What is Faith in the Bible?

[JIM]

Just because the actual phrase "saving faith" doesn't occur in English translations of the bible, that doesn't mean the idea of saving faith is not there. For example:

“For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; [it is] the gift of God,” (Eph 2:8 NKJV)

I don't object to the notion of "saving faith". I do indeed hold to a faith through which we are saved. But the faith that we have and hold is achieved in the same manner as any other faith that we have and hold. Faith in anything comes through information, data and experience leading to first thinking that it is true and then placing trust in it. Faith in God comes from hearing, and hearing the word about Christ (Rom 10:17). And how will they hear without a preacher (Rom 10:14)?

 

[David Lamb]

I don't object to the notion of "saving faith". I do indeed hold to a faith through which we are saved. But the faith that we have and hold is achieved in the same manner as any other faith that we have and hold. Faith in anything comes through information, data and experience leading to first thinking that it is true and then placing trust in it. Faith in God comes from hearing, and hearing the word about Christ (Rom 10:17). And how will they hear without a preacher (Rom 10:14)?

Sorry for misunderstanding your previous post.

 

[JIM]

Sorry for misunderstanding your previous post.

No need to apologize. There is so much confusion in all Christendom in the manner of faith. And that comes, I think, mostly due to the false doctrines of Original Sin and the even worse doctrine of Total Depravity. Both stand in stark contrast to the very being and nature of God.

 

[makesends]

JIM said:
Where do you read about "saving faith" as being different than "just faith"? Answer -- nowhere.
makesends said:
the demons also believe

As I have pointed out, faith is believing plus trusting. Demons certainly believe that God exists, but they have not placed their trust in him. They do not trust in God. They do not believe IN God, They do not have faith.

The conclusion, then, seems to be that "just faith", is also to place your trust in, which is no different than "saving faith". Demons, I guess, then, have neither?

Yes, I'm being facetious. But you seem to have flip-flopped here.

You will probably say that the difference is in what one is putting one's trust. To put it IN God is different from to put it in the fact that there IS a God, and also different from putting one's trust IN the legs of the chair, because God is different? Is that a fair representation of what you mean about 'saving faith' being the same as 'just faith'? That's the only representation I can find for your flip-flop above, that to me makes any sense.

The problem with that notion is that OUR trust in the legs of the chair is from experience, and requires little commitment. Our trust that there IS a God requires only the empirical evidence of existence and no commitment at all --just belief, shrugging off the implications. But faith is the substance of things expected, the evidence of things not seen. It requires integrity of commitment beyond what we inconsistent humans are capable of producing. It implies humility of submission that is only known within the Trinity. It implies understanding of the terms of the Gospel far beyond our grasp. It implies depth of love beyond our ken. It implies power we don't have in and of ourselves --the very power of a life-giving spirit. This faith is something only God can produce.

Only the same God that can put the breath of life into clay can raise man from spiritual death.

 

[Mr GLee]

Faith is the "let there be" power to show God is good

Human faith. "Let there be" and nothing changes nothing . . .a dead work offering nothing a false boast

Faith . . . Christ's labor of love towards us in working with us He gives us little of His Holy faithful power.


Hebrews 6 Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of (human) faith toward God,

Dead faith. . . . no faith (power)


Deuteronomy 32:20
And he said, I will hide my face from them, I will see what their end shall be: for they are a very froward generation, children in whom is no faith.

 

[Eleanor]

Faith is beleeing IN. Believing IN is believeing plus trusting. Faith is believing plus trusting, That is the definition of the words. Both are functions of the human mind and heart. That is definitely derives from each person individually. Faith in God is believing God plus trusting God.

Php 1:29 For it has been granted to you that for the sake of Christ you should not only believe in him but also suffer for his sake,

So you think that suffering is a gift of the Holy Spirit.

On what basis do you assume that faith and suffering have the same origin?

That is an interesting, but false, understanding of the work of the Holy Spirit. Just as suffering is not a gift of the Holy Spirit, so also believing is not a work of the Holy Spirit. But the Holy Spirit, by indwelling those who have been saved does indeed help them in their believing in Him and suffering for His sake.

I could refute each of the rest of the passages you posted there. But It probably would serve little purpose.

 

[His clay]

It is your thinking that faith in God is some miraculous infusion into the heart and mind of the individual that is dangerous. As I stated to @Arial the difference between faith in God and faith in anything else is God not faith. The Bible is the source of the data and information to bring one to accept God and what it says about God as truth and to place one's trust and confidence in God. There is no other source. That is the whole purpose of the Bible.

Perhaps you could actually deal with what I actually wrote rather than your straw man? Is it really that hard for you? Did you notice how your response here avoids the scripture I posted as well? Did you notice how you said the Bible is the source, and then your post has nothing referenced or quoted of the Bible?

posted again for your convenience, since you ignored it and violated James' 1, the importance of listening . . .
The distinction is an absolutely necessary distinction, and it is evidenced by today's pagan spirituality in contrast to Christianity. Postmodern ideology has impacted today's culture, and often people think of religion like a buffet. You can take what you like, since there really is no objective reality in postmodern thought. "I believe" is kind of a saying. People may be believing in themselves (which is pagan). People may be just "believing" without any specific content (which is pagan). People may be believing in the pick and choose ideology they have constructed from postmodern society (which is pagan).

It is blatantly obvious that this is radically different than "saving faith" defined by the Bible, which is distinct from the dead faith mentioned in James 2:17-19, which is different than the "belief" evidenced by those who picked up stones to stone Jesus in John 8:31-59.

Jim, your denial of the obvious is dangerous.

 

[makesends]

Faith is beleeing IN. Believing IN is believeing plus trusting. Faith is believing plus trusting, That is the definition of the words. Both are functions of the human mind and heart. That is definitely derives from each person individually. Faith in God is believing God plus trusting God.

Can you explain how, if faith is a function of alone the human mind and heart, some believe and some don't? What makes that difference between them? And why are the vast majority condemned, in the end, instead of somewhere around 50-50?

 

[Mr GLee]

Can you explain how, if faith is a function of alone the human mind and heart, some believe and some don't? What makes that difference between them? And why are the vast majority condemned, in the end, instead of somewhere around 50-50?

Faith is a powerful law of "Let there be" it worked to create, and "it was God alone good"

Not of our own dying selves

 

[JIM]

JIM said:
Where do you read about "saving faith" as being different than "just faith"? Answer -- nowhere.
makesends said:
the demons also believe

The conclusion, then, seems to be that "just faith", is also to place your trust in, which is no different than "saving faith". Demons, I guess, then, have neither?

Yes, I'm being facetious. But you seem to have flip-flopped here.

You will probably say that the difference is in what one is putting one's trust. To put it IN God is different from to put it in the fact that there IS a God, and also different from putting one's trust IN the legs of the chair, because God is different? Is that a fair representation of what you mean about 'saving faith' being the same as 'just faith'? That's the only representation I can find for your flip-flop above, that to me makes any sense.

The problem with that notion is that OUR trust in the legs of the chair is from experience, and requires little commitment. Our trust that there IS a God requires only the empirical evidence of existence and no commitment at all --just belief, shrugging off the implications. But faith is the substance of things expected, the evidence of things not seen. It requires integrity of commitment beyond what we inconsistent humans are capable of producing. It implies humility of submission that is only known within the Trinity. It implies understanding of the terms of the Gospel far beyond our grasp. It implies depth of love beyond our ken. It implies power we don't have in and of ourselves --the very power of a life-giving spirit. This faith is something only God can produce.

Only the same God that can put the breath of life into clay can raise man from spiritual death.

You have only shown me that you really do not understand the difference between believing someone and believing IN someone. Until you recognize and understand that difference there is no point in going any further in this discussion with you. After all that is key to the whole question of what is faith. Simply believing someone is not faith.

 

[JIM]

Can you explain how, if faith is a function of alone the human mind and heart, some believe and some don't? What makes that difference between them? And why are the vast majority condemned, in the end, instead of somewhere around 50-50?

That is very simple. Faith requires obedience to God in thinking, saying and doing things from a person that does not want to.

1Jn 2:15 Do not love the world nor the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life, is not from the Father, but is from the world. 17 The world is passing away, and also its lusts; but the one who does the will of God lives forever.

The vast majority love the world and the things of the world.

Paul, in his letter to the Ephesians, knowing and understanding the conditions existing in Ephesus, and the world generally, called on them to walk in a new life.

Eph 4:17 So this I say, and affirm together with the Lord, that you walk no longer just as the Gentiles also walk, in the futility of their mind, 18 being darkened in their understanding, excluded from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the hardness of their heart; 19 and they, having become callous, have given themselves over to sensuality for the practice of every kind of impurity with greediness. 20 But you did not learn Christ in this way, 21 if indeed you have heard Him and have been taught in Him, just as truth is in Jesus, 22 that, in reference to your former manner of life, you lay aside the old self, which is being corrupted in accordance with the lusts of deceit, 23 and that you be renewed in the spirit of your mind, 24 and put on the new self, which in the likeness of God has been created in righteousness and holiness of the truth.

"sensuality for the practice of every kind of impurity with greediness" -- sex and money.

 

[JIM]

Perhaps you could actually deal with what I actually wrote rather than your straw man? Is it really that hard for you? Did you notice how your response here avoids the scripture I posted as well? Did you notice how you said the Bible is the source, and then your post has nothing referenced or quoted of the Bible?

posted again for your convenience, since you ignored it and violated James' 1, the importance of listening . . .
The distinction is an absolutely necessary distinction, and it is evidenced by today's pagan spirituality in contrast to Christianity. Postmodern ideology has impacted today's culture, and often people think of religion like a buffet. You can take what you like, since there really is no objective reality in postmodern thought. "I believe" is kind of a saying. People may be believing in themselves (which is pagan). People may be just "believing" without any specific content (which is pagan). People may be believing in the pick and choose ideology they have constructed from postmodern society (which is pagan).

It is blatantly obvious that this is radically different than "saving faith" defined by the Bible, which is distinct from the dead faith mentioned in James 2:17-19, which is different than the "belief" evidenced by those who picked up stones to stone Jesus in John 8:31-59.

Jim, your denial of the obvious is dangerous.

What you wrote really has not one thing to do with the question of what faith is. It does deal somewhat with the question of why so many do not have faith in God.

 

[makesends]

That is very simple. Faith requires obedience to God in thinking, saying and doing things from a person that does not want to.

1Jn 2:15 Do not love the world nor the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him. 16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life, is not from the Father, but is from the world. 17 The world is passing away, and also its lusts; but the one who does the will of God lives forever.

The vast majority love the world and the things of the world.

Paul, in his letter to the Ephesians, knowing and understanding the conditions existing in Ephesus, and the world generally, called on them to walk in a new life.

Eph 4:17 So this I say, and affirm together with the Lord, that you walk no longer just as the Gentiles also walk, in the futility of their mind, 18 being darkened in their understanding, excluded from the life of God because of the ignorance that is in them, because of the hardness of their heart; 19 and they, having become callous, have given themselves over to sensuality for the practice of every kind of impurity with greediness. 20 But you did not learn Christ in this way, 21 if indeed you have heard Him and have been taught in Him, just as truth is in Jesus, 22 that, in reference to your former manner of life, you lay aside the old self, which is being corrupted in accordance with the lusts of deceit, 23 and that you be renewed in the spirit of your mind, 24 and put on the new self, which in the likeness of God has been created in righteousness and holiness of the truth.

"sensuality for the practice of every kind of impurity with greediness" -- sex and money.

At best, here, all you have done is show a difference, but not what makes the difference. HOW, again, is it possible that the majority of free-willed creatures reject Christ but the minority do not? Why is it not 50-50?

If you don't understand my question, let me ask it this way: You say the difference is that the vast majority love the world and the things of the world. Again, then, I ask WHY do the majority love the world and the things of the world? You will likely have another similar answer that may fall along the lines of cause-and-effect, or according to motivation, or some other such answer. But then I will ask you, WHY that is true --that is, WHY do they do, want, choose --whatever-- why do they do that? Go all the way back to what happened to make THAT difference.

 

[Lees]

Can you explain how, if faith is a function of alone the human mind and heart, some believe and some don't? What makes that difference between them? And why are the vast majority condemned, in the end, instead of somewhere around 50-50?

This question is not to me, but I would like to give an opinion. I do not believe faith is only a function of the human mind and heart. But the questions of 'how some believe and some don't', and 'what makes the difference between them', 'and why are the vast majority condemned...instead of somwhere around 50/50%, is interesting.

Simply put, I would say believers believe because they are believers. By that, I mean, from day 1. From the time they are born into this world physically, they are already believers, even though they don't know it. They are 'of God'. As opposed to those not 'of God'. (John 8:44) "ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father aye will do..." (John 8:47) "He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.

Just because those 'of God' come to their confession of faith at different times, doesn't matter. It is God's perogative as to when He reveals it to them. (Matt. 16:17) And the number of them, I believe, is already set. Note (Prov. 8:22-31) There is various views of Who is being addressed here, either the Wisdom of God or Christ in eternity past. But it doesn't matter to my point. The time is way in the past. (Pro. 8:22) "The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old."

(Pro. 8:23) "I was set up from everlasting...."

(Prov. 8:24) "When there were do depths, ...no fountains...."

(Prov. 8:26) "While as yet he had not made the earth...." etc. etc.

(Prov. 8:30-31) "Then I was by him, as one brought up with him; and I was daily his delight rejoicing always before him. Rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth; and my delights were with the sons of men."

What 'sons of men'? Those who would be born 'of God'. When God told Adam and Eve to 'multiply and be fruitful and replenish the earth' did He have all those who would be of Satan and not of Him included in that command. Of course not. Because of the fall, they would be born due to Satan introducing another seed line.

But, because of the fall, the whole human race went down, and those 'of God' with them. But, the only ones who are 'lost', are those 'of God'. Because they were always 'of God'. And it is to them God sets out to save. Those not of God are not lost as they never were God's.

Because of this, those of God have the ear to hear their Father. His voice resonates in their being. And at God's appointed time, they will come to him in faith, because it is who they are. Do we exercise our will? Yes. But we exericse it because of who we are. None of the lost will be lost.

The believer will believe because he is a believer. God always works with a minority in numbers, which is why there are more of Satan's children than of God's.

Lees

 

[makesends]

This question is not to me, but I would like to give an opinion. I do not believe faith is only a function of the human mind and heart. But the questions of 'how some believe and some don't', and 'what makes the difference between them', 'and why are the vast majority condemned...instead of somwhere around 50/50%, is interesting.

Simply put, I would say believers believe because they are believers. By that, I mean, from day 1. From the time they are born into this world physically, they are already believers, even though they don't know it. They are 'of God'. As opposed to those not 'of God'. (John 8:44) "ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father aye will do..." (John 8:47) "He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God.

Just because those 'of God' come to their confession of faith at different times, doesn't matter. It is God's perogative as to when He reveals it to them. (Matt. 16:17) And the number of them, I believe, is already set. Note (Prov. 8:22-31) There is various views of Who is being addressed here, either the Wisdom of God or Christ in eternity past. But it doesn't matter to my point. The time is way in the past. (Pro. 8:22) "The LORD possessed me in the beginning of his way, before his works of old."

(Pro. 8:23) "I was set up from everlasting...."

(Prov. 8:24) "When there were do depths, ...no fountains...."

(Prov. 8:26) "While as yet he had not made the earth...." etc. etc.

(Prov. 8:30-31) "Then I was by him, as one brought up with him; and I was daily his delight rejoicing always before him. Rejoicing in the habitable part of his earth; and my delights were with the sons of men."

What 'sons of men'? Those who would be born 'of God'. When God told Adam and Eve to 'multiply and be fruitful and replenish the earth' did He have all those who would be of Satan and not of Him included in that command. Of course not. Because of the fall, they would be born due to Satan introducing another seed line.

But, because of the fall, the whole human race went down, and those 'of God' with them. But, the only ones who are 'lost', are those 'of God'. Because they were always 'of God'. And it is to them God sets out to save. Those not of God are not lost as they never were God's.

Because of this, those of God have the ear to hear their Father. His voice resonates in their being. And at God's appointed time, they will come to him in faith, because it is who they are. Do we exercise our will? Yes. But we exericse it because of who we are. None of the lost will be lost.

The believer will believe because he is a believer. God always works with a minority in numbers, which is why there are more of Satan's children than of God's.

Lees

You have a point, although I would put it that they are, from the beginning of Creation, of the 'Elect'. From birth not saved, not better, still just as enslaved to sin as anyone else, rotten at the core, spiritually dead, until God (as you indicated) produced in them faith through which they are saved.

Anything that sets them apart is by the choice of God, and any virtue within them is a result of the work of God; THEY are not of themselves better than anyone else.

 

[Lees]

You have a point, although I would put it that they are, from the beginning of Creation, of the 'Elect'. From birth not saved, not better, still just as enslaved to sin as anyone else, rotten at the core, spiritually dead, until God (as you indicated) produced in them faith through which they are saved.

Anything that sets them apart is by the choice of God, and any virtue within them is a result of the work of God; THEY are not of themselves better than anyone else.

And I agree with you. I use the term 'of God' here instead of 'elect' to show our origin is not just from God's 'choosing' who will be saved, but that His 'choosing' is based upon those who are first 'of Him'.

Note in (John 8:47) Christ does not say, if you would believe you would hear God's words. He says, "ye therefore hear them not, because ye are not of God."

Note in (John 10:26), "But ye believe not, because ye are not my sheep...." He does not say, because you don't believe you are not my sheep. He is saying because you are not my sheep, you don't believe.

Lees

 

[JIM]

At best, here, all you have done is show a difference, but not what makes the difference. HOW, again, is it possible that the majority of free-willed creatures reject Christ but the minority do not? Why is it not 50-50?

If you don't understand my question, let me ask it this way: You say the difference is that the vast majority love the world and the things of the world. Again, then, I ask WHY do the majority love the world and the things of the world? You will likely have another similar answer that may fall along the lines of cause-and-effect, or according to motivation, or some other such answer. But then I will ask you, WHY that is true --that is, WHY do they do, want, choose --whatever-- why do they do that? Go all the way back to what happened to make THAT difference.

Do you like ice cream? Do you like money? Do you like your wife (assuming you are married)? Well some like cocaine. Some like money but don't like working for it. Some "love" women, wife or not. What does it say about Eve? Why did she eat the forbidden fruit? The Bible says, Gen 3:6 So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate.

None of us are really any different. She liked it. It was pleasurable. It made her "feel good". The old "hippie" saying, "If it feels good, do it" is a mantra of the worldly. The old joke, "Why did God take all the fun things and make them sin?" is the thinking of all too many people.

I understand your question. But the answer you are looking for is simply wrong. We disobey God because we want to. It is not happenstance that a very young child's first words usually include "no". Whatever it was, the child didn't want it or didn't want to do it. That is all quite natural. And even as mature adults, there are things that we say "no" to. Just because we say "no" to something doesn't make it wrong. However, when we say "no" to God's laws it is wrong, it is a sin. We don't say "no" to God because of what Adam did; we say "no" to God because we want to, because of "the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life" (1 John 2:16).

That is the thrust of Paul's message in Romans 7.

 

[Mr GLee]

Do you like ice cream? Do you like money? Do you like your wife (assuming you are married)? Well some like cocaine. Some like money but don't like working for it. Some "love" women, wife or not. What does it say about Eve? Why did she eat the forbidden fruit? The Bible says, Gen 3:6 So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate.

Hi Jim

I would offer. Believers know the garden parable is a picture of Christ not seen pursuing a wife.

Adam represents Christ the anointing teaching master not seen. Eve seen to represent the bride mankind as a whole.

Together makes up the priestly order. Adam as Moses the living word "let there be "and Eve as Aaron the priestess and the testimony was "God alone good"

Adam as if Christ the powerful, vessel the source of prophecy as it is written Eve the weaker the receiver of prophecy as a Priestess sent out with the gospel . Adam failed to protect her from false prophecy (neither shall you touch)

The ministry of two. . . .never one

Exodus 7:1-2And the Lord said unto Moses (Adam as if God ) , See, I have made thee a god to Pharaoh: and Aaron (Eve as if Aaron ) thy brother shall be thy prophet.;Thou shalt speak all that I command thee:(Adam) and Aaron (Eve)thy brother shall speak unto Pharaoh, that he send the children of Israel out of his land.

Neither shall you touch. . The lust of the flesh drew them to the tree hidden in the center tother with. the lust of the eyes the two building blocks of false pride they took over, in false pride mankind fell

1 John 2:16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.


Gen 3:6 So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate.

 

[makesends]

Do you like ice cream? Do you like money? Do you like your wife (assuming you are married)? Well some like cocaine. Some like money but don't like working for it. Some "love" women, wife or not. What does it say about Eve? Why did she eat the forbidden fruit? The Bible says, Gen 3:6 So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate.

None of us are really any different. She liked it. It was pleasurable. It made her "feel good". The old "hippie" saying, "If it feels good, do it" is a mantra of the worldly. The old joke, "Why did God take all the fun things and make them sin?" is the thinking of all too many people.

I understand your question. But the answer you are looking for is simply wrong. We disobey God because we want to. It is not happenstance that a very young child's first words usually include "no". Whatever it was, the child didn't want it or didn't want to do it. That is all quite natural. And even as mature adults, there are things that we say "no" to. Just because we say "no" to something doesn't make it wrong. However, when we say "no" to God's laws it is wrong, it is a sin. We don't say "no" to God because of what Adam did; we say "no" to God because we want to, because of "the lust of the flesh and the lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life" (1 John 2:16).

That is the thrust of Paul's message in Romans 7.

And.... just as I predicted, around we go again!

Why do we want to disobey God? Why is there "lust of the flesh and lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life"? How did we come by that?

Maybe more to the point, though, WHY are some more reliable to avoid disobedience? WHY not 50-50?

 

[JIM]

Why do we want to disobey God? Why is there "lust of the flesh and lust of the eyes and the boastful pride of life"? How did we come by that?

For the very same reason that Eve saw that the forbidden fruit was good for food and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise. She liked it. There is lust of the flesh because it feels good even if it is wrong. Same with lust of the eyes, it is pleasurable even if it is wrong. Same with pride of life.

We sin because we like it, it gives us pleasure, it makes us feel good, it's fun.

Maybe what you are confused about is why any of those things are wrong. That is a different question.