Faith is not a choice

[The Biblicist]

That doesn't contradict what I said.

I believe Romans 4:16 does though! I don't think I am being ureasonable in saying that at all. What if we read it like you really mean it - "it is of man that it might be by grace"! Isn't that what you really mean because you believe faith is of man not of or by grace?

 

[webdog]

I believe Romans 4:16 does though! I don't think I am being ureasonable in saying that at all. What if we read it like you really mean it - "it is of man that it might be by grace"! Isn't that what you really mean because you believe faith is of man not of or by grace?

Not at all. The very fact all that is required is faith, and God is the author of that faith is all grace. Everything we need and have for salvation is of grace.

 

[The Biblicist]

Not at all. The very fact all that is required is faith, and God is the author of that faith is all grace.

Ok, if I understand what you are saying correctly, you are saying that "God is the author of that Faith"! Is that what you are saying? Then faith is of grace if faith has its source with God as its author?

 

[Winman]

Look at the text again! The promise is "of faith" but if faith were "of works" or "of man" as you demand, he could not go on to say it is "by grace" because grace does not originate with man or of man's works. It is "of faith" because faith originates with God's grace and that is why it is "by grace" that the promise is obtained.

So it is saying the very exact opposite of what you are saying. Furthermore, because it is "OF FAITH" it is "SURE" = CERTAIN to all the seed. This also contradicts your definition of faith since your kind faith has NO CERTAINTY so anything that is "OF" your kind of "FAITH" cannot be "sure"!

There are only two ways to receive salvation from God, either you work for it, or you receive it by faith.

If you work for salvation, then salvation is merited or earned and cannot be by grace.

Therefore the opposite must be true, salvation must be received by faith to be by grace. This is what Paul is saying, no matter how you try to twist scripture.

Paul didn't say, "Therefore it is of grace, that it might be by faith" as you try to falsely teach. No, God said it is of faith, that it might be by grace.

Once again, Calvinism teaches the EXACT OPPOSITE of scripture.

As for the promise being SURE, or course it is, I agree 100%. But we must believe that by faith, and faith is believing what is not seen.

It would be like loaning a stranger your car. You believe him by faith that he will return it. While he is gone with your car, you are in a state of faith, believing he will return it as promised.

The moment he returns the car and gives you the keys, you can no longer believe him by faith to return you car, now you know for an absolute certainty that he returned the car.

Faith is depending on someone's promise. You do not depend on something you have in your hand at the moment. Of course, all of God's promises are SURE, because God cannot lie. Nevertheless, we must wait by faith for the fulfillment of those promises.

And anybody who says they have never doubted ever is completely full of bunk, or else they are crazy. Even John the Baptist doubted Jesus, and he was a prophet who was shown who Jesus was by the Holy Spirit.

Mat 11:2 Now when John had heard in the prison the works of Christ, he sent two of his disciples,
3 And said unto him, Art thou he that should come, or do we look for another?

When John the Baptist was thrown in prison, he became discouraged and began to doubt. He sent messengers to ask Jesus if he was the promised Christ, or should they look for another.

This was AFTER the Holy Spirit had revealed to John that the Holy Spirit would lite on the Christ.

Jhn 1:32 And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him.
33 And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.
34 And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God.

The Holy Spirit himself had told John the Baptist that he would see the Spirit descending and remaining on the Son of God, and yet John doubted later.

Of course, you are so full of yourself that you probably believe you are better than John the Baptist.

 

[The Biblicist]

There are only two ways to receive salvation from God, either you work for it, or you receive it by faith.

There are not "two ways" but only "one" way and there never has been two ways for sinners because they already are sinners. Being a sinner eliminates any other way but grace.

If you work for salvation, then salvation is merited or earned and cannot be by grace.

Therefore the opposite must be true, salvation must be received by faith to be by grace. This is what Paul is saying, no matter how you try to twist scripture.

I am sorry, but your logic makes no sense to me. Indeed, what you are saying directly contradicts your position. Faith is either "of man" or "of God" as there are no other options. Faith is either "of works" or "of grace" as there are no other options. If faith is "of man" then it is "of works" as grace cannot originate with fallen men. If faith is "of God" then it is "of grace" but if it is "of man" then it is "of works" as fallen man is never the source of grace and "saved through faith" could not be "by grace" as grace and works cannot be mixed (Rom. 11:6)

 

[Winman]

There are not "two ways" but only "one" way and there never has been two ways for sinners because they already are sinners. Being a sinner eliminates any other way but grace.

You know what I meant.

Paul is simply saying salvation must be received by faith to be by grace. If a man were to work for salvation, then salvation would be by merit.

I am sorry, but your logic makes no sense to me. Indeed, what you are saying directly contradicts your position. Faith is either "of man" or "of God" as there are no other options. Faith is either "of works" or "of grace" as there are no other options. If faith is "of man" then it is "of works" as grace cannot originate with fallen men. If faith is "of God" then it is "of grace" but if it is "of man" then it is "of works" as fallen man is never the source of grace and "saved through faith" could not be "by grace" as grace and works cannot be mixed (Rom. 11:6)

Faith is simply believing God's promise, just as you would believe a friend's promise.

Now, faith in Christ is like faith in anyone else, it comes to us by the same kind of mental processes, and is based upon simple principles and plain matters of fact, and needs no vision of the night.

Here Charles Spurgeon compares faith in Jesus to faith "in anyone else" and he is correct. It is like faith in your parents, or your spouse, a brother or sister, or a close friend. You trust these persons because you know they love you and will never do anything to hurt you.

On the other hand, you may know someone who is a thief and a liar. You know by experience not to trust this person.

Our faith in Jesus comes from reading the word of God. We can read how loving and compassionate Jesus was, how he healed those who were sick, and died to save us from our sins. We can hear his words and clearly "Never spake man like this man" (Jhn 7:46)

But notice Spurgeon says that faith in Jesus comes to us by mental processes, and is based upon simple priniciples and matters of fact.

http://www.spurgeon.org/sermons/1031.htm

I am not a big fan of Spurgeon, but he is correct here.

Faith IS a gift in the sense that if God did not reveal himself to us through his word, then we could not possibly believe on Jesus. You cannot believe what you do not know. Paul says this very thing in Romans 10:14;

Rom 10:14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher?

There is not another verse of scripture in all the Bible that directly asks, "AND HOW SHALL THEY BELIEVE IN HIM?" as this verse does.

Does Paul ask how shall they believe unless they are supernaturally regenerated to have the ability to believe? NO, Paul does not mention being regenerated in order to believe here or anywhere else in all of scripture, and this was the PERFECT place to say so if it were true (it is not true).

No, Paul simply asks how they shall believe in him of whom THEY HAVE NOT HEARD? That's it, Paul implies a person simply needs to hear of Jesus to believe in him. He says not one word about the necessity to be supernaturally regenerated to have the ability to believe.

And just a few verses later Paul says faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. God supplies the word of God, and we could not believe without it, but we must do the HEARING.

 

[The Biblicist]

Paul is simply saying salvation must be received by faith to be by grace

You are avoiding the problem I placed before you. JUSTIFYING Faith is either of man or of God. You are saying it is of man yet the Scriptures say no man can come to Christ in faith but those that are given and drawn by God. Scriptures says that faith is the work of God (Jn. 6:29,37-39,44-45; 64-65). Scriptures says Christ is the "author" of faith not man. Romans 4:16 still directly contradicts your interpretation and positon. JUSTIFYING Faith cannot be "by grace" and yet "of man" as the two are directly contradictory as grace does not originate with man but only with God.

 

[The Biblicist]

You are avoiding the problem I placed before you. JUSTIFYING Faith is either of man or of God. You are saying it is of man yet the Scriptures say no man can come to Christ in faith but those that are given and drawn by God. Scriptures says that faith is the work of God (Jn. 6:29,37-39,44-45; 64-65). Scriptures says Christ is the "author" of faith not man. Romans 4:16 still directly contradicts your interpretation and positon. JUSTIFYING Faith cannot be "by grace" and yet "of man" as the two are directly contradictory as grace does not originate with man but only with God.

The lost man is capable of COMMON faith but not Justifying faith. Justifying faith is impossible for the carnal nature as it is at "enmity with God and is not subject to the law of God" and so then those "in the flesh cannot please God" because it requires coming to God initially by faith to please God (Heb. 11:6).

 

[Winman]

You are avoiding the problem I placed before you. JUSTIFYING Faith is either of man or of God. You are saying it is of man yet the Scriptures say no man can come to Christ in faith but those that are given and drawn by God. Scriptures says that faith is the work of God (Jn. 6:29,37-39,44-45; 64-65). Scriptures says Christ is the "author" of faith not man. Romans 4:16 still directly contradicts your interpretation and positon. JUSTIFYING Faith cannot be "by grace" and yet "of man" as the two are directly contradictory as grace does not originate with man but only with God.

Faith doesn't save you, Jesus saves you. It is like a surgeon who says you need an operation on your heart or you will surely die. You believe the doctor and place yourself in his care. He puts you to sleep and operates and fixes the problem with your heart. Did your faith save you? No, the doctor saved you.

Well, Jesus is the great physician, and he will heal your very soul. If you come to him and trust him, he will give you a new heart and make you a new creature. Your faith will not save you, but if you trust Jesus he will.

I am not going to keep arguing with you. If faith was a gift, then Jesus would not have marvelled at the centurions great faith, and he would not have marvelled at his fellow countrymen's unbelief. These two examples alone easily refute your view.

 

[Rippon]

That doesn't contradict what I said.

You said the object of our faith is the gift. Are you referencing Christ as the gift?

 

[The Biblicist]

Faith doesn't save you, Jesus saves you.

That is not the issue! We are not talking about WHO saves you but rather from whence JUSTIFYING faith originates - man or God. The scriptures repeatedly deny your position that it is of man. Common faith is of man but not justifying faith (Jn. 6:29; 37-39; 44-45; 64-65; Heb. 12:2; Philp. 1:29; Heb. 12:2). Romans 10:17 uses the word "rhema" not "logos" and refers to God's word of command as explained clearly by Paul in 2 Cor. 4:6.

You are constantly confusing common faith with justifying faith and they are not one and the same. Common faith is not the "fruit of the Spirit" faith either. Common faith is the faith that the unregenerated man posseses but the "faith OF CHRIST" is faith that originates from Christ as its "author" not from unregenerated men.

You pit scripture against scripture, base your doctrine on unbiblical analogies, story illustrations instead of doctrinal passages that deal directly with this specific subject.

I am not going to keep arguing with you.

You are right we are at an impasse

If faith was a gift, then Jesus would not have marvelled at the centurions great faith, and he would not have marvelled at his fellow countrymen's unbelief. These two examples alone easily refute your view.

What you are failing to grasp is that it is not "great" or "little" faith that saves but the OB JECT of faith. Whenever these adjectives are used it is not speaking about justifying faith but the spiritual gift of "faith" that varies from one child of God to another. Thus having NOTHING to do with thier initial justification but with their faith in God for other things (healing, miracles, etc). So your examples are totally invalid. Miracle faith provides consequences "according to your faith" but salvation is the OBJECT not the size of your faith.

 

[Luke2427]

No, he doesn't comically believe faith = choice. You said we believe we are saved by grace through choice. That is the dumbest thing I think I've heard you say yet.

Your very snide, inflammatory accusation can be turned right back on you.

"Decent people offer substantive critiques or contributions.

All you do here is insult and inflame."

You are so backwards that you don't even see that the VERY thing you accuse me of is the epitome of what you are doing while ACCUSING ME OF IT!!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!

You're out of your depth, Webdog. Everybody knows it.

You prove it time and time again when you make assertions without supporting them.

You just SAY it is the dumbest thing you've heard me say and you don't bother to show WHY.

If you were deeper, you could show why.

If you were better educated on these matters you would not be ABLE to drive-by post like this making claims without providing warrants.

Honestly, bud, seriously- intelligent people just don't do that kind of thing- at least no where near the extent to which you do it- WHICH IS CONSTANTLY.

You are nothing more than a troll.

You do nothing more than drive-by post because you cannot debate these issues.

And it is because, as you have repeatedly proven, that is the limit of your ability.

 

[Luke2427]

So far no one has refuted this, so I'm posting it again.

Jesus:
"I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel." Luke 7:9

He marvelled, and said to them that followed, "Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel."
Matthew 8:10

Bible says that Jesus FOUND FAITH in these people. He marveled at the faith he found in the centurion. If Jesus gave the centurion his faith, why would he marvel at something he gave to him as a gift?

It's about hypostasis.

If you think that Jesus was just omniscience wrapped in human flesh, you will not understand it.

If you understand that the brain of Jesus the MAN was a regular human brain lacking the capacity to contain all the information of the universe, then you will know why that happened.

As a man, Jesus could not lift a ton over his head.
As a man, Jesus did not have all the knowledge of the universe.

As God he did.

This is very complex and I have not even scratched the surface of it but to say that the answer to your question here is a matter of hypostasis.

If you understand hypostasis you'll understand the answer.

 

[webdog]

You are so backwards that you don't even see that the VERY thing you accuse me of is the epitome of what you are doing while ACCUSING ME OF IT!!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!

You're out of your depth, Webdog. Everybody knows it.

You prove it time and time again when you make assertions without supporting them.

You just SAY it is the dumbest thing you've heard me say and you don't bother to show WHY.

If you were deeper, you could show why.

If you were better educated on these matters you would not be ABLE to drive-by post like this making claims without providing warrants.

Honestly, bud, seriously- intelligent people just don't do that kind of thing- at least no where near the extent to which you do it- WHICH IS CONSTANTLY.

You are nothing more than a troll.

You do nothing more than drive-by post because you cannot debate these issues.

And it is because, as you have repeatedly proven, that is the limit of your ability.

Looks like someone got their feelings hurt. When Luke goes to the education card, you know you are right:laugh:

I didn't have to expound on such stupidity...because someone already did! Just wanted to point out your mammoth hypocricy, that is all. You can talk the talk...start walking the walk.

 

[DHK]

It's about hypostasis.

If you think that Jesus was just omniscience wrapped in human flesh, you will not understand it.

If you understand that the brain of Jesus the MAN was a regular human brain lacking the capacity to contain all the information of the universe, then you will know why that happened.

As a man, Jesus could not lift a ton over his head.
As a man, Jesus did not have all the knowledge of the universe.

As God he did.

This is very complex and I have not even scratched the surface of it but to say that the answer to your question here is a matter of hypostasis.

If you understand hypostasis you'll understand the answer.

You are looking too deep. It has nothing to do with hypostasis. The subject is faith, a very simple subject.
Here is his post once again:

So far no one has refuted this, so I'm posting it again.

Jesus:
"I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel." Luke 7:9

He marvelled, and said to them that followed, "Verily I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel."
Matthew 8:10

Bible says that Jesus FOUND FAITH in these people. He marveled at the faith he found in the centurion. If Jesus gave the centurion his faith, why would he marvel at something he gave to him as a gift?

What did Jesus find? You guys are playing a game of semantics. Jesus was not on a treasure hunt! He didn't find anything. That is not how the word is being used. He "observed."

The word hyoorisko simply means: "to find (literally or figuratively):—find, get, obtain, perceive, see."
He perceived; he saw.



My grand-daughter was here today. She ran to me and jumped into my arms. She had the faith, trust, confidence to do that; that which she would not do with a stranger. She is only three. But she knows who I am, so she will gladly run to me.

Others can observe that. Jesus observed this about the Centurion. IOW, he said, "I have not "found" (observed) such great faith in Israel." He was a Roman soldier, a worshiper of idols. Israel knew the law, the OT, had studied of the miracles of Moses and the prophets, were expecting a Messiah to come. They had been following Christ and most of them had already seen his miracles and heard his words.

The Centurion had also seen some of his miracles, for he trusted Jesus to heal his child. But not only did he trust him to heal the child, he trusted him to heal the child from a distance. What faith he had compared to the others! This is what Christ observed. It was a comparison. And the faith of this man who was a Roman soldier, his faith, he put in Christ, the object of his faith.

It is the object of the faith that is important.

He didn't believe with God's faith; but with his own faith.

He put his faith in Christ, the object of his faith. And thus Christ marveled (as a man).



Really, it is not a difficult passage. It demonstrates faith, and what it is.

 

[Herald]

Rick,

I just do not get your gravity analogy. Yes. I do not have to believe in gravity for gravity to have an effect on me. I can deny gravity's existence if I so choose. It would be illogical to do so, but I can deny it. But even if I affirm its existence and physical effects, I still choose to do so. Just because something is a fact does not mean there is no volition on my part in giving assent to that fact.

The Bible says:

Hebrews 11:6 And without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is and that He is a rewarder of those who seek Him.

The word for "faith" is pistis. The word for "believe" comes from the same Greek root. Faith does not exist as a static abstract. Faith requires its verb form - "believe".

 

[The Biblicist]

The problem that no one has yet rightly addressed is that the fallen human nature will not believe or come to Christ by faith (Rom. 8:7-8) as it is in a state of war and resistance. Hence, faith in Christ is not something that can originate with fallen man due to man's nature. Here lies the problem with common faith that lost people exercise every day in regard to many other things.

Arminians who acknowledge total depravity admit that a special work of the Holy Spirit is necessary to deal with this impasse of the fallen nature. Hence, they argue that some kind of enablement occurs when the gospel is preached that provides the freedom of the fallen man to come to Christ.

Hence we both agree that some kind of enablement occurs due to intervention by God in some way so that the will is freed from its bondage to sin to come to Christ.

However, it is the nature of that enablement that divides us. We say that enablement is the work of God in giving and drawing a person to Christ which is always effectual while in other cases it is "worldly sorrow" that results in denial or false professions.

We say that the ability of fallen man to come to Christ by faith is due to the direct word of command by God (Rom. 10:17 "rhema") that creates a beleiving heart within his elect (2 Cor. 4:6; Ezek. 26:26-27; 2 Cor. 3:3) in connection with the preaching of the gospel (1 Thes. 1:4-5).

 

[Revmitchell]

The problem that no one has yet rightly addressed is that the fallen human nature will not believe or come to Christ by faith (Rom. 8:7-8) as it is in a state of war and resistance. Hence, faith in Christ is not something that can originate with fallen man due to man's nature. Here lies the problem with common faith that lost people exercise every day in regard to many other things.

Arminians who acknowledge total depravity admit that a special work of the Holy Spirit is necessary to deal with this impasse of the fallen nature. Hence, they argue that some kind of enablement occurs when the gospel is preached that provides the freedom of the fallen man to come to Christ.

Hence we both agree that some kind of enablement occurs due to intervention by God in some way so that the will is freed from its bondage to sin to come to Christ.

However, it is the nature of that enablement that divides us. We say that enablement is the work of God in giving and drawing a person to Christ which is always effectual while in other cases it is "worldly sorrow" that results in denial or false professions.

We say that the ability of fallen man to come to Christ by faith is due to the direct word of command by God (Rom. 10:17 "rhema") that creates a beleiving heart within his elect (2 Cor. 4:6; Ezek. 26:26-27; 2 Cor. 3:3) in connection with the preaching of the gospel (1 Thes. 1:4-5).

With the exception of the use of the word "arminian" this is the first honest post I have seen from you regarding what non cals believe. Thank you for that bit of honesty. I would also add that with the exception of it "is always effectual" everything you say "we say" is my position as well.

 

[percho]

The problem that no one has yet rightly addressed is that the fallen human nature will not believe or come to Christ by faith (Rom. 8:7-8) as it is in a state of war and resistance. Hence, faith in Christ is not something that can originate with fallen man due to man's nature. Here lies the problem with common faith that lost people exercise every day in regard to many other things.

Arminians who acknowledge total depravity admit that a special work of the Holy Spirit is necessary to deal with this impasse of the fallen nature. Hence, they argue that some kind of enablement occurs when the gospel is preached that provides the freedom of the fallen man to come to Christ.

Hence we both agree that some kind of enablement occurs due to intervention by God in some way so that the will is freed from its bondage to sin to come to Christ.

However, it is the nature of that enablement that divides us. We say that enablement is the work of God in giving and drawing a person to Christ which is always effectual while in other cases it is "worldly sorrow" that results in denial or false professions.

We say that the ability of fallen man to come to Christ by faith is due to the direct word of command by God (Rom. 10:17 "rhema") that creates a beleiving heart within his elect (2 Cor. 4:6; Ezek. 26:26-27; 2 Cor. 3:3) in connection with the preaching of the gospel (1 Thes. 1:4-5).

They are called, given the word of truth, by the Spirit of truth enabling them to become believers.

What enabled them to be given the Spirit of truth was Jesus the Christ going away in death. However had his Father not raised him from the dead, his going away in death would be vain, you would still be in your sins, your faith vain; See 1 Cor. 15:17 See Gal. 2:21

Faith of Jesus plus Grace of God the Father equals the righteousness of God.

 

[The Biblicist]

With the exception of the use of the word "arminian" this is the first honest post I have seen from you regarding what non cals believe. Thank you for that bit of honesty. I would also add that with the exception of it "is always effectual" everything you say "we say" is my position as well.

I take exception to your accusation that I am dishonest. That is another personal attack that has no basis. I have never denied anything in that post and to say I have is simply false.

This may be the first time I have expressed it in these exact words but I have never denied anything stated here. DHK's post called for this summary and expression.