What is faith?
Faith is a bit like falling down. One way to look at it is to see that it is more about not doing something than it is about doing something. What I mean is, faith is our own faith, but only because God has given it to us as a gift, so in that way it is not to our credit and this is the point of the description I am about to present.
The Human Point of View
Imagine you are standing on what you perceive as being level ground; you are trusting in your legs to hold you up, perpendicular to the ground. Imagine yourself making the decision to let your body fall to the floor freely, relying on your legs no more to hold you up, perpendicular to the floor, instead, you allow the force of gravity to relieve your legs of the duty of holding yourself in what you perceive is an upright position...this is like faith, trusting in something (or someone specifically) other than yourself to both establish and maintain your position of uprightness.
Christ's Point of View
Imagine you in your original position, from this, God's view, you see yourself as being horizontal, dead as it were. The point at which you considered yourself as giving over to the force of gravity to pull you down to the floor (from your perspective) was actually the act of God, the Spirit (as the "Force of Gravity") pulling you up to a vertical position; a position of uprightness. This is a bit like the way faith works from God's perspective.
Like all analogies, they are imperfect in describing the subject, but are only intended to point to them. The element left out s the fact that God changes your heart and thus your desires are necessarily changed to want to fall to the floor by giving up on your own ability to maintain your supposed uprightness.
Faith is a bit like falling down. One way to look at it is to see that it is more about not doing something than it is about doing something. What I mean is, faith is our own faith, but only because God has given it to us as a gift, so in that way it is not to our credit and this is the point of the description I am about to present.
The Human Point of View
Imagine you are standing on what you perceive as being level ground; you are trusting in your legs to hold you up, perpendicular to the ground. Imagine yourself making the decision to let your body fall to the floor freely, relying on your legs no more to hold you up, perpendicular to the floor, instead, you allow the force of gravity to relieve your legs of the duty of holding yourself in what you perceive is an upright position...this is like faith, trusting in something (or someone specifically) other than yourself to both establish and maintain your position of uprightness.
Christ's Point of View
Imagine you in your original position, from this, God's view, you see yourself as being horizontal, dead as it were. The point at which you considered yourself as giving over to the force of gravity to pull you down to the floor (from your perspective) was actually the act of God, the Spirit (as the "Force of Gravity") pulling you up to a vertical position; a position of uprightness. This is a bit like the way faith works from God's perspective.
Like all analogies, they are imperfect in describing the subject, but are only intended to point to them. The element left out s the fact that God changes your heart and thus your desires are necessarily changed to want to fall to the floor by giving up on your own ability to maintain your supposed uprightness.
12 comments:
Hi Jason,
I hope things are well with you and your family.
I am not sure I understand faith as being a gift God has given to us.If God gives the gift of faith, then has everyone been given that gift, or only those elected? If everyone has the gift of faith, why are there unregenerate people. If only the elect has been given the gift of faith, are the non-elect responsible for accepting Christ? I am really curious about your thoughts on this.
Jamie
Hi Jamie,
Thanks for posting. We are well...busy like everyone else is. Hope you and your family are well. Sorry, I had accidentally published my comment before finishing it, so here it is.
As for faith being a gift, Eph. 2:8-9 seems to support this idea explicitly as well as other passages that lend their support in less obvious ways. So I call it a gift because I believe Eph. 2:8-9 allows me to and I also think that protestant theology demands we consider it as such.
As for your second question, I think that the Bible clearly informs us that not all will believe thus not all will enter Christ's eternal presence.
And for the third question, all those who don't believe are responsible merely because God created them. In addition, Rom. 1 presents unbelievers as secretly suppressing the truth of God's demand for their allegiance thus making them culpable even if they don't admit His existence. Besides, Adam failed to obey God in our place, thus making us all responsible for his sin. That alone "gives" God the right to punish unbelievers, sad as it truly is.
Without knowing how you would differ specifically, I wouldn't want to elaborate any further yet for fear of trying to counter a position that isn't actually yours. :)
jAsOn
Thanks for responding Jason. I do enjoy reading some of your blogs on occasion, when I get a chance. They make for good conversation. I have also added you to my blog roll.
I would have to agree that Scripture clearly states that everyone will not believe. I also understand that the whole world has natural revelation to point them to a Creator in order for them to seek Him and receive special revelation (Rom. 1; Ps. 19). However, concerning us being given the gift of faith, I am not sure I can agree on that. I don't think Eph. 2:8-9 states that faith is the gift. In that passage faith is a feminine noun and that is a neuter pronoun. If I understand grammar correctly, faith cannot be the gift. I seem to believe a more accurate translation would be "For by grace are you being saved through the channel of faith." According to Rom. 6:23 the gift of God is salvation (eternal life), not faith.
As for my position, I hold to an infralapsarian position; election after the provision (unlimited atonement but limited redemption). I believe this to be the biblical order, even in Genesis (man created, man permitted to fall, a provision was made by God). This may be where we disagree, however, I respect your position whatever it may be. Personally, I am trying not to be bias and come to a conclusion based upon any presupposition I already have.
I will have to admit, you have the brand of a good theologian.
Jamie,
I'm glad you enjoy reading some of my posts. I pray they are at least useful in generating thought and conversation. I try to be as irenic as possible.
My understanding of original languages is amateur at best but I do have several guys I consult from time to time. If what I've heard is true and if I understand the way it's been explained, the entire first clause of verse 8 is what is being referred to as a gift. Neither noun, "grace" nor "faith" are neuter, so if the the pronoun "it" (being neuter) can't refer to faith then it can't refer to grace either. That is why some have concluded that "it" refers back to the whole of the first clause. I think the translation you suggested is good, but when verse 9 is added, both the grace and the channel through which it comes are shown to be gifts; in other words, the whole process is gracious.I think Rom. 6:23 states eternal life as being the gift of God but not to the exclusion of the means God uses to make it happen.
I think the question to ask may be this, if the faith to believe isn't given as a gift to us by God (and it is our faith, we actually believe but we are given the ability to do so) then in the end, why do some decide to believe and some don't? What, or who, is the determining factor?
My position would be: regeneration precedes faith. God gives individuals the ability to believe, then they necessarily do, so that the good works that were prepared for us to do actually and certainly get done (Eph. 2:10).
I appreciate the compliment, I certainly enjoy studying theology, and I pray that my study is to the glory of God. I must admit that, unlike you during our interactions, I have been less than gracious in my recent past as I have discussed this issue in particular, first from a perspective probably similar to yours and now from the perspective to which I currently adhere. During our interactions you have been most gracious, even though we may disagree. There's a lot to be said for that. I pray that my passion for the theology to which I hold will be tempered with the love of Christ when I discuss it with others.
By the way, What is your blog?
Well Jason, I believe that we all have, by nature, the tendency to defend our position as if it is the only one legitimate. I have learned over the years that I am not always right. I think humility goes along way in understanding and obtaining wisdom, and I could use more of both. Furthermore, as brothers in Christ we should make every effort to communicate with love whether we agree or not. I have only been studying the Scriptures for a relatively short period of time and, therefore, have many issues to work through concerning theology. I appreciate your patience in dealing with a novice.
My blog site is http://mephibosheth611.wordpress.com
I try to keep it simple because I am simple minded :)
I am still working through the Eph. 2 passage. The word "it" is added by the translators, so it is not there in the original Greek. I will continue to ponder that thought. I guess my question would be, if regeneration precedes faith, would that limit salvation? My second question arises from, or depends on, the answer of the first. If salvation is limited then how did the Pharisees pass over the love of God (Lk. 11:42)? In other words, how could God desire the salvation of all if He limited it only to the elect (2 Pet. 3:9)? I would love to hear your thoughts when you get time. Please do not let me bog you down; answer at your convenience.
Jamie
Jamie,
Yeah, I think sometimes it's better to be humble and loving than it is to be right...it's always right to be humble and loving.
That's not an easy thing for me to say and it's only by God's grace that I can. I love defending what I think is true but sometimes I seem to forget God's greatest command in the process. What ultimate good is it to have truth without love, or vice-versa?
It is a pleasure to me to discuss theology. It used to be that I didn't like it as much when discussing it with someone with whom I might have disagreed. Perhaps God has made me not care so much about being right. Yes, we are to make a case for what we believe, as it were, but I am more confident in God defending Himself better than I can :) Of course He uses us as means to proclaiming His truth. It's just that I recently don't feel like the weight of that proof is on my shoulders entirely. Why I ever thought that (deep down) I have no idea. Seems kind of silly now.
On Eph. 2, I misspoke, the "...and this..." I believe refers back to the items in the first clause.
If regeneration precedes faith, then yes, salvation is limited in the sense that God (for His own glory in the end, and I don't pretend to understand it)doesn't intend that everyone one would believe because if He had, then everyone would believe. So, limited in that way, yes.
In the context of Luke 11, Jesus seems to be chiding the Pharisees because they attend the appearance of the outside and did not deal with the heart, their own hearts. They tithe from their goods (something that is more outwardly praised by other men) and yet they neglect the justice that is provided for the poor infirm and the lowly in the Law, they neglect to show love and justice for those to whom the benefits of the tithe might go. Maybe this was not what you were getting at but I think the verse is about the Pharisees refusing to love others, not that they have refused the love of God for themselves.
As for 2 Pet. 3:9, the context seems to show that Peter is talking to believers about all who will eventually believe. The passage is concerning the "apontasis", it's really not a passage that explicitly addresses the scope of the atonement. It really addresses the fact that God has not forgotten His promise to return, it's just that He has not called in all those who will be saved. Because of those who would mock God for not having returned and for not having kept His promise (or so they thought) Peter had to reassure believers that God will not be mocked and He will keep His promise. In verse 1, Peter notes that he is writing to believers. Verse 9 says "...but is patient toward you...". So I take that to mean that God is patient toward those He has elected for salvation since Peter doesn't seem to be talking about all people in the previous 8 verses.
Well, that's all I got for now. I hope it clarifies what I think about the passages you mentioned.
Jason,
It is good to be able to discuss these issues with you; I appreciate your answers concerning my questions. It sounds like you may hold a similar position with Wayne Grudem.
I look forward to discussing other issues with you. Maybe we could meet up sometime for conversation about things not concerning theology. :)
Jamie
Jamie,
It's my pleasure to answer questions. I just hope the answers are clear. I'd say my theology is similar to Grudem in many respects...there are a few things I'd disagree with him over. How have you become familiar with Grudem?
I'd like to get together sometime, maybe lunch some Saturday or dinner some evening. By the way, where do you go to church?
Jason,
I am familiar with Grudem's Systematic Theology text; I have it and use it in my personal study. I was required to have it for a class and found it to be a good book. I do not agree on some issues, but overall it is a good addition to my library.
I attend church at Reedy Creek Baptist in Lexington. I currently live in the Reedy Creek area. I have been occasionally filling the pulpit at Big Oak Christian Church in Biscoe, NC for a few months now. Big Oak is a small work looking for a pastor, so I have been praying for the Lord's direction.
Lunch or an evening meal would be great. I would really enjoy getting reacquainted. It has been such a long time since high school, and I remember very little of that.
Where are you attending church, and do you live close by?
Jamie
Jamie,
What class required the grudem sys theo? Was it at PBC? When do you graduate?
I have furniture market next week, so I'm pretty busy through the end of the month but I'd love to meet one evening. I'll have to let you know.
We go to redeemer Pres. on Miller St.
I was required to have it in sys. theo. 1 at PBC. I am due to graduate this spring but I will be a few credit hours short, so maybe by summer of 2010. I began in 2006, so I am not complaining.
I am extremely busy this week and next as well, but let me know when you would like to meet.
I hope the market goes well.
Jamie
Post a Comment