Featured Faith? Where does it come from?

Hi again dear Brother,

I have seen that question, matter of fact, Paul himself posted it, "7 For who maketh thee to differ from another? and what hast thou that thou didst not receive? now if thou didst receive it, why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not received it?". These are rhetorical questions and the answer is obviously God, but if as you contend we become saved with the cause being our faith, then it would be us, not God, who ultimately makes us "differ from another" (the unregenerate), thus your theology is contrary to 1 Corinthians 4:7 and must be false.

According the dictionary, empirical means, "verifiable by observation", but praying for some circumstance with the result later happening in one's life is not empirical evidence because one can argue the fact that it ended up happening was only a chance occurrence or a result of something the person did that bought about the result (such as praying for a healing and a doctor performs surgery and the person is subsequently healed). You cannot prove God empirically caused this because he is "spiritual" and unseen not "earthy". This passage sums it up, "12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual.14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned." (1 Corinthians 2:12-14). I want you to notice two things, first the person must receive "the spirit which is of God" in order "that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God". The gospel is one of those things we "know" by faith because we first have the Spirit that "is freely given to us of God", therefore it is "freely given to us".

You are violating what Paul said that we should be doing "comparing spiritual things with spiritual" to come up with your teaching that faith is innate in men. Faith in earthly natural things are not the same as spiritual things such as having faith in God who is spirit. You are comparing faith in natural earthly things to faith in spiritual things (God).

God changed me from an unbeliever to a believer by a divine sovereign quickening that immediately resulted in faith being imparted to me as I was given life as Jesus said, "It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing (John6:63). Jesus here speaks of the "quickening" the Spirit performs. Life must precede action, therefore being born again must precede faith. Do you believe it is our flesh that has faith in God

I do not deny men has the innate ability to have faith in a false God such as Allah and subsequently carry out terrible acts in the name of their religion and belief. Scripture supports we all hav an innate ability to have faith in lies and false Gods before becoming born again because "the carnal mind is at enmity against God" and "in me that is in my flesh dwelleth no good thing". The fact that man has an innate ability and is so susceptible to believe such lies in false religions and indeed many do and so few believe the true gospel, I would argue is actually evidence that God must regenerate the person and give them faith to trust the true God of the Bible and his promises. The example you gave of people having faith in a lie and false religion is only further proof to support what scriptures says that the carnal mind "is at enmity against God" and cannot be subject to the law of God. It is not analogous to the opposite faith of being "fully persuaded" in the unseen true God the Father of the bible. Believing a lie and believing the truth can never be analogous, but are more similar to an oxymoron in my opinion.

God bless,

Brother Joe

 

Faith is just a measurement of obedience.

 

Regarding 2 Peter 2:1 and your claim it is referring to those teaching particular redemption,

"1) Derive soteriological truths from soteriological passages (this isn't);
2) "Lord" is δεσπότης (despotes--sovereign title) not κύριος (kurios--soteriological title);
3) Is this the Father or the Son? Can it be proven?
4) "bought" (ἀγοράζω) has no purchase price mentioned, which would be the only time that happens in the NT *if* this is a soteriological reference;
5) The passage says the Master did not *potentially* purchase these men, but that He did, in fact, purchase these men (sovereignty, not redemption). Compare Deuteronomy 32:5-6 for parallel use in the OT.
6) Derive the extent of the atonement from Hebrews that discusses it, not from 2 Peter's reference to false teachers. " (source http://reformationtheology.com/2008/01/does_2_peter_21_deny_particula.php)

 

Brother DHK,

One more final post on 2: Peter 2:1 to dispel your erroneous interpretation and commentary sources you have cited,

The following is from a commentary article on this verse titled "2 Peter 2:1 and Universal Redemption" by Simon Escobedo III. If interested, the whole article can be found here http://vintage.aomin.org/2PE21.html

"To summarize this argument, then: in the thirty New Testament occurrences, where the Greek term agorazo is used (this is the greek word for the word "bought" in the verse), only five texts are clearly and indisputably redemptive (2 Peter 2:1 being the lone exception). Furthermore, in these five instances, there are seemingly three undeniable contingencies or features that strengthen the redemptive contexts. Namely, a) the purchase price or its equivalent is stated in the text (i.e., the blood, the Lamb; cf., 1 Cor. 6:20; 7:23; and Rev. 5:9), or the purchase price is implicit in the immediate context (Rev. 14:3, 4); b) redemptive markers or language is used, and b) in every case the context is restrictive to believers (cf. 1 Cor. 6:20; 7:23; 5:9; and 14:3, 4). None of these features or contingencies are to be found in 2 Peter 2:1.

It has been demonstrated that the term “Master” (despotes) refers to an owner in a master- slave relationship. The meaning here is not of Christ as Savior or Mediator (despotes is never used as a redemptive title), but to Christ (or the Father) as Sovereign. It has also been demonstrated that the term “bought” (agorazo) in the New Testament is most frequently used in non-redemptive contexts. When used redemptively there are specific pointers that are conspicuously absent in 2 Peter 2:1 (such as the purchase price, believers as the lone object, or the presence of other mediatorial or redemptive features). Since this is so, it of necessity eliminates the assumed non-Reformed interpretation, at the very least, as the only viable interpretation of 2 Peter 2:1

In Conclusion

We are left then with two possible understandings to the text:

1. The term is being used redemptively. Hence these were men who were bought by Christ (purchased, redeemed) but lost their salvation when they became apostate.

2. The term is being used non-redemptively; hence Peter is not addressing the extent of the atonement, but is providing an OT example (similar to Deut. 32:5-6) of a sovereign master (despot) who had purchased slaves and on that basis commanded their allegiance. "

 

Brother DHK,

Is the source of the good fruit faith in God derived by a man from a good thing in a man or bad thing in a man, from where does this faith come if it is possessed by one prior to being born again, does it come from our flesh or our mind?

 

Good question brother Sov, and if it is "innate in man", I would ask further what part of man, the flesh, the mind?

 

It can come out of fear of judgement, it can come from knowledge of the damage sin causes. It can come from gratitude of realizing what Christ has done for us. Everyone is different and God may use a unique way to turn us towards Him. Wether it be tragedy or even a kind gesture. What ever it is, it breeds in us a desire to please God through obedience.

 

For if by one man's offence death reigned by one; much more they which receive abundance of grace and of the gift of righteousness shall reign in life by one, Jesus Christ. For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous. Rom 5:17,19

Is the above obedience of faith?

Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers; But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot: Who verily was foreordained before the foundation of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you, 1 Peter 1:18-20 KJV

Who was Jesus being obedient to? What did his obedience pertain to? Whose faith was manifested by that obedience?

being declared righteous freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God did set forth a mercy seat, through the faith in his blood, for the shewing forth of His righteousness, because of the passing over of the bygone sins in the forbearance of God -- Romans 3:24,25 YLT

Who was obedient to whose faith through which man can be declared righteous?

The God of Jews only is He, and not also of nations? yes, also of nations; since one is God who shall declare righteous the circumcision by faith, and the uncircumcision through the faith. Rom 3:29,30

Col 1:27 YLT to whom God did will to make known what is the riches of the glory of this secret among the nations -- which is Christ in you, the hope of the glory,

Is that our belief? Why do we believe, what the word of God states?

The OP: Faith, where does it come from. ------- I might add; What is it and where does it come from?

 

Faith is not some magical thing. It is simple obedience to the truth.

 

1. If I remember correctly you introduced Clarke not me.
2. He doesn't speak on behalf of particular redemption.
3. He leaves the reader with the impression that the false teacher's wrong is a teaching that "some may perish for whom Christ died," in that Christ died for all, whereas the Calvinist teaching is that all that Christ died for will not perish.

 

Absolutely none. Therefore God would never give the unregenerate His spiritual gifts or His fruit of the Spirit which you steadfastly maintain.
Faith is listed as a spiritual gift along with "Apostles, teachers, prophets, healers, workers of miracles, etc.
Why wouldn't God make an Apostle or a prophet out of an unregenerate person? It was a spiritual gift. The position is absurd.

 

Like I said, I am not playing this game.
I tell you what. Perhaps I might give you a full exposition of the chapter so you have the context when you stop taking 1Cor.2:14 out of its context. The context of 1Cor.2:14 is to the Corinthian believers who were carnal believers. In order to see that you must take into consideration the full chapters of two and three of 1Corinthians. When you start doing that, then I will consider your request here.

Otherwise the believers that Peter was writing to had to put up with false teaching as you allude to, one of which is itemized in the first verse. Your problem is that you don't want it classified as a false teaching. That I can't help you with.

 

Nothing Rippon suggested you do was a game.

 

1Cor.4:7 deals with humility, not faith. Paul is contrasting his life to the lives of the false teachers that the Corinthians had been listening to. Faith is not even mentioned there. It really is a non sequitor.
The heart of the question asked in verse 7 is "why did you glory"?
The only comment on this verse by MacArthur is:

When I talk to the unsaved, especially about evolution and the origins of the earth, I use some of the arguments that you have put forth.
1. Science deals with empirical facts, verifiable by observation.
2. For anything to be in the realm of science it must be verifiable.
3. The "big bang" was not seen, cannot be verified. No one was there. Therefore it is in the realm of the metaphysical and must be taken by faith. As much science is thrown at it, it is still a matter of faith.
4. Creation also is a matter of faith and provides a better frame of reference of how this world came into existence. I would rather put my faith in Creation than in the big bang, for belief that order comes out of chaos is also contrary to the laws of science.

God doesn't give us the "faith" to believe in either one. We simply accept it by faith. It is confidence in the word of another. The unsaved scientist takes the word of those who have taught him and blindly believes them. I have put my confidence in the Word of God and believe what God has taught me. I believed in creation before I was saved. But after I went to college (not Christian), I began to change my mind. Not until I knew the Bible was I able to have confidence in the One who wrote the Bible that creation was true.
Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God.

Paul and the other authors of the Bible make such comparisons in the Bible quite frequently.
Consider all the metaphors that Christ used of himself, calling himself:
The Door, The light of the world, The good shepherd, living water, bread from heaven, manna, The vine, etc. He compared himself to many natural or carnal things. Does that mean that Christ is carnal? By your reasoning the answer would have to be yes.
Faith is faith--confidence or trust in the word of another. God doesn't come down and give an unbeliever something that is different from everyone else: a supernatural way of believing in Him. Impossible. The only reason you would say this is because you believe in a twisted doctrine of Total Inability. Perhaps that is where you should start examining the scheme of things.

How was the nature of faith changed? There is only a change of life after salvation not before. If it happens before, then salvation must be by works; reformation not regeneration.

But instead of focusing his attention and faith upon Allah, if he had put his faith in Christ he could have been saved. His life would have been changed as a result. He would bear the fruit of the Spirit and see at once the horrible doctrine and actions of what he once believed.

God bless,

Brother Joe[/QUOTE]