|
Just sticking my toe in: See "The Faith of Jesus
Christ-The Narrative Substructure of Galatians 3:1-4:11 (2002 reprint) Richard
B. Hays. This reference is for David. You can check this discussion (the
faithfulness of Jesus Christ) out on the internet. Lance
Sent: May 14, 2004 01:37
Subject: Re: [TruthTalk] The Passion
Test
In a message dated 5/13/2004 5:14:12 AM Pacific
Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
David Miller wrote:
>>I'm getting lost even
more. "Didache" = doctrine,
>>so why do you use it to refer
to faith? Didache
>>has to do with the intellect.
>>
>>And what does "passionate" have to do with
faith?
>>Passionate = sensuality and flesh, not faith which
>>is spirit. I don't even view faith as emotional at
>>all, but not intellectual either. It is
spiritual
>>trust and confidence, a perception, a sense of the
>>spirit to perceive that which is imperceptible to
>>the senses of the flesh.
"Passionate faith" is neither
sensual nor of the flesh. These are words used by me to describe the
true nature of "belief." It is different from the "pistis" of the
demons. It has an emotional base and so I serve God with a
passion. Faith is more than consent -- it is a driving
force not possible without emotion. If you serve God with less than a
passion for servitude, so be it.
John S. wrote:
>The w
o r d "faith" is used in two different
>ways in the NT. "The faith" is a body of teaching
>(didache) (IICo13:5) and, again, in the sense of a
>passionate belief -- an emotional allegiance ---
>one that produces a pattern of activity. The first is
>collection of revelatory and traditional doctrine, the
>second involves the intellect but moves far beyond an
>mere
intellectual proclamation.
This is a very interesting
conversation, John. I have trouble seeing
faith ever being talked
about in the New Testament as a body of
teaching. I realize that
many people in our culture use the word
"faith" to refer to a religious
system of belief, but I do not see the
Scriptures using it in that
way. I read 2 Cor. 13:5. It says, "Examine
yourselves,
whether ye be in the faith." I don't see anything about
teaching
here at all. How can one be *IN* the body of teaching?
Here is what Thayer says: "pistis is rather the form in
which the truth (as the substance of right doctrine) is subjectively
appropriated." I put it this way -- "the faith" (Rom
14:1, Eph 4:13, I Tim 3:9 and 4:1) is a body of teaching that is the
truth. That body of "truth" is not as important as is the personal and
passionate faith of the believer -- and so we have "weak in the
faith" (Romans 14:1) spoken of the same individual who possesses a faith
that is so recognized by God as to render that individual lost if he violates
his faith (14:23). Romans 14 is a clear and explicit
statement to the effect that personal and passionate faith in God and His
Christ puts us in good sted--- opens the flood gates of salvation by
grace (through that faith). The "weak" or wrong brethren in Romans
14 are those who disagreed with Paul, for crying out loud. With
Paul.. Paul, the spokesman for God, the author of inspired scripture,
does not speak convincingly to these brethren and Paul respects that --
he not only allows for their error, he argues that the quality of their faith
is just fine, albeit mistaken in a doctrinal sense.
I see
this as
referring to the same definition of faith that I mentioned
before, a
condition of absolute trust and confidence in our Lord. In
other
words, he instructs them to examine themselves to see whether or
not they
are merely paying lip service to God, or if they truly trust
in
God. Do you know of any other passages where the word faith
might be
interpreted as teaching?
Furthermore, I don't see where
faith has anything to do with emotional
allegiance. In fact, I
would consider "emotional allegiance" alone to
be a counterfeit of faith
just as I would consider intellectual
allegiance to be a counterfeit
faith.
You really enjoy arguing against
straw men, don't you. Nowhere do I say that emotional allegiance stands
alone. In fact, in the end, both our intellect and emotion fail
us -- hence the continue flow of the blood of the
Lamb.
Now emotion might be a side
product
of faith, just as emotion might be a side product of knowledge,
teaching,
or anything else. Emotion is simply a reaction, either
positive or
negative. Faith itself is an ability to perceive a
spiritual
reality which results in trust and confidence and assurance of
that
knowledge that comes through the spirit.
Faith cannot be properly
understood without introducing the emotional aspect. I occasionally see
couples who have made an allegiance to their marriage but their is no emotion
there -- no love. Emotion without direction (right
teaching) is useless -- but emotion that seeks out the direction
of the Lord is vital to any and all marriages. Ditto for our
relationship with God through Christ.
John S. wrote:
>You last sentence above does not
communicate to me.
Well, let me try and break it
down.
David Miller wrote:
>>It is spiritual trust and
confidence, a perception,
>>a sense of the spirit to perceive that
which is
>>imperceptible to the senses of the flesh.
By
spiritual trust and confidence, I mean a loyalty and reliance
and
assurance that originates in the spirit, within the heart of
man. By
perception, I mean a spiritual sense, that part within man
which can
perceive God. No man perceives God through the five
senses of his flesh
(sight, touch, smell, hearing, taste). Man must
touch God within his
spirit. Faith is that aspect of man that can
see in the spirit. Faith
is to the spirit what eyes are to the
flesh. Men of faith see in the
spirit the same way men of the flesh
see in the physical world. Based
upon that spiritual sight, they
have a trust and confidence of what they
have seen, and we call that
faith.
Perhaps this is a semantical issue, once again. You
seem to be saying there is more to man than the five senses. I would
agree with that. I would not use the words "faith is that aspect
of man that can see in the spirit," however. It does not
communicate in a practical way with what you are trying to say. If
you make those words work for you in your teaching of other, absolutely
great.
John
|
