for salvation" the change in decision is precisely the decision to place faith in God the Son, Jesus the Christ, as personal Savior, nothing more.)

By the way, the Calvinistic system of belief has often claimed that the obedience of faith for salvation is a work IF it is defined in the non-Calvinistic manner, and that it is not work (as per the Scriptures) ONLY if it is defined according to their system of doctrine.

(Note: In my experiences above, the conversations were NOT about Jonah 3:10 per se, but about the correct definition of "repentance for salvation.")

What do you think of the Illustration below, why would the word repentance change its meaning if it is about sin, whereas if it is about writing a letter, still it does not mean that the effort of writing is the repentance.  Why is it that when it is about sin, the repentance is not only a change of mind but it becomes a work or effort?  

 

[mbkjpreacher 13]

21 hours ago, Alan said:

The first time that I heard that Jonah 3:10 that repentance of sin was a work was from a sermon from Anderson.

It seems that there is no Baptist preacher in the history of Baptists that interprets Jonah 3: 10 that repentance of sin is a work.  Steven Anderson must have been the first person to interpret such verse to support the idea that repentance of sin is work.  Early Baptist preachers never preach and interpret Jonah 3: 10 as repentance of sin is work.  There is no clear statement where the passage say that God saw that repentance of sin is a work, therefore it is only an interpretation of Steven Anderson which has influenced so many preachers.  

[mbkjpreacher 13]

19 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Yes, with explanation.  I have heard previously that "repentance for salvation" is being made into a work IF it is being defined as a "turning from sinful behavior" for salvation.  However, those whom I have previously encountered along this line then proceed to indicate that such is a false definition for repentance; and they have further provided a definition that they believe does not make "repentance for salvation" out to be work.

(Note: I myself would also hold that "repentance for salvation" is being made into a work IF it is being defined as a "turning from unrighteous behavior unto righteous behavior."  Now, I hold strongly that repentance IS a Biblical requirement for true salvation, and when Biblically defined is NOT a work.  Even so, I also hold strongly that "repentance for salvation" should be defined as a "turning from a committed love for unrighteousness unto the only Savior from unrighteousness."  I believe that "repentance for salvation" is a "change of mind" concerning "sin, righteousness, and judgement" (as per John 16:8-11) that will lead to a change in decision; and I believe that in "repentance for salvation" the change in decision is precisely the decision to place faith in God the Son, Jesus the Christ, as personal Savior, nothing more.)

By the way, the Calvinistic system of belief has often claimed that the obedience of faith for salvation is a work IF it is defined in the non-Calvinistic manner, and that it is not work (as per the Scriptures) ONLY if it is defined according to their system of doctrine.

(Note: In my experiences above, the conversations were NOT about Jonah 3:10 per se, but about the correct definition of "repentance for salvation.")

I think the reason why they interpreted "Turning from sinful behavior"  is a work because they interpreted the word TURNING as a work or effort to stop sinning.  If TURNING FROM INIQUITY is a work then the purpose of preaching the gospel which is to TURN THEM FROM INIQUITY is to make them work to be saved.  But that is contradictory to the whole teaching of the Bible.  

 

Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed. Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.
(Acts 3:25-26)

And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.
(Galatians 3:8)
 

19 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Yes, with explanation.  I have heard previously that "repentance for salvation" is being made into a work IF it is being defined as a "turning from sinful behavior" for salvation.  However, those whom I have previously encountered along this line then proceed to indicate that such is a false definition for repentance; and they have further provided a definition that they believe does not make "repentance for salvation" out to be work.

(Note: I myself would also hold that "repentance for salvation" is being made into a work IF it is being defined as a "turning from unrighteous behavior unto righteous behavior."  Now, I hold strongly that repentance IS a Biblical requirement for true salvation, and when Biblically defined is NOT a work.  Even so, I also hold strongly that "repentance for salvation" should be defined as a "turning from a committed love for unrighteousness unto the only Savior from unrighteousness."  I believe that "repentance for salvation" is a "change of mind" concerning "sin, righteousness, and judgement" (as per John 16:8-11) that will lead to a change in decision; and I believe that in "repentance for salvation" the change in decision is precisely the decision to place faith in God the Son, Jesus the Christ, as personal Savior, nothing more.)

By the way, the Calvinistic system of belief has often claimed that the obedience of faith for salvation is a work IF it is defined in the non-Calvinistic manner, and that it is not work (as per the Scriptures) ONLY if it is defined according to their system of doctrine.

(Note: In my experiences above, the conversations were NOT about Jonah 3:10 per se, but about the correct definition of "repentance for salvation.")

To open their eyes, and to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins, and inheritance among them which are sanctified by faith that is in me.
(Acts 26:18)
 

Is the TURNING from darkness to light a work?  

[mbkjpreacher 13]

21 hours ago, SureWord said:

Next Anderson will say that obeying the gospel is a work.

Romans 10:16- But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?

There seems to be an influence in his doctrine.  Calvinists believe that the sinner cannot repent and believe so they placed repentance and faith after salvation.  Anderson believes that man cannot repent of sin without work so he placed repentance of sin after salvation. The truth is that repentance of sin is not work, and work is the result of repentance (of sin) and faith. 

[Pastor Scott Markle 2,846]

5 hours ago, mbkjpreacher said:

I think the reason why they interpreted "Turning from sinful behavior"  is a work because they interpreted the word TURNING as a work or effort to stop sinning.  If TURNING FROM INIQUITY is a work then the purpose of preaching the gospel which is to TURN THEM FROM INIQUITY is to make them work to be saved.  But that is contradictory to the whole teaching of the Bible.  

Ye are the children of the prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers, saying unto Abraham, And in thy seed shall all the kindreds of the earth be blessed. Unto you first God, having raised up his Son Jesus, sent him to bless you, in turning away every one of you from his iniquities.
(Acts 3:25-26)

Indeed, IF turning from iniquity (repentance) is defined as meaning a turning from the commission of sin, then it is a work (that is -- the work of quitting sin).  In addition, then the purpose of preaching the gospel, which as you say is to turn them from iniquity, would be to motivate sinners to do the work of quitting sin in order to be saved.  However, also as you say this IS "contradictory to the whole teaching of the Bible."  

Now, the debate among Fundamental Baptists over the definition of "repentance for salvation" has existed at least for a few generations.  This debate over the definition has resulted in some effectively denying the need for repentance at all as a prerequisite for salvation.  Those who do this do so in order to avoid the "work" idea of repentance, that sinners must quit sinning in order to be saved.  On the other hand, the debate over the definition of repentance for salvation has resulted in others effectively teaching that repentance is a cessation of sinning, by indicating that if a person does not quit sinning then that person shows no true evidence of having truly repented.   These are the ones that the previous group are accusing as having turned repentance for salvation into a work.

Concerning Mr. Steven Anderson, I know very little.  In fact, I know only as much as the information that others have presented about him on this very site.  I have never read anything of his.  I have never listened to anything of his.  I have never encountered anyone of his while out and about in my life.  Online Baptist has been my sole source of encounter with information concerning Mr. Steven Anderson.  Based solely on that source, it appears to me that Mr. Steven Anderson has encountered enough teaching to be convinced in a definition for repentance that means a quitting of sinning, but that he also recognizes that a quitting of sinning would indeed be a work.  Furthermore, it appears that he fully recognizes the Biblical truth that salvation is through faith and not at all of works.  Thus it appears that he has responded to the above ideas and truths by concluding that repentance (being defined as the work of quitting sin) must follow after faith for salvation.  To some extent his logic is sound IF his definitional premise is correct concerning "repentance for salvation." 

However, I myself would contend that his definitional premise is incorrect, that repentance should NOT be defined as a turning/quitting of sin.  Now, those on the other side may contend that even if we define repentance as "a change of mind" it is a change of mind that ALWAYS results in a change of behavior (and usually they mean an OBSERVABLE change in behavior).  Thus they will contend that if a change in behavior is not observable (the "fruit test"), then genuine repentance did not occur and neither did salvation.  In relation to this, I myself would contend that repentance should be defined more precisely as "a change of mind that results in a change of DECISION."  Furthermore, I would contend that in the matter of repentance for salvation specifically, the change of decision is NOT the decision to quit sinning, but IS precisely the decision to place faith in the Savior from sin and condemnation.

[Jim_Alaska 2,365]

The "Steven Andersons" of this world can say anything they want and get away with it if the are never challenged.

The people of this world that follow men like this are not following God, but man.

They manipulate words and meanings to their own mindset, but the plain meaning of Scripture is clear. 

Example:

2 Corinthians 5:17 (KJV) Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.

The "order" in which this Scripture is put forth would rule out repentance being a "work".

Godly, responsible preachers should be looking to God and His Word for their understanding, not another man.

[mbkjpreacher 13]

22 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Indeed, IF turning from iniquity (repentance) is defined as meaning a turning from the commission of sin, then it is a work (that is -- the work of quitting sin).  In addition, then the purpose of preaching the gospel, which as you say is to turn them from iniquity, would be to motivate sinners to do the work of quitting sin in order to be saved.  However, also as you say this IS "contradictory to the whole teaching of the Bible."  

Now, the debate among Fundamental Baptists over the definition of "repentance for salvation" has existed at least for a few generations.  This debate over the definition has resulted in some effectively denying the need for repentance at all as a prerequisite for salvation.  Those who do this do so in order to avoid the "work" idea of repentance, that sinners must quit sinning in order to be saved.  On the other hand, the debate over the definition of repentance for salvation has resulted in others effectively teaching that repentance is a cessation of sinning, by indicating that if a person does not quit sinning then that person shows no true evidence of having truly repented.   These are the ones that the previous group are accusing as having turned repentance for salvation into a work.

Concerning Mr. Steven Anderson, I know very little.  In fact, I know only as much as the information that others have presented about him on this very site.  I have never read anything of his.  I have never listened to anything of his.  I have never encountered anyone of his while out and about in my life.  Online Baptist has been my sole source of encounter with information concerning Mr. Steven Anderson.  Based solely on that source, it appears to me that Mr. Steven Anderson has encountered enough teaching to be convinced in a definition for repentance that means a quitting of sinning, but that he also recognizes that a quitting of sinning would indeed be a work.  Furthermore, it appears that he fully recognizes the Biblical truth that salvation is through faith and not at all of works.  Thus it appears that he has responded to the above ideas and truths by concluding that repentance (being defined as the work of quitting sin) must follow after faith for salvation.  To some extent his logic is sound IF his definitional premise is correct concerning "repentance for salvation." 

However, I myself would contend that his definitional premise is incorrect, that repentance should NOT be defined as a turning/quitting of sin.  Now, those on the other side may contend that even if we define repentance as "a change of mind" it is a change of mind that ALWAYS results in a change of behavior (and usually they mean an OBSERVABLE change in behavior).  Thus they will contend that if a change in behavior is not observable (the "fruit test"), then genuine repentance did not occur and neither did salvation.  In relation to this, I myself would contend that repentance should be defined more precisely as "a change of mind that results in a change of DECISION."  Furthermore, I would contend that in the matter of repentance for salvation specifically, the change of decision is NOT the decision to quit sinning, but IS precisely the decision to place faith in the Savior from sin and condemnation.

This statement of yours is agreeable with me, " Furthermore, I would contend that in the matter of repentance for salvation specifically, the change of decision is NOT the decision to quit sinning, but IS precisely the decision to place faith in the Savior from sin and condemnation.".  I may rephrase this statement based on my understanding that repentance is a change of mind from sin (after being convicted of sin and condemnation) to trust in Jesus as Savior.  

Repentance from sin is never work, or meant as quitting from sin.  The Andersonites are inclined to believe in different plan of salvation for the Old Testament people when they are ask about Isaiah 55: 7.  They would interpret that statement "Let the wicked forsake his way and the unrighteous man his thoughts" meant that the wicked to obtain pardon, they are to work hard in forsaking their way and sinful thoughts.  Or they cannot explain this passage.  I have asked so many Andersonites and those who believe similar to him but they cannot explain this passage when I ask with these questions:  

1.  Are the wicked in this passage saved or not? 

2. Is mercy and pardon in this passage about salvation? 

3. Is the forsaking in this passage a change of mind/ decision or an effort to work hard to quit sinning?  

What is your answer to these questions?  

[mbkjpreacher 13]

22 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Indeed, IF turning from iniquity (repentance) is defined as meaning a turning from the commission of sin, then it is a work (that is -- the work of quitting sin).  In addition, then the purpose of preaching the gospel, which as you say is to turn them from iniquity, would be to motivate sinners to do the work of quitting sin in order to be saved.  However, also as you say this IS "contradictory to the whole teaching of the Bible."  

Now, the debate among Fundamental Baptists over the definition of "repentance for salvation" has existed at least for a few generations.  This debate over the definition has resulted in some effectively denying the need for repentance at all as a prerequisite for salvation.  Those who do this do so in order to avoid the "work" idea of repentance, that sinners must quit sinning in order to be saved.  On the other hand, the debate over the definition of repentance for salvation has resulted in others effectively teaching that repentance is a cessation of sinning, by indicating that if a person does not quit sinning then that person shows no true evidence of having truly repented.   These are the ones that the previous group are accusing as having turned repentance for salvation into a work.

Concerning Mr. Steven Anderson, I know very little.  In fact, I know only as much as the information that others have presented about him on this very site.  I have never read anything of his.  I have never listened to anything of his.  I have never encountered anyone of his while out and about in my life.  Online Baptist has been my sole source of encounter with information concerning Mr. Steven Anderson.  Based solely on that source, it appears to me that Mr. Steven Anderson has encountered enough teaching to be convinced in a definition for repentance that means a quitting of sinning, but that he also recognizes that a quitting of sinning would indeed be a work.  Furthermore, it appears that he fully recognizes the Biblical truth that salvation is through faith and not at all of works.  Thus it appears that he has responded to the above ideas and truths by concluding that repentance (being defined as the work of quitting sin) must follow after faith for salvation.  To some extent his logic is sound IF his definitional premise is correct concerning "repentance for salvation." 

However, I myself would contend that his definitional premise is incorrect, that repentance should NOT be defined as a turning/quitting of sin.  Now, those on the other side may contend that even if we define repentance as "a change of mind" it is a change of mind that ALWAYS results in a change of behavior (and usually they mean an OBSERVABLE change in behavior).  Thus they will contend that if a change in behavior is not observable (the "fruit test"), then genuine repentance did not occur and neither did salvation.  In relation to this, I myself would contend that repentance should be defined more precisely as "a change of mind that results in a change of DECISION."  Furthermore, I would contend that in the matter of repentance for salvation specifically, the change of decision is NOT the decision to quit sinning, but IS precisely the decision to place faith in the Savior from sin and condemnation.

I think the belief that there is no more repentance for salvation and the belief that it requires work to be saved are both extremely wrong and unbiblical.  Romans chapter 4 and James chapter two speaks of justification by works before men, and justification by faith before God.  Works are fruits or manifestations of repentance and faith, yet true faith can exist even before works exists, yet salvation is based on faith (repentance implied) not based on works.  But for those who believe that salvation is by faith without repentance is actually they only have intellectual belief.  

 

The sequence is 

 

Intellectual belief or head knowledge  -->  Repentance --> Saving Faith

 

Repentance when it comes to man's salvation is referring to repentance from sin.  

Iniquity is sin, rebellion is sin, unbelief is sin, all unrighteousness is sin.. No need to make it plural all of them are called sin.    1 John 5:17  All unrighteousness is sin: and there is a sin not unto death.

[mbkjpreacher 13]

I believe the idea that repentance of sin is a work of quitting from sin is of Pentecostal origin.  I have read an article that Curtis defined repentance of sin as to quit from sin, whereas the man prior to him who led the Sword of the Lord believes in repentance of sin as requisite of salvation.  So it was Hyles and Curtis where the idea evolved and they categorized repentance and repentance of sin as two different thing, until Steven Anderson discovered and interpreted Jonah 3: 10 that God saw their works that it is repentance of sin, though the passage does no really say that.  

If you saw your child's actions that he changed his mind from playing throwing dirt to your car to cleaning your car, would you say that the change of mind is the child's actions?  No!!!  Rather the child's action of cleaning your car is the result of the change of mind, and the change of mind is not the action. 

[mbkjpreacher 13]

I would agree with the author of this book but not with the Pentecostals nor of Andersonism doctrine which has the same definition of repentance of sin to that of the Pentecostals and cults.  

[Ukulelemike 3,803]

The problem comes, I think, with confusing repentance with the result of repentance, or if you will, repentance of heart with repentance in action. True repentance will come with a change in behavior, the heart action resulting in the change of behavior: heart to works.  Now, some things repented of can take time to turn into an action, (ie, addictions, etc). in the case of Nineveh, their repentance, initially, was a changed heart, followed by prayer and fasting with a true intent of heart to change and obey God. Yes, there was a work, but that was a work borne out of repentance of the heart. I do not believe that God would accept any work that wasn't based on at least a repentant heart-even if he knows they may not get it right in action, if the heart is right, truly wanting to please God. If they were just doing a work with no repentant heart behind it, God probably wouldn't have spared them.

[heartstrings 2,374]

The basic meaning of "repent", in the Bible, is to "turn" from or against. The Ninevites turned from sin in their hearts in faith. Why was it faith? Because they believed the words of Jonah. about God's coming wrath. The "repenting" came first and the "works" followed. So the King of Nineveh had to "repent", by faith, in his heart, before deciding to don the sackcloth and order the citizens to do the same. But, It's also an example of others being able to see your faith BY your works.

[Jordan Kurecki 668]

On 1/20/2021 at 10:30 AM, heartstrings said:

The basic meaning of "repent", in the Bible, is to "turn" from or against. The Ninevites turned from sin in their hearts in faith. Why was it faith? Because they believed the words of Jonah. about God's coming wrath. The "repenting" came first and the "works" followed. So the King of Nineveh had to "repent", by faith, in his heart, before deciding to don the sackcloth and order the citizens to do the same. But, It's also an example of others being able to see your faith BY your works.

This is not exactly accurate. The word "repent" has different meaning depending on context, in the OT testament there are at least two different Hebrew words translated as repent. While one of the words translated as repent, Shub, means to turn, the more common word translated as repent however is Nacham, which means more of like "to sigh" and by implication means to be sorry, if you look at that particular Hebrew word and study it more you get the sense of someone has changed their thinking inwardly. Imagine a person "sighing" and changing their mind about something and realizing they were wrong.

In Greek the common word is metanoeo which literally means a change of mind. 
There is also another word where Judas "repented" that means more like regret. 

There really is no such as "THE" basic meaning of repent in the Bible, because depending upon the context, and depending on the Hebrew or Greek word, the word repent takes on different meanings.

You can't just come up with ONE theological definition of the word "repent" and then force that onto every word or passage in the Bible. 

 

[Kleptes 27]

It is amazing how some preachers like Steven Anderson can turn people from a true belief in Jesus Christ with out work, but with work.  Repentance isn't turning from sin, it is turn to the LORD.  Why do we turn because of conviction by the Holy Ghost and then and only then can we truly turn to God and believe on Jesus Christ of whom the God Father sent.

The only work that I know is the work of God the Father.  

John 6:26 Jesus answered them and said, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Ye seek me, not because ye saw the miracles, but because ye did eat of the loaves, and were filled.

John 6:27 Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath God the Father sealed.

John 6:28 Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?

John 6:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

John 6:30 They said therefore unto him, What sign shewest thou then, that we may see, and believe thee? what dost thou work?

John 6:31 Our fathers did eat manna in the desert; as it is written, He gave them bread from heaven to eat.

 

 

 

Edited Tuesday at 03:03 AM by Kleptes

[Hugh_Flower 25]

Isn't fighting/fleeing temptation considered a work? 

 

[heartstrings 2,374]

On 1/22/2021 at 6:11 PM, Jordan Kurecki said:

This is not exactly accurate. The word "repent" has different meaning depending on context, in the OT testament there are at least two different Hebrew words translated as repent. While one of the words translated as repent, Shub, means to turn, the more common word translated as repent however is Nacham, which means more of like "to sigh" and by implication means to be sorry, if you look at that particular Hebrew word and study it more you get the sense of someone has changed their thinking inwardly. Imagine a person "sighing" and changing their mind about something and realizing they were wrong.

In Greek the common word is metanoeo which literally means a change of mind. 
There is also another word where Judas "repented" that means more like regret. 

There really is no such as "THE" basic meaning of repent in the Bible, because depending upon the context, and depending on the Hebrew or Greek word, the word repent takes on different meanings.

You can't just come up with ONE theological definition of the word "repent" and then force that onto every word or passage in the Bible. 

 

Here's one use of the word translated from "Nacham".....

Jonah 3:10

 And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.

Do you think God "sighed" here? No He turned from the evil (bad stuff), which He was fully intending to do to them, when he saw that THEY had "turned" from theirs. Here's another.......

Genesis 6:6

And it repented the LORD that he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart.

Do you think God "sighed" here as well? Do you think he was sorry that he made man? No, He did neither. Notice it does not even say "God repented". What it says is "it repented God". I personally do not believe God "regretted" making man(not saying that you would believe that) or that he was "sorry" or anything like that. What I believe it means here is that God's creation, namely man, had turned against him. To further that thought, there's another thing to consider,: none of this took God by surprise: He knew man would sin from the very beginning. So why "sigh" or even be sorry? 

 

[1Timothy115 889]

I didn’t take time to read all the comments of this thread, just the original post, so I have no idea what others have said, please pardon any redundancy. I had never heard of Steven Anderson before this thread. I have seen one of his videos on the death sentence for all homosexuals.

Jonah 3:10   And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.

There was a lot more they were doing that could be considered “works” as follows: 
“the people of Nineveh believed God”
“proclaimed a fast”
“put on sackcloth”
“from the greatest of them even to the least of them ”
“the king of Nineveh, and he arose from his throne, and he laid his robe from him, and covered him with sackcloth, and sat in ashes”
(the king) “he caused it to be proclaimed and published through Nineveh by the decree of the king and his nobles, saying, Let neither man nor beast, herd nor flock, taste any thing: let them not feed, nor drink water:”
“let man and beast be covered with sackcloth, and cry mightily unto God”

But this latter part is not a work but a willful inward change. This is repentance and it isn’t a work of man it is a fear and respect of God and turning from self-will by the entire city of Nineveh.
“let them turn every one from his evil way, and from the violence that is in their hands.”

Is your turning from sin to the will of God a work, or a grace emanating from God's grace toward your faith? 

Personally, I read Jonah 3:10 with Ephesians 2:8-9 and John 1:16 and I see no disparity in the traditional tenants of Baptists teaching of repentance. I’ll go with William Evans, THE GREAT DOCTRINES OF THE BIBLE ; “change of mind, heart movement, not only a heart broken “for” sin, but ”from” sin also.”
 

[SureWord 196]

14 hours ago, 1Timothy115 said:

I didn’t take time to read all the comments of this thread, just the original post, so I have no idea what others have said, please pardon any redundancy. I had never heard of Steven Anderson before this thread. I have seen one of his videos on the death sentence for all homosexuals.

Jonah 3:10   And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.

There was a lot more they were doing that could be considered “works” as follows: 
“the people of Nineveh believed God”
“proclaimed a fast”
“put on sackcloth”
“from the greatest of them even to the least of them ”
“the king of Nineveh, and he arose from his throne, and he laid his robe from him, and covered him with sackcloth, and sat in ashes”
(the king) “he caused it to be proclaimed and published through Nineveh by the decree of the king and his nobles, saying, Let neither man nor beast, herd nor flock, taste any thing: let them not feed, nor drink water:”
“let man and beast be covered with sackcloth, and cry mightily unto God”

But this latter part is not a work but a willful inward change. This is repentance and it isn’t a work of man it is a fear and respect of God and turning from self-will by the entire city of Nineveh.
“let them turn every one from his evil way, and from the violence that is in their hands.”

Is your turning from sin to the will of God a work, or a grace emanating from God's grace toward your faith? 

Personally, I read Jonah 3:10 with Ephesians 2:8-9 and John 1:16 and I see no disparity in the traditional tenants of Baptists teaching of repentance. I’ll go with William Evans, THE GREAT DOCTRINES OF THE BIBLE ; “change of mind, heart movement, not only a heart broken “for” sin, but ”from” sin also.”
 

Steven Anderson is an anti-semite who essentially believes every IFB pastor or layman who disagrees with him on any issue is going to hell. This, of course, is to establish his complete power and authority over his flock to prevent any questioning of his teachings. Apparently, though,  recently he's had some serious personal issues within his own family that led to a departure of many from his church. These things happen. Pastors can have wives and children who do bad things but the difference here is Anderson isn't going to hell because of it. If this was to happen to any other preacher it would be a sure sign they are possessed of devils and going to hell. In other words, he's a hypocrite.

Now, that being said, the first time the word "repent" is used in the bible is in Genesis 6:6 and it's the Lord who repents. Following the Law of First Mention this would make repentance an act of changing one's mind and regretting a decision which leads to change but the change itself is not repentance just the fruit of repentance.

Remember when our Lord told the Twelve to forgive a brother 70x7? That was a brother who repented but still kept committing the same offense yet he still was considered to have repented. Sometimes the works may take awhile to follow 

Apparently, God can show regret and change his mind about something even though he's omniscient and immutable. My guess it's a case of anthropomorphism.

[heartstrings 2,374]

14 hours ago, 1Timothy115 said:

I didn’t take time to read all the comments of this thread, just the original post, so I have no idea what others have said, please pardon any redundancy. I had never heard of Steven Anderson before this thread. I have seen one of his videos on the death sentence for all homosexuals.

Jonah 3:10   And God saw their works, that they turned from their evil way; and God repented of the evil, that he had said that he would do unto them; and he did it not.

There was a lot more they were doing that could be considered “works” as follows: 
“the people of Nineveh believed God”
“proclaimed a fast”
“put on sackcloth”
“from the greatest of them even to the least of them ”
“the king of Nineveh, and he arose from his throne, and he laid his robe from him, and covered him with sackcloth, and sat in ashes”
(the king) “he caused it to be proclaimed and published through Nineveh by the decree of the king and his nobles, saying, Let neither man nor beast, herd nor flock, taste any thing: let them not feed, nor drink water:”
“let man and beast be covered with sackcloth, and cry mightily unto God”

But this latter part is not a work but a willful inward change. This is repentance and it isn’t a work of man it is a fear and respect of God and turning from self-will by the entire city of Nineveh.
“let them turn every one from his evil way, and from the violence that is in their hands.”

Is your turning from sin to the will of God a work, or a grace emanating from God's grace toward your faith? 

Personally, I read Jonah 3:10 with Ephesians 2:8-9 and John 1:16 and I see no disparity in the traditional tenants of Baptists teaching of repentance. I’ll go with William Evans, THE GREAT DOCTRINES OF THE BIBLE ; “change of mind, heart movement, not only a heart broken “for” sin, but ”from” sin also.”
 

When you "believe", it is called "faith". All the rest that they did simply demonstrated that faith. They believed enough to take action.

The actual "repentance" occurred in their hearts the moment they "believed God".

[1Timothy115 889]

On 3/3/2021 at 10:12 AM, SureWord said:

Now, that being said, the first time the word "repent" is used in the bible is in Genesis 6:6 and it's the Lord who repents. Following the Law of First Mention this would make repentance an act of changing one's mind and regretting a decision which leads to change but the change itself is not repentance just the fruit of repentance.

Remember when our Lord told the Twelve to forgive a brother 70x7? That was a brother who repented but still kept committing the same offense yet he still was considered to have repented. Sometimes the works may take awhile to follow 

Apparently, God can show regret and change his mind about something even though he's omniscient and immutable. My guess it's a case of anthropomorphism.

I've seen a lot of debate over Genesis 6:6 "repented the LORD" and other places in scripture.  I believe that what happened was God correcting the course of mankind and every land creature  man had touched. If God was repenting, who was He repenting to? Who was He required to change for? God observed Noah living in His will; so, mankind was preserved which goes with Malachi 3:6, Hebrews 13:8, James 1:17, 1 Peter 3:20, and 2 Peter 2:5. Hebrews 11:7, 1 Peter 3:20, and 2 Peter 2:5.

I believe what we call God repentance is actually man's obedience or return to obedience and aligning with the will of God. It's man turning into the will of God and not attempting to go against the current of God's will. Such was the case with Nineveh. Opposed to everything Holy, but when they turned to the will of God, they were no longer out of God's will.

I've always likened, God's repent, to a man attempting to paddle up stream against a fast current. how long before he realizes he has to go near to the shore to continue. Like us coming near to the Lord and into God's will. "Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you." James 4:8