Wednesday, February 25, 2009

Identity - Part 3

Is Saving Faith "blind faith"?

If Saving Faith is not blind then it must be placed in something known, or understood. If something must be known or understood does this add something to Salvation by Grace through Faith? I say that Saving Faith is not blind but is placed in One Who is made known through revelation by testimony of His Own works. The process of revelation is processed by reasoning in the mind of the Sinner as ministered to by the Spirit of God. This results in one exclusive identity of the person of Christ that cannot be impersonated or usurped by any created thing, thus results in a faith in Him alone.

Isa 1:18 puts it this way.

"Come now, and let us reason together," Says the LORD, "Though your sins are like scarlet, They shall be as white as snow; Though they are red like crimson, They shall be as wool.

The Lord our God does not want “simple faith” that is simple to knowledge of Him but wise to our desire for Eternal Life. For does not all the world want to live, yet have nothing to do with the Lord God Almighty? The Faith the Lord wants is that which is placed in Him. And I echo the Apostle Paul saying “How can they call on One of Whom they have not heard?” We must know His identity in order to call on Him.

But those who reduce the Gospel (The Saving Message which must be received) to something akin to “Believe Jesus for Eternal Life” do not just misidentify the Object of Saving Faith they also misidentify the effect of it. Let us read and hear again what our ministry is.

2 Cor 5:18-20

Now all things are of God, who has reconciled us to Himself through Jesus Christ, and has given us the ministry of reconciliation, that is, that God was in Christ reconciling the world to Himself, not imputing their trespasses to them, and has committed to us the word of reconciliation. Now then, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God were pleading through us: we implore you on Christ's behalf, be reconciled to God.

Eternal Life is a benefit but our ministry is that of reconciliation to God Himself. Heaven is not a wonderful place where God hangs out. Heaven is a wonderful place BECAUSE the One True Holy and Perfect God is there. He is the glory of Heaven.

I submit to the reader that those who say “We just can’t know for sure” what the actual Saving Message is are like the agnostics of the World. They are comfortable with non-committal supposing they offend no one, and cannot be in error if they do not take a stand. This comfortable status quo leaves one luke-warm in their convictions.

Be sure the Lord Our God is near to all who call on Him in truth. Ps 145:18 We ought to “consider” His works. Eccl 7:18.

Here are a couple of quotes from Warren Henderson’s book, In Search Of God (Gospel Folio Press 2007)

Modern philosophy considers reason and faith to be disassociated, but the Bible teaches that both must be exercised to know God and to understand truth. Philosophy teaches that these are conflicting agents – the former intellectual and the latter emotional. But is this true? Is there no common ground in which both faith and reason might labor together for a greater benefit than either could accomplish alone? What is the consequence of determining reality solely through a philosophical means?” Pg 13

Biblical Christianity has this distinction over the religions of the world- the seeker is challenged to test the Scripture to validate its truthfulness.” Pg 22

The Law of Sin & Death states “The soul that sins shall die.” Ezk 18:4 & Ezk 18:20 If one has sinned they must die. They can do that themselves, or they can be baptized into Christ’s death (& resurrection) by grace through faith. But they cannot choose Christ unless they know Him, and they can’t know Him unless they know what He did.

Thus one must properly identify the object, content and result of our Saving Faith, or it cannot be Saving Faith.

Ref: My work about reasoning here is derivative of Henderson's presentations in his book.

4 comments:

Lou Martuneac said...

Kev:

Your Identity series has been a help, blessing and clarification of what the Gospel is NOT, which is what is coming from the Grace Evangelical Society (GES).

You wrote, “But those who reduce the Gospel (The Saving Message which must be received) to something akin to ‘Believe Jesus for Eternal Life’ do not just misidentify the Object of Saving Faith they also misidentify the effect of it.

In reading the Crossless gospel advocates it is quite clear in their reductionist system that the sole of object of faith/belief for the reception of eternal life is the PROMISE-ONLY. CG advocates insist belief in the PROMISE-ONLY saves even if the lost man thinks the promise is being made by Mormonism’s Jesus believed to be the non-deity, half-brother of Satan.

I just posted a new article addressing this and related issues coming from the GES. It is titled, Believing the Gospel: “May Indeed Frustrate Grace?”

Thanks again for this good series.

Yours in Him,


Lou

Lou Martuneac said...

Kev:

You also wrote, “submit to the reader that those who say ‘We just can’t know for sure’ what the actual Saving Message is are like the agnostics of the World. They are comfortable with non-committal supposing they offend no one, and cannot be in error if they do not take a stand. This comfortable status quo leaves one luke-warm in their convictions.”

This obviously refers to Rose of Rose’s Reasonings, who claims that the GES interpretation of the content of saving faith is a mere “theory, nuance of doctrine, a difference of opinion that is acceptable.”

On the other hand, she is fiercely opposed to the Lordship Salvation interpretation of the Gospel and can give numerous Bible reasons for why she rejects that works based message.

In 208 our partner Stephen wrote an article about this. It is titled, Reasoning on Rose: “We Just can’t Know?”

He noted, “Rose is essentially taking a stand on uncertainty, along the lines of ‘I’m not certain of the content of saving faith so the rest of you shouldn’t be so certain either.’ To be clear, Rose’s stand against Lordship Salvation makes it clear she has strength of conviction regarding what the Gospel is NOT, but that she is not sure with it IS… . Rose isn’t committed to anything except the middle -- and this is one of those cases where being in the 'middle' reveals a compromised stance rather than balance.

This, as you noted, is a form of agnosticism. IMO, it also reflects the ecumenical mindset that prefers friendship ahead of fidelity to the Word of God. When friendship and personality gets involved in doctrinal debates far too often it is the friendship that is given preference over the clear teaching of Scripture.

This is an offense to the Lord and a dangerous compromise of the biblical mandate that forbids unity with brethren whose “contrary doctrine,” introduces “divisions and offences” to the New Testament church.

Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them. For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple," (Rom. 16:17-18).


LM

Kevl said...

The more I study the more I see all attacks on the Gospel to be the same. I used to rile against Lordship Salvation and the Crossless Gospel.. now I am truly beginning to see error as simply error.

I do not wish to tear people down, but I do want to show what Scripture says so that they can consider the things they say, the positions they have and the company they keep in light of Scripture.

Kev

Lou Martuneac said...

Hi Kev:

You referred to, "Attacks on the Gospel."

Some attacks come by way of addition to the Gospel, such as Lordship Salvation. Other attacks come through subtraction such as the Crossless gospel. As you wrote, however, "error is error."

In any event, people are involved. Some people propagate "error," some are susceptible to error, other people refute error.


Lou