Faith? Where does it come from?

[Craigbythesea]

CBSea,
God saves His people by Covenant....not by works that men do, but rather by the perfect work of the Son.

Not all who were members of OT Israel....were of the Israel of God. These were covenant breakers.
In the NT. all in the New Covenant will be saved, kept by the power of God.

Wisdom...is not scripture at all.....it was rejected by the believing church.

Iconoclast,

Thank you for you gracious reply.

I quoted Wisdom 3:1 to show the continuity from about 750 BCE (the time of the ministry of Isaiah) through the present day of the Judeo-Christian concept of there being protection in the hand of God. I quoted from Isa. 43:13 to show that the protection lasted only so long as the Jews remained in the hand of God (which did not last very long!). Jesus used the concept in John 10:29 to teach that His own hand was the hand of God, and that He and the Father were one. Some unknown person at some unknown time in history began, very imaginatively, using 10:29 to teach a concept that is not so much as hinted at in that verse—that is, the concept that once a person is saved, they cannot lose their salvation.

By the way, is Wisdom 3:1 true, or is it not? The truth is always the truth regardless of who says it or writes it. Much of the content of the Qur’an comes from the Bible. Does its inclusion in the Qur’an make it any less true than it is in the Bible?

 

[Internet Theologian]

Why? Are you a late comer, not been paying attention? I have given scores of verses. Obviously you haven't read any of my posts. Go back and read through the thread I have no intention of making a special exposition for your private eyes only.

You have no Scripture to offer that backs up your false teaching. Not even one. And it is not my eye alone that is beholding your grave error.

 

[Internet Theologian]

Try on this classic from DHK back on 9/28/2008 :"My pet dog trusts me; has faith in me. Did God give him that faith?"

That's quite disturbing but I'm not surprised. One who holds error that deep ought to stop teaching altogether while seeking to be taught and 'deprogrammed' from his Finneyist errors.

 

[SovereignGrace]

I said "faith" not love.

You were the one who first mentioned love in this thread, IIRC.

That is your opinion unsupported by Scripture, at least scripture that you cannot properly expound.

I have shown you many and you disagree with my view, Monsieur.

Salvation is all of God.

Not when you place your innate faith into it, Monsieur.

It is God's gift to man, to be received by faith.

FYI, I do not disagree with this, mon ami.

But God did not give the faith to man.

Au contraire mon frère.

Man is not a robot to have salvation forced upon him.

The ole robot schtick again? Please stop.

He is the one who must choose to receive this gift by his faith.

And then by him using his innate faith you have man doing his part and God doing His. Man has drawn a line that God can not cross. Until he does his, God can not do His part. That is not 'salvation is all of God' mon frère.

 

[SovereignGrace]

I said "faith" not love.

You posted this in post # 86 of this thread:

To use a parallel illustration: One cannot deny that love exists before salvation. A man will love his wife. He will love his parents and other relatives. He will love material things as the rich young ruler did. The object of his love may be something other than Christ.
However, when he becomes saved, the love for one's wife does not diminish, but ought to grow greater. You still love your wife don't you? (I am only assuming you are married). So what is the difference? The love that you have now has a spiritual aspect to it. With a love for Christ (even though your love for Him ought to be first and foremost), He enables you to have an even greater love for your wife.

You first introduced love into this thread, and I also used love to prove my case.

 

[TCassidy]

All who disagree with Calvinism are apostate?

All who ignorantly attack Particular Redemption have fallen away from the Truth of God's word.

 

[TCassidy]

Yes, dead means dead, which means "separated."

Where does the bible say that?

For example, God told Adam "In the day thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die.
Adam ate; Adam died. And then Adam continued to carry on a conversation with God though he was dead. How is that possible? He was separated from God spiritually; not a corpse. Death is separation. He needed to be reconciled.

And who has claimed that spiritual death equates to physical death? Obfuscate, obfuscate, obfuscate.

This is your MO. Rather than honestly addressing the real issue you throw up a lot of smoke and dust to try to obfuscate the issue.

Spiritual death does NOT equate to physical death. NOBODY in this discussion, except you, has made that claim.

Which is separation.

Physical death is when life is separated from the body. Spiritual death is when the spirit is separated from its Creator. That would seem to be self-evident.

And death and hell shall be cast into the Lake of Fire which is the Second Death.
What is death? It is eternal separation from God, in this verse.

More obfuscation.

I didn't say she was. I asked if you put your trust, faith, confidence in her.
Do you trust your wife?
Do you trust God?

Once again you (deliberately?) fail to understand the simple concept of faith. I will try one more time to enlighten you as to the difference between mere fleshly confidence and true bible faith.

The English word "faith" occurs in the form “feyth,” in Havelok the Dane (13th century); and is similar to the Latin "fides" which comes from the Sanskrit root bhidh, meaning “to unite,” “to bind.” It is important to understand this ancient indication of the spiritual work of faith, as that which unites us to God for salvation.

To demean the proper understanding of that great word "faith" by comparing it to mere confidence in the ingenuity of man is indicative of a massive failure to understand what biblical faith actually is. And that is a terrible indicator of the state of doctrinal understanding among some baptists.

Only one brings salvation. Faith is faith. I don't believe God gives spiritual gifts or His fruit to unbelievers, only to believers. Thus God requires of the unregenerate to believe with their faith. As Jesus said: "According to YOUR faith, so be it."

So when God inspired 1 Corinthians 2:14 "Now the natural man doesn’t receive the things of God’s Spirit, for they are foolishness to him, and he can’t know them, because they are spiritually discerned" - was God lying?

What about Romans 8:7 "Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be." Was God lying when He inspired that verse?

The bible says the unsaved man doesn't receive spiritual things but you say he does. The bible says he can't know them but you say he can. The bible says the unsaved man is the enemy of God you say he has faith in the love, sacrifice, and Person of God. The bible says the unsaved man can not be subject to the law of God but you say he can.

Who is right? You or God?

 

[DHK]

That is a classic remark that I will save.
You must have flipped through the pages at a mighty fast pace when you claim you "went through a confession once."

I only dealt with the points that I felt were relevant. So you might not find much.

Just about every post of yours refutes that remark. We have constantly corrected you as to what we believe yet you continue to characterize us with absurdities we have never, nor shall ever hold to.

You can't refute something that is Biblical. When you are wrong you are wrong. You can post a wrong position. That doesn't mean you have refuted me.

 

[DHK]

Try on this classic from DHK back on 9/28/2008 :"My pet dog trusts me; has faith in me. Did God give him that faith?"

More to the point it shows that you need to look in the dictionary and find out what the real definition of faith is. It is not this tangible mystical essence that you think God gives the unregenerate so that they are able to be saved. Where do you come up with these things? The New Age Movement. It isn't the Bible.

 

[DHK]

Yes...I speak the thruth to you...over and over....the others seem to agree with me...who agrees with you?

No one, except a few of your cheer-leaders agree with ad hominems, false accusations, and derogatory posts. Absolutely no one. You live in a dream world.

 

[DHK]

You have no Scripture to offer that backs up your false teaching. Not even one. And it is not my eye alone that is beholding your grave error.

On the contrary. You have never provided any scripture to show that God gives faith to the unregenerate.
No one here has. It is a fact: God doesn't give spiritual gifts or his fruit to the ungodly. Why people here think that is beyond me.

 

[DHK]

And then by him using his innate faith you have man doing his part and God doing His. Man has drawn a line that God can not cross. Until he does his, God can not do His part. That is not 'salvation is all of God' mon frère.

Show me just one example in scripture where it is clear and explicit that God gave man the faith to believe and then the man became regenerated, and then he became saved. There is no example.
Folks here try to use Cornelius.. But that doesn't work. It works against them. Why?

1 Peter 1:23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.
1 Peter 1:25 But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you.
--In order to be born again or regenerated Cornelius had to hear the Word of God, that is the gospel. He had not heard that message until Peter got there even though God had spoken to them.
BTW, here is a good example of a dead man speaking to God, praying to God. So much for that theory.
And yet, he was not born again until he heard the gospel. That is what the scriptures here teach.
The Holy Spirit works through the Word of God to bring a person both regeneration and salvation.
There is no other way.
But the Calvinist has it backwards.

 

[DHK]

All who ignorantly attack Particular Redemption have fallen away from the Truth of God's word.

There are many who don't believe in particular redemption, including Peter who calls it a damnable heresy.

2 Peter 2:1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

 

[walkinspirit]

All who ignorantly attack Particular Redemption have fallen away from the Truth of God's word.

If that means that if I believe Christ died on the cross for the sins of the world and not for the elect only ( as the bible says), than I will gladly concider myself as one who has "fallen away" from Calvins doctrine.

Salvation is offered to all who believe Jesus and even though faith is a gift and the Father draws those who he intends to be saved to Jesus, the sinner has to submit his will and heart to God, because he doesn't draw anyone unwillingly and He doesn't bring anyone to the cross without their consent.

God is not a tyrant, he will not contradict himself he is love he wishes all men come to the saving knowledge of truth and he is holy, he can't do that unless a sinner comes to the cross and believes Jesus as Lord and Savior.

We are spiritually dead in our trans passes and sins and separated from God (in our fallen unregenerated state) that means the spirit but we still have a soul with its faculties functioning in us, we have the choice in our will to accept or not Jesus Christ.

When the Word of God and the gosple is preached the seed of faith is planted on those who open their heart and believe Jesus as their Lord and Saviour.

Calvinists can try as hard as they want, they won't be able to convince the rest of us that human beings have no human responsibility to accept or reject the gosple. It is there in the Bible and we can misinterpret it to fit our man made theology but God still keeps man responsible and excuses him not at all.

Believing that the sinner is a responsible moral being before a holy and just God is what the Bible teaches. It does justice to the character of God.

And all that said I still believe in the doctrine of election or predestination it is taught in the bible as well as the doctrine of God's sovereignty and human responsibility. I can't reconcile them with my finite mind but these truths are reconciled in the Bible and in the mind of God.

Blessings,

 

[DHK]

Where does the bible say that?

It says it in Scriptures like: James 2:26, Eph.2:1; Rev.20:14,15; Rom.6:23, etc.

And who has claimed that spiritual death equates to physical death? Obfuscate, obfuscate, obfuscate.

Not equal, but similar. The are similar in that they both fall under the definition of separation.

This is your MO. Rather than honestly addressing the real issue you throw up a lot of smoke and dust to try to obfuscate the issue.

How is that? If one is speaking of death, then proper meanings must be assigned or there is confusion in the discussion. We are simply talking past each other.

Spiritual death does NOT equate to physical death. NOBODY in this discussion, except you, has made that claim.

When Adam died he was separated from God spiritually. How else could he carry one a conversation with God?

Physical death is when life is separated from the body. Spiritual death is when the spirit is separated from its Creator. That would seem to be self-evident.More obfuscation.

Yes it is self-evident and obviously not "obfuscation."

Once again you (deliberately?) fail to understand the simple concept of faith. I will try one more time to enlighten you as to the difference between mere fleshly confidence and true bible faith.

We don't speak 13th century English. It was hardly English at that time.
Here is a Biblical definition of Faith:

Romans 4:20 He staggered not at the promise of God through unbelief; but was strong in faith, giving glory to God;
21 And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform.
--The person whom the Bible describes as "strong in faith," was "fully persuaded that what God had promised God was able to perform."
Faith is the confidence that what a person has promised a person will do, whether in the secular realm or the spiritual realm.

So when God inspired 1 Corinthians 2:14 "Now the natural man doesn’t receive the things of God’s Spirit, for they are foolishness to him, and he can’t know them, because they are spiritually discerned" - was God lying?

This is a badly misused and misunderstood verse. The context is Christians who have been living a carnal life (1Cor.3:1-5). These verses just precede chapter three.
Thus the context starts primarily with verse 10 and ends with chapter 3, both speaking about Christians not being able to understand anything beyond simple truths of the Word of God:

1 Corinthians 2:10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.
--They were not able to understand the deep things of the Word of God because they were carnal, still babes in Christ, not able to eat meat. They were worldly which means, though they were saved, they often acted like the unsaved. This means that while in that condition they did not receive the things of the Spirit nor did understand them
Note: it says they "did not," not "could not." There is a difference.

What about Romans 8:7 "Because the carnal mind is enmity against God: for it is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be." Was God lying when He inspired that verse?

Writing to Christians, James says:
James 4:4 Ye adulterers and adulteresses, know ye not that the friendship of the world is enmity with God? whosoever therefore will be a friend of the world is the enemy of God.
The carnal mind is emnity against God. And the friend of the world is the enemy of God, though he be a Christian. That is how much God hates the world. Both live in the flesh pleasing the flesh rather than the things of the Spirit of God. Both Paul and James is writing to Christians.

The bible says the unsaved man doesn't receive spiritual things but you say he does. The bible says he can't know them but you say he can. The bible says the unsaved man is the enemy of God you say he has faith in the love, sacrifice, and Person of God. The bible says the unsaved man can not be subject to the law of God but you say he can.

Who is right? You or God?

God is right. Your interpretation is wrong. God is speaking here to Christians living worldly and carnal lives.

If I told you of a Muslim who was given a Bible, and simply by reading the NT he was saved, without any other outside influence how would that affect your interpretation of 1Cor.2:14, when you say "the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God"?
Would you deny his salvation because he would not fit into your preconceived theology?

 

[TCassidy]

Yes it is self-evident and obviously not "obfuscation."

It is when you deliberately confuse the two.

 

[TCassidy]

21 And being fully persuaded that, what he had promised, he was able also to perform.

Exactly the opposite of "neither can he know them" and "receives not the things of the spirit of God." The enemy of God can never be "fully persuaded" while still in his lost state.

 

[Craigbythesea]

If that means that if I believe Christ died on the cross for the sins of the world and not for the elect only ( as the bible says), than I will gladly concider myself as one who has "fallen away" from Calvins doctrine.

Salvation is offered to all who believe Jesus and even though faith is a gift and the Father draws those who he intends to be saved to Jesus, the sinner has to submit his will and heart to God, because he doesn't draw anyone unwillingly and He doesn't bring anyone to the cross without their consent.

God is not a tyrant, he will not contradict himself he is love he wishes all men come to the saving knowledge of truth and he is holy, he can't do that unless a sinner comes to the cross and believes Jesus as Lord and Savior.

We are spiritually dead in our trans passes and sins and separated from God (in our fallen unregenerated state) that means the spirit but we still have a soul with its faculties functioning in us, we have the choice in our will to accept or not Jesus Christ.

When the Word of God and the gosple is preached the seed of faith is planted on those who open their heart and believe Jesus as their Lord and Saviour.

Calvinists can try as hard as they want, they won't be able to convince the rest of us that human beings have no human responsibility to accept or reject the gosple. It is there in the Bible and we can misinterpret it to fit our man made theology but God still keeps man responsible and excuses him not at all.

Believing that the sinner is a responsible moral being before a holy and just God is what the Bible teaches. It does justice to the character of God.

And all that said I still believe in the doctrine of election or predestination it is taught in the bible as well as the doctrine of God's sovereignty and human responsibility. I can't reconcile them with my finite mind but these truths are reconciled in the Bible and in the mind of God.

Blessings,

Thank you, my brother, for this refreshingly accurate post!

 

[TCassidy]

If that means that if I believe Christ died on the cross for the sins of the world and not for the elect only ( as the bible says), than I will gladly concider myself as one who has "fallen away" from Calvins doctrine.

Please don't misrepresent what I said.

Salvation is offered to all who believe Jesus and even though faith is a gift and the Father draws those who he intends to be saved to Jesus, the sinner has to submit his will and heart to God, because he doesn't draw anyone unwillingly and He doesn't bring anyone to the cross without their consent.

Of course the sinner submits to God. That is what regeneration does. It makes the sinner able to do so, to believe, repent, and submit. And nobody has ever said anyone is drawn against his will. That is a deliberate falsehood. He does not force us to go. He makes us willing to go.

God is not a tyrant, he will not contradict himself he is love he wishes all men come to the saving knowledge of truth and he is holy, he can't do that unless a sinner comes to the cross and believes Jesus as Lord and Savior.

Nobody has accused God of being a tyrant. Nobody has accused God of contradicting Himself. 1 Timothy 2:4 "who desires all people to be saved and come to full knowledge of the truth." The Greek word translated "desires" (θελει) is not the normal word used to express God's decretal will but rather a preference. We must understand there is a difference between God's desire and His eternal salvific purpose which transcends His desire.

God does not want men to sin and thus incur His eternal wrath. He would rather they live holy and obedient lives. He hates the consequence of that sin. Yet God, for His own glory, and according to His eternal will, chose to endure "vessels . . . prepared for destruction" for the supreme fulfillment of His will. (Romans 9:22) According to His eternal purpose He chose only the elect out of the world (John 17:6) and passed over the rest leaving them in the consequences of their sin. God's choices are determined by His sovereign, eternal purpose, not His desires.

We are spiritually dead in our trans passes and sins and separated from God ( in our fallen unregenerated state) that means the spirit but we still have a soul with its faculties functioning in us, we have the choice in our will to accept or not Jesus Christ.

Except the fallen soul will always choose rebellion against God and will never, in fact cannot, chose obedience to Him.

When the Word of God and the gosple is preached the seed of faith is planted on those who open their heart and believe Jesus as their Lord and Saviour.

When the word of God and the gospel is preached the Holy Spirit, using the means of gospel preaching, regenerates the dead soul, removes the old cold, dead heart of stone, and replaces it with a living, believing heart of flesh which then opens and believes on Jesus as their Lord and Savior.

Calvinists can try as hard as they want, they won't be able to convince the rest of us that human beings have no human responsibility to accept or reject the gosple.

No "Calvinist" (I am not a Calvinist. I am a Particular Baptist) believes mankind has no responsibility to believe and accept the gospel. Straw man argument.

It is there in the Bible and we can misinterpret it to fit our man made theology but God still keeps man responsible and excuses him not at all.

Yes, it is there in the bible. The unsaved man is the enemy of God, and cannot understand nor accept the things of God. There is none righteous, no not one. There is none that seeks after God.

Salvation is all of God and none of you.

Believing that the sinner is a responsible moral being before a holy and just God is what the Bible teaches. It does justice to the character of God.

Just as everyone in this thread believes.

And all that said I still believe in the doctrine of election or predestination it is taught in the bible as well as the doctrine of Gods sovereignty and human responsibility. I can't reconcile them with my finite mind but these truths are reconciled in the Bible and in the mind of God.

The reason you can't reconcile them is that you have assumed a dichotomy where none exists. Man is responsible for his sin and the consequences thereof. God is Sovereign and elects and predestinates whom He will according to His own good will. Nothing to reconcile. God is in charge.

 

[TCassidy]

There are many who don't believe in particular redemption, including Peter who calls it a damnable heresy.

2 Peter 2:1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

Do you have any understanding at all of what Peter was saying? Peter here warns that the false teachers deny the Sovereign Lordship of Jesus Christ. Their basic error is that they refuse to submit their lives to the rule of Christ. Just as the human master over a household bought slaves and the slaves owed the master allegiance as their sovereign (Deuteronomy 32:5-6). This can be applied to the false teachers who had refused to submit to the authority of God even while claiming to be Christians. Peter mocks their claim by writing of their coming damnation. The passage describes the sinful character of the false teachers who claim Christ but deny His Sovereign Lordship over their lives.

To try to apply that to those of us who believe in the absolute Sovereign Lordship of Christ in salvation is such a vile attack on fellow believers that it merits severe consequences as it is in direct violation of the Baptist Board rules.