Where does believing faith come from part 4

[The Archangel]

They accept the basic truths that have been presented to them. The quote Paul is using is in reference to the "fool" of Psalm 14 who has rejected even that.

God has reached out to man first, even placing them in the perfect location and time in history so man will do just that (Acts 17:25-26)

But that's not what the text is saying. Paul is using a reference and applying it to a much larger context.

And your second statement doesn't explain how a person with an only-evil-continually heart seeks (actively) after God. Unless you are suggesting that everyone has been given a new heart.

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

[webdog]

But that's not what the text is saying. Paul is using a reference and applying it to a much larger context.

And your second statement doesn't explain how a person with an only-evil-continually heart seeks (actively) after God. Unless you are suggesting that everyone has been given a new heart.

Blessings,

The Archangel

Has God put every man in the perfect location and time in history to seek Him? Can He not open a spiritually blind ("...that they may feel their way...") person's heart?

And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place, 27 that they should seek God, in the hope that they might feel their way toward him and find him. Yet he is actually not far from each one of us,

 

[The Archangel]

Has God put every man in the perfect location and time in history to seek Him? Can He not open a spiritually blind ("...that they may feel their way...") person's heart?

And he made from one man every nation of mankind to live on all the face of the earth, having determined allotted periods and the boundaries of their dwelling place, 27 that they should seek God, in the hope that they might feel their way toward him and find him. Yet he is actually not far from each one of us,

Context. Paul is speaking to the context of the Greek Areopagus, which I'm certain you know.

But is your statement what Paul is trying to convey? No. If it was Paul's intent why, then, are there still--2,000 years later--people who have never heard of Christ and, therefore, cannot seek Him?

Your statement makes it seem like seeking God is the thing...not believing in Christ. Certainly, Paul would hold to the absolute necessity of faith in Christ.

Or is it more likely Paul is addressing the people of the Areopagus telling them that this is the time to repent and believe--they have been brought by God to this exact place and time to hear the gospel through Paul.

Clearly, the second option is the better.

And the previous two questions are still, as yet, unanswered.

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

[webdog]

But is your statement what Paul is trying to convey? No. If it was Paul's intent why, then, are there still--2,000 years later--people who have never heard of Christ and, therefore, cannot seek Him?

Non Sequitur due to the fact there is no way for you to prove what you allege, which is a negative.

Your statement makes it seem like seeking God is the thing...not believing in Christ. Certainly, Paul would hold to the absolute necessity of faith in Christ.

They go hand in hand. If one truly seeks God with what He has provided, He will make a way to Christ.

Or is it more likely Paul is addressing the people of the Areopagus telling them that this is the time to repent and believe--they have been brought by God to this exact place and time to hear the gospel through Paul.

I agree with this as well, but it is not an "either/or" scenario.

 

[The Archangel]

They go hand in hand. If one truly seeks God with what He has provided, He will make a way to Christ.

And what has He provided?

Blessings,

The Archangel

 

[Winman]

AresMan;1480066]This is too funny. HOW OFTEN are sovereign gracers chastised about "ALL does not mean ALL" and "WORLD does not mean WORLD" with certain proof texts. However, when a sovereign gracer brings a text that says "NNE," the libertarian free willer attempt to drill from the context that "NNE does not mean NNE."

So, you admit that sovereign gracers often attempt to change the clear meanings of words to suit their doctrine.

I am not saying that the context of the quote from Psalm 14 is specifically targeted to the Gentile oppressors of Israel. However, if you believe that the New Testament is also inspired, you would also have to see that Paul quotes Psalm 14:1c-3 as a reference to the entirety of both Jews and Gentiles as a whole. Because the writing of Paul was God-breathed, he was giving a further manifestation of this passage that it applies to everyone (Rom 3:20,23). Those without the law do not seek after God because they are pagans. Those who have the law do not seek after God because they have a works-based religion that does not save. Everyone does not seek after God for some reason because they seek to please themselves out of paganism or self-righteous "religion."

Because we all know that "ALL does not mean ALL" right?

And you admit that I was correct and that in Psalms 14 "all men" indeed does not mean all men when taken in context.

Why do they do that? Could it be because God is working within and on behalf of those that do?

No, God works from the outside. Jesus knocks on your door and calls to you. But you must open the door of your heart before he comes within. This is a concept you Cals cannot seem to grasp, even when that is what scripture shows.

Rev 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.
This was not just written to the church at Laodicea as Cals falsly argue. It is addressed to "any man".

But you cannot accept the truth shown here. God draws a man, God calls a man. But it is done from the outside through the scriptures or preaching. Only when a man receives Christ of his own free will does the Holy Spirit enter a man and regenerate him.

Remember that earlier one had to repent and be baptized to receive the indwelling of the Holy Spirit (Act 2:38). Also, one could give the Holy Spirit with the laying on of hands (Act 8:16,17). Now, when the Gospel to the Gentiles began, the Holy Spirit simply fell upon people as He willed when the apostles spake (Act 11:15).

Nevertheless, you will always see the same order in salvation. First a person hears the gospel, then believes or trusts it, and then afterward receives the Holy Spirit. A person is not regenerated first and then believes afterward.

Why do you keep on harping with the same Scriptures and your same interpretations of them and just ignore the well-reasoned responses to them? I have already responded to these and you just ignore my arguments.

The rich young ruler had pride. He thought that he was good enough to merit eternal life by keeping the law. It was all about him. Jesus showed him that no one can keep the whole law and that eternal life cannot come through the deeds of the law.

The rich young ruler (as was common at the time) thought that being rich reflected a right relationship with God and His blessings. The poor and afflicted were thought to be so because of sin (Joh 9:1-3). The disciples were also shocked about this when Jesus told them that it is hard for a rich man to enter the kingdom of God (Mar 10:23-24). The disciples were "were astonished out of measure" and said "Who then can be saved?" (Mar 10:25). If the rich who were the pinnacles of God's blessings could not be saved, then how could anyone be saved?!
Then Jesus told them something even more shocking:
Man cannot save himself. It is impossible. However, God can save anyone. He saves through the His Word preached in the Gospel message.
God uses His Word to regenerate people. He saves us by the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit (Tit 3:5-6). This regeneration is what is possible with God that overrides the impossibility of man who does not seek after God. The regeneration is what grants people faith in the Gospel, which is the pecuniary grounds for justification.

You show lack of discernment. The rich young ruler's problem was not pride. He ran to Jesus and kneeled down showing his great humility. Jesus asked him to give up his wealth, his love of money was the problem.

Why did the crowds follow Jesus? Not because of Who He was, but because they wanted a king who would overthrow the Roman empire and give them free meals.

Some did seek after Jesus because they thought he would be the king to restore the kingdom to Israel, and some did follow him because of the free meals. But many sought him because they hungered and thirsted for righteousness.

Matt 5:6 Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness: for they shall be filled.

When the Bible says that no one seeks after God, it does not mean that everyone is as wicked as humanly possible, distains any idea of heaven, and does not desire eternal life in any form. It means that they do not seek God as Who He is. They do not desire eternal life on God's terms.

I love the way Cals backpedal on Total Depravity. They have to, because they know that many unsaved people are very moral and do good works.

And to say that an unsaved person never seeks God is just as ridiculous, you can find thousands of people who will tell you they sought God for many years before they came to know and understood the simple gospel. Carico, a Cal admitted she wanted to believe the Bible for years. Even Old Regular here said he believed in the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost since his youth but knew he wasn't saved. This shows that he was concerned about his salvation, he wanted to be saved. He said that only when he reached his 40's did he realize God had saved him.

No, God is speaking of the wicked, those men who willingly reject God and want nothing to do with him. These are those who put God out of their mind and so God gives them up to a reprobate mind.

Rom 1:28 And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient;

Go through the Psalms especially and read about the "wicked". God is not speaking of all men, he is speaking to those who obstinately reject God. He says they oppress the poor, so this shows he is not speaking of all men.

Psa 10:2 The wicked in his pride doth persecute the poor: let them be taken in the devices that they have imagined.
3 For the wicked boasteth of his heart's desire, and blesseth the covetous, whom the LORD abhorreth.
4 The wicked, through the pride of his countenance, will not seek after God: God is not in all his thoughts.

God is not speaking of all men when he says the wicked. And the Jews whom Paul preached to in Romans knew that quite well, they knew that the scriptures he quoted from Psalms 14 did not apply to every single person.

It is you that does not know this.

 

[webdog]

And what has He provided?

Blessings,

The Archangel

Everything needed.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

To the title, Where does believing faith come from?

Jesus.

 

[Winman]

To the title, Where does believing faith come from?

Jesus.

First of all, there is no such thing as unbelieveing faith. Faith by definition means to believe.

Faith comes by hearing the word of God. This is not simply audibly hearing the words of scripture, it means to take them to heart and trust them.

Rom 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

I read the sermon Old Regular provided by Spurgeon. He may have been a great preacher, but he said some pretty ridiculous things in that sermon.

—"How can I get the faith which gives me possession of Christ Jesus, and brings me salvation?" Our text is the ready answer, practically a complete answer; not doctrinally or theologically complete, but practically perfect. "Faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." "But faith is the work of the Holy Spirit in the soul is it not?" Certainly. "And it is given by the Spirit to God's own chosen?" Assuredly; yet, nevertheless, it was not necessary for the apostle to mention those facts here. Some persons are always for having a whole system of theology in every sermon, but it is not needful that they should be gratified. Paul is clear enough about the work of the Spirit in other places, and it is not needful that he should introduce that subject into every line he writes. It was practically unnecessary for him to mention that subject in the present instance, and, therefore, he did not do so.

Look what Spurgeon says here. He says that it was not necessary for Paul to explain that the Holy Spirit regenerates a person to have faith. Ridiculous.

Then, even when he says it was not necessary for Paul to explain this, he goes to great lengths to explain this. But not from scripture.

It would sometimes puzzle rather than instruct an enquirer if we were to go into the full details of a matter. For instance, if I am thirsty, how shall I quench my thirst? By a draught of water. But in what way can I obtain water? It quite suffices for practical purposes for you to tell me to go to the tap or the fountain. There is no need to explain to me before I drink that the water is supplied by a company, and forced to the spilt by sundry machines, having been first extracted from the great fountains beneath by artesian wells, or drawn from the river at Thames Ditton. Nor would it be needful in answer to my question to trace the river to the clouds, and to treat upon the formation of vapor by the skill and wisdom of God. Practically, to the thirsty man all you want to say is, "There's the water, drink." I will add another illustration. A man is hungry, and he asks you, "How can I get bread?" "Go to the baker's," you say. The answer is complete enough for him; it meets the case at once. If he wants a larger declaration of how bread is obtained, we can give it to him at another time when he is no longer hungry; we will tell him how the corn is sown in the furrow of earth, and how by mysterious processes of nature it germinates, grows, and ripens; we will trace it from the reaper to the thresher, and from the thresher to the mill, and we will also show that daily bread is as much a gift from heaven as the manna which dropped down upon the hungry people in the wilderness. But, it is not needful for the feeding, of the hungry that we should on every occasion go into all those details, although we hold very sound views upon them. And when you are dealing with an anxious person, it will suffice to say to him, "Faith cometh by hearing;" further information can be supplied under happier circumstances. I mean to keep to our text this morning, and if any shall charge me with an omission of the work of the Spirit, or a failure to trace all saving faith to the electing grace of God, I shall bear the charge without murmuring, only saying that my soul rejoices as much as that of any man living in the work of the Spirit of God; and, that the electing love of God and his determinate purposes are precious truths to me. If the text was sufficient for Paul; it will, I trust, be sufficient for you.

I love that last line. Spurgeon says that if Paul did not go to the trouble to explain that faith is given to a man through the regeneration of the Holy Spirit, then he will not bother either.

Back in my youth we called that a "cop out" :laugh:

I would not listen to preaching like this. We are talking about a person's soul and where they spend eternity. I want to know and understand the scriptures, not assume anything. I am not just going to take Spurgeon's word here, even if he was a great preacher. I want to see scripture that supports his doctrine.

But he gives none, he says it is not necessary, but then goes to great lengths to give unscriptural examples from his own mind to explain a doctrine that is not shown in scripture.

This kind of preaching may be good enough for you Cals, but not for me.

No, the scriptures mention not one word of the Holy Spirit regenerating a man to have the ability to have faith and believe, and that is the reason Spurgeon cannot provide it. That is the simple truth of the matter.

The scriptures say faith comes by hearing the word of God. All men have the ability to hear and believe the scriptures if they so choose. Jesus told his disciples to take heed or care in what they listen to. Only if a man has the ability to hear does this command even make sense.

Mark 4:24 And he said unto them, Take heed what ye hear: with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you: and unto you that hear shall more be given.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

First of all, there is no such thing as unbelieveing faith. Faith by definition means to believe.

Faith comes by hearing the word of God. This is not simply audibly hearing the words of scripture, it means to take them to heart and trust them.

Rom 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

I read the sermon Old Regular provided by Spurgeon. He may have been a great preacher, but he said some pretty ridiculous things in that sermon.



Look what Spurgeon says here. He says that it was not necessary for Paul to explain that the Holy Spirit regenerates a person to have faith. Ridiculous.

Then, even when he says it was not necessary for Paul to explain this, he goes to great lengths to explain this. But not from scripture.



I love that last line. Spurgeon says that if Paul did not go to the trouble to explain that faith is given to a man through the regeneration of the Holy Spirit, then he will not bother either.

Back in my youth we called that a "cop out" :laugh:

I would not listen to preaching like this. We are talking about a person's soul and where they spend eternity. I want to know and understand the scriptures, not assume anything. I am not just going to take Spurgeon's word here, even if he was a great preacher. I want to see scripture that supports his doctrine.

But he gives none, he says it is not necessary, but then goes to great lengths to give unscriptural examples from his own mind to explain a doctrine that is not shown in scripture.

This kind of preaching may be good enough for you Cals, but not for me.

No, the scriptures mention not one word of the Holy Spirit regenerating a man to have the ability to have faith and believe, and that is the reason Spurgeon cannot provide it. That is the simple truth of the matter.

The scriptures say faith comes by hearing the word of God. All men have the ability to hear and believe the scriptures if they so choose. Jesus told his disciples to take heed or care in what they listen to. Only if a man has the ability to hear does this command even make sense.

Mark 4:24 And he said unto them, Take heed what ye hear: with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you: and unto you that hear shall more be given.

So you disagree that it come from Jesus?

 

[Winman]

So you disagree that it come from Jesus?

No, I actually agree with you 100%, because Jesus is the Word of God.

John 1:1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Rev 19:13 And he was clothed with a vesture dipped in blood: and his name is called The Word of God.

Jesus is the Word of God. And we are saved by hearing the word of God.

Where I disagree is that I believe that we hear the word of God from the outside, and then receive the word inwardly. If you go to church and listen to the sermon, do the preacher's words originate from within you? Of course not, the preaching of the word of God originates from without you. Only when you not only listen, but take to heart the words of God do they work effectually within you. One man hears "thou shalt not steal" and takes them to heart and resolves to be as honest as possible. Another man hears these same words but does not take them to heart and continues to steal whenever he can.

One more time, please see the simple picture the Lord himself provided.

Rev 3:20 Behold, I stand at the door, and knock: if any man hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him, and will sup with him, and he with me.
Where is Jesus here? Is he inside with you, or is he outside knocking and calling?

What does it mention next? It next says, "if any man hear my voice". Where is Jesus at this point? He is still on the outside knocking and calling.

This is ridiculous to have to explain. We all have experienced someone knocking on our door or ringing the doorbell. That person is outside desiring to come in. It is foolish to even have to explain something that everyone knows and easily understands. But this seems to be necessary when speaking to Calvinists.

Now, what does Jesus mention next? He says, "and open the door". Now, who does the opening, Jesus or you? You open the door. Calvinists may not like this, but the responsibility to open the door belongs to you. Jesus is not a criminal, he is not a burglar who busts down your door. No, he is a gentleman who politely knocks and calls to you, and you have the responsibility of opening the door.

And what does Jesus say he will do if you open the door? He says, "I will come IN to him". Did you notice the word "IN" there? Now where is Jesus? He is now inside with you and sits down and sups with you.

So, this very simple picture clearly shows how salvation works. God calls or knocks on your door with his word, with the scriptures, or preaching of the gospel. Every man has the ability to hear God's word. But a man is given the responsibility to open the door. This is man's will. Jesus will not force himself upon you. He wants to save you, and he makes this known. But only if you willingly receive him of your own free will and invite him in, will he enter. Now he is on the inside, within you.

The scriptures clearly show that you receive the Holy Spirit by hearing the word of God and believeing.

Gal 3:2 This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?

How do you receive the Holy Spirit? By the hearing (mentioned 1st) of faith (mentioned 2nd). So you hear the word of God, then believe, then receive the Spirit.

You do not have the Holy Spirit inside you until after you hear the word of God and believe.

But you Cals will not listen. You can provide not one word of scripture to support your doctrine, I just showed several that clearly and easily support mine.

 

[ReformedBaptist]

No, I actually agree with you 100%, because Jesus is the Word of God.

Great. All glory to God.

 

[OldRegular]

Jesus is the Word of God. And we are saved by hearing the word of God.

Really! Can you prove that?

 

[asterisktom]

Where did faith come from? How could it not be from God?

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

We also know that "not all men have faith" (2 Thess. 3:2). Thus, they were not given this faith. All good gifts are from above (James tells us). Faith is a good gift. Paul knew that within him, that is his flesh dwells no good thing (Rom. 7:18).

I don't see how there can be controversy on this point. Scripture is plain.

 

[Tom Butler]

In Rev 3:20, Jesus is not aiming his remarks at lost people He is speaking directly to believers in the church at Laodicea. This is the lukewarm congregation which had become self-satisfied. He did not call them unbelievers.

This verse is not useful in proving anything more than what it says.

 

[webdog]

Where did faith come from? How could it not be from God?

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

We also know that "not all men have faith" (2 Thess. 3:2). Thus, they were not given this faith. All good gifts are from above (James tells us). Faith is a good gift. Paul knew that within him, that is his flesh dwells no good thing (Rom. 7:18).

I don't see how there can be controversy on this point. Scripture is plain.

If it's from God, how could Christ scold His disciples (oh ye of little faith)? How could He have been surprised by the faith of the centurion if He gave it to him?

"Not all men have faith" does not say what you are trying to make it say. It simply means that not all men have faith, not all men are not given faith. You are letting your theology interpret Scripture.

 

[webdog]

In Rev 3:20, Jesus is not aiming his remarks at lost people He is speaking directly to believers in the church at Laodicea. This is the lukewarm congregation which had become self-satisfied. He did not call them unbelievers.

This verse is not useful in proving anything more than what it says.

That is a faulty understanding prevalent in today's church. Lukewarm does not mean they were believers who were self satisfied, it means they were putrid, needing to be vomited out. They were unbelievers pretending to be believers. It makes no sense for God to rather someone be an unbeliever (cold) than a self satisfied believer.
John MacArthur has a good commentary on this church.

 

[Amy.G]

That is a faulty understanding prevalent in today's church. Lukewarm does not mean they were believers who were self satisfied, it means they were putrid, needing to be vomited out. They were unbelievers pretending to be believers. It makes no sense for God to rather someone be an unbeliever (cold) than a self satisfied believer.
John MacArthur has a good commentary on this church.

The Laodicean church was an apostate church. They professed to be Christian, but were far from it. Christ is standing on the outside of this church and calling individuals to open the door and let Him in. He will spew this church out of His mouth, but He will still save individuals who open the door. This is also a picture of the apostate "churches" that we see today. Christ is not in them.

 

[asterisktom]

If it's from God, how could Christ scold His disciples (oh ye of little faith)? How could He have been surprised by the faith of the centurion if He gave it to him?
.

Who says He was surprised. What He did was commend him. Christ, we are told in John's gospel, "knew what was in man." That precludes any surprise on His part. He scolded the disciples for having little faith - not no faith. They weren't using what they had been given.

"Not all men have faith" does not say what you are trying to make it say. It simply means that not all men have faith, not all men are not given faith. You are letting your theology interpret Scripture.

No, actually, it was the other way around. I wasn't from a Calvinistic background. That is just how the passages led me. I grew up agnostic. When I became a Christian I just wanted to find the truth, not having friends or vested interest in any denominations. Over the last thirty years I had changed my theology time and again when I came across a verse that just wouldn't fit.

"Not all men have faith" seems pretty straightforward.

 

[Amy.G]

"Not all men have faith" seems pretty straightforward.

Yes. It simply means that not all men believe in Jesus, not that they can't believe.