Faith Re-Visited for the ???? time

[Andy T.]

4. and my message and my preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power,
5. so that your faith would not rest on the wisdom of men, but on the power of God.

If Paul's words were not in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, their faith would be in the wisdom of men.

This was a real possibility.

If it were not a real possibility Paul would not have addressed it.

There are two real possibilities and Paul draws their attention to it.

(1) The possibility that their faith would rest on the wisdom of men exist
(2) The possibility that for it not to was based upon Paul's message which was a demonstration of the Spirit and of power.

Nope, the only way they (true believers) could have had faith in the wisdom of men, is if Paul had preached the wisdom of men. Paul didn't, so they didn't.

These verses aren't the 'huge hammer slammer' on God's glory in salvation that you thought they were. In fact, they slam the notion that man somehow gets to share in God's glory in saving His people.

 

[GordonSlocum]

Nope, the only way they (true believers) could have had faith in the wisdom of men, is if Paul had preached the wisdom of men. Paul didn't, so they didn't.

Agree. I have not dissagreed with your statement that you make here. If you feel I did then you have miss understood me.

You acknowledge in your statement that had Paul Preached the wisdom of men they would have had "faith" in the wisdom of men." I agree.


The same "faith" that was exercised in the Power of God could have been in the wisdom of men if as you state and I agree that if Paul's message been in the wisdom of men.

The subject here is the existence of "faith". The same "faith" could have but did not. Because it did not does not negate the possibility Paul states because if it were not real Paul would not have stated it.

 

[psalms109:31]

debt

Nope, the only way they (true believers) could have had faith in the wisdom of men, is if Paul had preached the wisdom of men. Paul didn't, so they didn't.

These verses aren't the 'huge hammer slammer' on God's glory in salvation that you thought they were. In fact, they slam the notion that man somehow gets to share in God's glory in saving His people.

To be eternal in debt to Jesus for our salvation, man can never share in the glory of our salvation.

The wages of our sin is death. To pay our own debt is eternal condemnation.

I boast in Jesus and Him crucified

 

[Andy T.]

Agree. I have not dissagreed with your statement that you make here. If you feel I did then you have miss understood me.

You acknowledge in your statement that had Paul Preached the wisdom of men they would have had "faith" in the wisdom of men." I agree.


The same "faith" that was exercised in the Power of God could have been in the wisdom of men if as you state and I agree that if Paul's message been in the wisdom of men.

The subject here is the existence of "faith". The same "faith" could have but did not. Because it did not does not negate the possibility Paul states because if it were not real Paul would not have stated it.

No, he is not saying that it was a possibility that they have faith in the wisdom of men, because of the fact that Paul preached the Gospel in the power of the Spirit. The "so that" at the beginning of v. 5 indicates a surety. God used Paul, so that their faith would be in the right thing (Christ) and not in vain.

 

[GordonSlocum]

No, he is not saying that it was a possibility that they have faith in the wisdom of men, because of the fact that Paul preached the Gospel in the power of the Spirit. The "so that" at the beginning of v. 5 indicates a surety. God used Paul, so that their faith would be in the right thing (Christ) and not in vain.

And so it is: We disagree

Does the passage say in vain?

or does it say "in order that the faith of you may not be in the wisdom of men"?

The construction of the Greek is clear as to the intent and meaning. Here is a word for word starting with verse 4.

And the speech of me (Paul) and the proclamation of me (Paul) not in persuasive of wisdom words,

But in demonstration of spirit and of power,

In order that the faith of you man not be in the wisdom of men,

But in power of God

The two verses could be translated as follow :

And the speech of me and the proclamation of me [was] not in persuasive of wisdom words in order that the faith of you not be in the wisdom of men, but in demonstration of spirit and of power in power of God.

You may disagree with me and that is fine.

The grammar is clear and states that the possibility exist - for the plural you - to have faith in the wisdom of men.

That tells me that man does by direct inference have faith in that which is not of God but with the correct information that man’s faith can be directed toward God as a result of the “demonstration of spirit and of power of God” the speech and proclamation can in.

We have the ability of faith on the part of the “you” Second person personal pronoun you”

(1) to be in the wisdom of men

Or

(2) to be in the speech and proclamation that is a demonstration of Spirit and Power of God.

 

[Andy T.]

And so it is: We disagree

Does the passage say in vain?

or does it say "in order that the faith of you may not be in the wisdom of men"?

When I say "in vain" I am using shorthand for "in the wisdom of men". Faith in the wisdom of men is vanity. Not sure how this affects the thrust of my previous posts, though.

 

[canadyjd]

You can't divorce verse 5 from verses 1-4. In fact, verse 5 is just the final phrase of one sentence that begins in v. 4.

You are doing quite well Andy. Gordon should continue on in the chapter, and not camp on one verse to try to prove the opposite of what is being taught. Paul goes into more detail of what has actually happened to these believers.

The mysteries of God's wisdom have been revealed through His Holy Spirit (v.12) whom we have receieved so we may know the spiritual "things freely given to us by God".....

Now, notice the similarities between verses 4-5 and verse 13.

(v.4) "and my message and my preaching were not in persuasive words of wisdom, but in demonstration of the Spirit and of power, (v.5) so that your faith would not rest on the wisdom of men, but on the power of God."

(v.13) "which things we also speak, not in words taught by human wisdom, but in those taught by the Spirit, combining spiritual thoughts with spiritual words."

What was the demonstration of the Spirit and Power? That the message of the cross, Christ and Him crucified ((2v.2) would save those who believe (1v.21) Why? because that message is the wisdom of God. We know the message to be true because it is spiritually discerned and we have the mind of Christ (v.16) and have been taught by Holy Spirit (v.13) in order to be able to know the truth.

That is why their faith, and ours, "rests" on the power of God.

peace to youraying:

 

[GordonSlocum]

When I say "in vain" I am using shorthand for "in the wisdom of men". Faith in the wisdom of men is vanity. Not sure how this affects the thrust of my previous posts, though.

The text indicates that "faith" can either be in the wisdom of man or power of God

The point I am making is that the same faith that is in the power of God could be in the wisdom of men.

This faith that Paul speaks of in the power of God which could also be in the wisdom of men is the same faith.

In that it is the same faith poses an interesting situation. If faith is a special gift given to an elect person whereby they are then able to believe in Jesus which suggest that the faith that was given could only be directed toward Jesus resulting is salvation.

So, in that Calvinism teaches this and these verses indicate that the same faith can find its object in the wisdom of men as well as in the power of God, in Christ, creates an impasse for the Calvinist. It suggest in clear terms that any view that believing faith is a special gift where by a regenerated person can only trust in Christ, that this teaching is false.

While I see it as false regardless of these verses they only serve as further evidence that what they say is incorrect.

 

[russell55]

Sorry, double post.

 

[russell55]

So, in that Calvinism teaches this and these verses indicate that the same faith can find its object in the wisdom of men as well as in the power of God, in Christ, creates an impasse for the Calvinist.

You know, if you would read these verses in context, you'd find that the line you keep quoting is not talking about what the object of the faith is. In fact, it states the object of the faith a few verses earlier: Christ and him crucified. The line you're basing your argument on is speaking about what underlies their faith in Christ and him crucified. Their faith in Christ crucified is based not on human wisdom--they didn't get it from intelligent and reasonable listening to an eloquent speaker--but from the powerful work of the Holy Spirit, who used the stumbling message from Paul in their hearts in a mighty way.

Actually, when you use the whole context to understand that line you keep quoting repeatedly, the passage argues quite forcefully for faith in Christ and him crucified being a gift from God that results from the work of the Spirit.

 

[Tom Butler]

If this so called "gift of faith" that does not exist in the Bible unto salvation is spoken of here in your thinking and it is a gift that God infused into a person then how is it that such a special faith can be abused in the mind of Paul as He addresses the content related to the verses at hand. .

Let me isolate the term "gift of faith" and offer this scripture verse:

Phillipians 1:29 "For unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake."

It appears that the saving faith of the believers was given to them.

 

[GordonSlocum]

No, he is not saying that it was a possibility that they have faith in the wisdom of men, because of the fact that Paul preached the Gospel in the power of the Spirit. The "so that" at the beginning of v. 5 indicates a surety. God used Paul, so that their faith would be in the right thing (Christ) and not in vain.

I can see that you like to substitute "not in vain" for the actual words. I will take it that you intend it to be synonymous

There really is no sensible reason that such an issue come up unless it were possible. Paul is only the instrument of the message. It could be you in today’s world and it might very well have been you in your past and continues to be you as well in the present with respect to sharing the Gospel to the lost and teaching the saved.

Let take your wording "so that their faith would be in the right thing (Christ) and not in vain."

Here is how is stack up

(1) faith in the right thing (Christ)
(2) faith not in vain.

Faith takes an object so something it “out there” so to speak that becomes the object of belief, trust, or to believe in.

For faith to be in vain as it is compared to faith in Christ it has to have an object. We would ask this question, “What is the content of the ‘in vainness’ that the faith is placing its trust in.?”

Lost people believe in themselves, theories, philosophies they have learned, and false gospels of different forms of Christianity, cults, and world religions. etc. So, “in vain” covers a lot.

Both cases faith's object is either Christ or in vain things (human wisdom)

Gordon

 

[GordonSlocum]

Let me isolate the term "gift of faith" and offer this scripture verse:

Philippians 1:29 "For unto you it is given in the behalf of Christ, not only to believe on him, but also to suffer for his sake."

It appears that the saving faith of the believers was given to them.

The idea here is opportunity to believe in and suffer for which is supported by the grammar. They were not given saving faith so they could believe but the opportunity to believe. These two words "echaristhaa huper" are set against your understanding and grammatically make it impossible to see the text as teaching "faith" as a gift.

The idea is “you are granted the opportunity” Not only to believe but to suffer. You would have to change the structure of the grammar to support, what on the surface could and I am sure comes across as you have suggested, the idea that faith is a gift in this text. But, no the grammar does not support such a conclusion.

 

[Allan]

The idea here is opportunity to believe in and suffer for which is supported by the grammar. They were not given saving faith so they could believe but the opportunity to believe. These two words "echaristhaa huper" are set against your understanding and grammatically make it impossible to see the text as teaching "faith" as a gift.

The idea is “you are granted the opportunity” Not only to believe but to suffer. You would have to change the structure of the grammar to support, what on the surface could and I am sure comes across as you have suggested, the idea that faith is a gift in this text. But, no the grammar does not support such a conclusion.

I agree Gordon. The sentence structure and context support your argument.

 

[GordonSlocum]

QUOTE=russell55]Well, first off, I'm not sure anyone here believes that faith in the wrong things is a gift from God. Trusting in the wrong things is the natural human condition, but trust in Christ alone for salvation is the supernatural gift. Trust in Christ does not come naturally to us, but is a work of the Spirit.

I don't think the texts you are quoting address where faith in Christ comes from.[/QUOTE]


Russell I don't completely disagree.

Two realms, Satans and God's - Satans is permitted because God is the permitter

But "faith" does not transfer form being an inherient ability of man to a special gift simply because the Object of faith changes.

A lost man's object of faith is self, or other theories, views, etc.

When sinner lost man hears the facts of the Gospel simmer man now has more information to consider. Add to that the convicting ministry of the HS in his heart and the fact that "The Light" sheds light on the subject Sinner man can transfer his faith form the deadness of whatever - to Christ.

Faith always takes an object. You can not have faith in something that does not exist.

How then does the capability to have faith come into existance.

(1) first the capacity is there for man to exersize it all the time and so do we
(2) the gift is not faith but the Grace of God that gives the capacity the object in which to trust, believe, or have faith in.

 

[Andy T.]

Gordon,

You speak as though the believers at Corinth, myself, you and all other believers of all time could have just as easily rejected Christ as believe on Him. That our decision to trust Christ was a 50/50 shot and could have gone either way. I've never met any Christian who described their testimony in such a disinterested fashion. In no way do I gather that Paul was telling the Corinthian believers that they could have just as easily believed in the wisdom of men rather than believe on Christ.

 

[GordonSlocum]

Gordon,

You speak as though the believers at Corinth, myself, you and all other believers of all time could have just as easily rejected Christ as believe on Him. That our decision to trust Christ was a 50/50 shot and could have gone either way. I've never met any Christian who described their testimony in such a disinterested fashion. In no way do I gather that Paul was telling the Corinthian believers that they could have just as easily believed in the wisdom of men rather than believe on Christ.

I think you are missing the point. There really isn't any need for the Holy Spirit to guide Paul to write the words he did unless the possibility where not there.

What does it say? It say the possibility exist give the circumstance that people could and actually do place faith in themselves, other systems, etc. The reason their faith was in the Power of God was because Paul was speaking in the will of God by the power of God's spirit and thus the correct message was given to them.

I am just going with the text which clearly suggest that the possibility exist. There really isn't any reason for it to be recorded for our hearing if it were not possible.

The bottom line of the text is that the same faith exercised to believe in the Power of God could have been the save faith to believe in the other that was not the power of God.

Implication: If, according to some Calvinist (it seems all on here) that "believing faith" is a special gift given to the first regenerated whereby they believe unto saving regeneration that they are in deep trouble from this text which clearly refutes such a notion.

This text clearly indicates that believing faith in the Power of God of which cold have been in the wisdom of men was resident in man and not a special gift given to a regenerated person.

Also, in that the text is clear on that distinction - if we posit the Calvinist view then once the regenerated person is given this special gift of faith they are fee to reject Christ which according to the text is a viable option given other circumstances.

The fact that "faith" in these verses are the same faith weather in the power of God or the wisdom of men clearly does not permit faith to be divided in to a so called human faith vs. a Devine faith.

No the faith spoken of in the text is a faith that exist in the perosns of which can be directed to the Power of God or the wisdom of men. It is the same "faith"

 

[Andy T.]

Gordon, you just keep mispresenting the Cal position. Russell55 corrected you above, but you keep repeating the same strawman. We don't believe that faith is some special substance that God gives us. Before we were saved, He opened our eyes to our sin to the point that we called on Him in faith. It was our faith. And yes, our faith was turned from something else (fill-in-the-blank) to Christ.

No one denies that there are varying possibilities in life. Let's grant that it was possible that the Corinthian believers could have had faith in the wisdom of men. How does that defeat the Cal position? I would argue that if someone dies without faith holding on to the wisdom of men, then they were not elect. You would argue differently. Neither argument is won or lost on these verses.

But you have not in anyway shown that a believer's faith in Christ was conjured up completely by the mere force of the person's will. Up at the beginning of the thread you showed us some Greek that 'you' is a pronoun. Thanks, but I learned that in 4th grade. And as it has been pointed out before, the Cal does not deny that our faith is ours.

 

[GordonSlocum]

Gordon, you just keep mispresenting the Cal position. Russell55 corrected you above, but you keep repeating the same strawman. We don't believe that faith is some special substance that God gives us. Before we were saved, He opened our eyes to our sin to the point that we called on Him in faith. It was our faith. And yes, our faith was turned from something else (fill-in-the-blank) to Christ.

No one denies that there are varying possibilities in life. Let's grant that it was possible that the Corinthian believers could have had faith in the wisdom of men. How does that defeat the Cal position? I would argue that if someone dies without faith holding on to the wisdom of men, then they were not elect. You would argue differently. Neither argument is won or lost on these verses.

But you have not in anyway shown that a believer's faith in Christ was conjured up completely by the mere force of the person's will. Up at the beginning of the thread you showed us some Greek that 'you' is a pronoun. Thanks, but I learned that in 4th grade. And as it has been pointed out before, the Cal does not deny that our faith is ours.

We actually agree on the "fact" that faith is not a special gift as some Calvinist preach and teach. That is good.

That was the only point I was making in the verses. The same faith can be in man or in God. Whatever other systems of Theology teach was not in consideration in my thinking as to what these verses say.

But, for the Calvinist that say and think and teach that "faith" is a special gift I take it you too disagree with that version of Calvinism.

Thank, I think we all learn as we drop our guards and let the Scripture speak for itself.

I thing we have done that at least you and I with respect to the topic of faith.

God Bless - Have to go do some Lock work.

 

[russell55]

But "faith" does not transfer form being an inherient ability of man to a special gift simply because the Object of faith changes.

Nobody says faith (in general) isn't an inherent ability of man. What the natural person doesn't do is see the beauty of Christ, so they don't put their trust in him.

A lost man's object of faith is self, or other theories, views, etc.

Yes, exactly.

When sinner lost man hears the facts of the Gospel simmer man now has more information to consider.

Absolutely. But to the lost person who considers the information, the message of the cross is foolishness or a stumbling block. (Same passage, btw: 1 Corinthians 1:18, 23)

Add to that the convicting ministry of the HS in his heart and the fact that "The Light" sheds light on the subject Sinner man can transfer his faith form the deadness of whatever - to Christ.

Yep, for all those who get the convicting ministry of the Holy Spirit--this passage calls that the call--the message is not foolishness, but the power and wisdom of God. But they not only can transfer their faith to Christ, they do transfer their faith to Christ, because they see the message of the cross for exactly what it is. They understand the power of it. Notice the parallels in chapter 1:

• the message about the cross is foolishness (verse 18)
• we preach about a crucified Christ, a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles (verse 23)

Universally (Jew and Gentile) the gospel message is either foolishness or a stumbling block, with this exception:

• but to us who are being saved (verse18)
• But to those who are called (verse 24)

Notice the parallel between being saved and being called. This is a call that saves. Everyone who is called in this way is being saved, and the next phrases in each text tells you why.

• it is the power of God (verse 18)
• Christ is the power of God and the wisdom of God (verse 24)

Being called (or being saved) makes people see the gospel for what it is: the power and wisdom of God. The ability to see the gospel this way is not natural--naturally we see the gospel as foolishness or a stumbling block. The ability to see the gospel as a valuable thing comes to us as a result of being called (or being saved).

How then does the capability to have faith come into existance.

The abiltiy to have faith in something is always there. It's the ability to have faith in Christ which isn't always there, and that comes through God's call.

(1) first the capacity is there for man to exersize it all the time and so do we

Calvinists don't disagree that people have the ability to have faith in something

(2) the gift is not faith but the Grace of God that gives the capacity the object in which to trust, believe, or have faith in.

.
The gift is the ability to have faith in Christ, not faith in general, and that gift comes to us through the grace of God. Those who receive this gift--those who are called in this way--believe. We know this because this text tells us that those who are called in this way are being saved.

This is why, by the way, that the text can say that it is "by God's doing you are in Christ Jesus, who became for us wisdom from God, and righteousness and sanctification and redemption. . ." (verse 30).

And this is why we don't in boast ourselves, but in the Lord.(verses 29 and 31)