The difference is that one is based on what one knows through his natural senses and the other is based on what one knows through spiritual senses.
Initial faith and ongoing faith, is a distinction needed between the two to interpret Scripture accurately?
- Thread starter Dave123
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
I agree, one faith, but the distinction still applies. I know why people call our faith Jesus' faith, because it's from the Spirit. I think that the KJV actually translated it that way. But that's the life, the indwelling, not the initial faith. This life saves in a practical manner. In other words, it's our practical sanctification after we are placed into Christ and justified. Paul spoke about it in Galatians 3:2-3 as being perfected. This is the part that is all of grace and a gift from god.
The initial faith is another story. Where does that come from? By what power, if any, does one believe? I think the answer is in the OT, where they believed, but were not indwelt or born again.
Calvinism mostly has what I would call the two option theory, the flesh or the Spirit. Born again, or the flesh. I think it's significant that in the OT, the presence of God played a part in drawing people. The light. This presence may have been limited to the Temple, the Tabernacle, God incarnate, etc. There is the Holy Spirit being upon believers, but that was only to equip them for certain tasks. Then His Word....I believe that's the only way Jesus can enter a someone without the blood of the cross being applied. When the Holy Spirit was given to believers at Pentecost and after, the curtain from the Temple was torn, and God would now reside within believers. I believe that's why Jesus said this about that time, because in this NT dispensation, believers take that presence of God with them when they evangelize.
John 12:32-36 And I, if I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all peoples to Myself." This He said, signifying by what death He would die. The people answered Him, "We have heard from the law that the Christ remains forever; and how can You say, 'The Son of Man must be lifted up'? Who is this Son of Man?" Then Jesus said to them, "A little while longer the light is with you. Walk while you have the light, lest darkness overtake you; he who walks in darkness does not know where he is going. While you have the light, believe in the light, that you may become sons of light." These things Jesus spoke, and departed, and was hidden from them.
and this...This is really the basis of our persecution. The light either draws, or they gnash there teeth and want to put it out by any means possible. This is a general grace that can be rejected.
John 16:7-11 Nevertheless I tell you the truth. It is to your advantage that I go away; for if I do not go away, the Helper will not come to you; but if I depart, I will send Him to you. And when He has come, He will convict the world of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment: of sin, because they do not believe in Me; of righteousness, because I go to My Father and you see Me no more;
of judgment, because the ruler of this world is judged.
Just a thought. There are other options other than the the two that are often used to determine what Scripture is speaking of in regards to Gods grace in our coming to faith.
Dave
Isn't our initial faith, the one that gives us the Holy Spirit indwelling, the life, just a trust in what we, at that point, only intellectually understand? Our initial faith, the one that gives life, is simply a desire. Paul said that we can desire to do good things from the flesh, it's just that we cannot do good things [by righteous standards] from the flesh. This is where the idea that one must have a pure or perfect faith comes from. The idea is implied by many Calvinists when they claim that a true saving faith must be from the Holy Spirit, again, mixing up Scripture that speaks of the faith that is called the life, with Scripture that speaks of the faith that brings us that life. Believe and be saved.
It reminds me of A.A. step number one. At least the original one before A.A. became secularized. Admit you are defeated. Surrender your life to God. Acknowledge total powerlessness over sin.
The point being, we are not freed from sin until we are placed into Christ Jesus. That faith, or life, is different from the faith that brought us there. It's just a desire to have what God promises. The faith of a mustard seed. The initial faith does not need to pass righteous standards, and be pure for it to be genuine. That's what I believe. A desire can be genuine, and selfish, tainted, if you will, but still genuine. In fact, it really wouldn't be genuine if it wasn't selfish.
As someone said, it's not the life we disagree on, it's the faith that gives us that life. That would be fun to explore, but it never really gets that far.
Dave
I agree the same faith, but only the ongoing is the life. So they are distinct in that regard. The two option theory that is used today by some Calvinists is fitting with Scripture. I think that's a direct result of reverse engineering, using the system to define Scripture. I touched on that in a previous post #22. I agree that the difference lays in the initial faith, or where the ongoing begins. I think it's the OT is where the answers are. They were not indwelt, and not yet born again, yet the believed (John 7:38-39).
Dave
We are saved by faith and not by works when we first confess Christ for that is all we can do for we are in the flesh and have not received the Spirit yet.
But when we receive the Spirit we have to have works of love, good works, for faith to be valid in our life.
Which James said Abraham was justified by works for a person is justified by works, and not faith alone.
Which charity, love in action, works, is greater than faith.
And faith works by love.
Which Paul said he could have all faith so he could remove mountains but if he did not have charity he is nothing.
And John said do not love in word, neither in tongue, but in deed, works, and in truth.
Initial faith is accepting the truth before receiving the Spirit that guides us to be Christlike.
But ongoing faith is to allow the Spirit to
lead you to be Christlike.
But no person would of accepted the truth unless God intervened in their life for in the flesh dwells no good thing.
Which the truth is to hate sin, and not want sin, and allow the Spirit to lead them which they will not fulfill the lusts of the flesh.
For if not then it is not love, and not good works, which is not a part time job for a little leaven leavens the whole bunch.
Which some people deny the power thereof because they will not let go of the flesh and love sin more than God and do not come to the truth.
God said to turn away away from them for they do not represent the truth.
Which is millions of people that live in sin and think they are saved.
But when we receive the Spirit we have to have works of love, good works, for faith to be valid in our life.
Which James said Abraham was justified by works for a person is justified by works, and not faith alone.
Which charity, love in action, works, is greater than faith.
And faith works by love.
Which Paul said he could have all faith so he could remove mountains but if he did not have charity he is nothing.
And John said do not love in word, neither in tongue, but in deed, works, and in truth.
Initial faith is accepting the truth before receiving the Spirit that guides us to be Christlike.
But ongoing faith is to allow the Spirit to
lead you to be Christlike.
But no person would of accepted the truth unless God intervened in their life for in the flesh dwells no good thing.
Which the truth is to hate sin, and not want sin, and allow the Spirit to lead them which they will not fulfill the lusts of the flesh.
For if not then it is not love, and not good works, which is not a part time job for a little leaven leavens the whole bunch.
Which some people deny the power thereof because they will not let go of the flesh and love sin more than God and do not come to the truth.
God said to turn away away from them for they do not represent the truth.
Which is millions of people that live in sin and think they are saved.
What justifies us is all given to us as an act of the moment. Once we are placed into Christ we are justified. A true faith will evidence itself by perseverance in said faith. Those who don't persevere, never had it. Now, saved, as in practically becoming what God already reckons us to be in Jesus Christ, yes, but saved over that lifetime as in justified, no.
This is practical sanctification, vs. positional sanctification. Saved just means delivered. Legally, we are delivered from what we deserve from God's justice, and also delivered from the power of sin, all as a direct result of being placed into Christ. But practically, we are being delivered from sin as a process as we are being conformed to Christlikeness. Thus the ongoing faith is that process. It doesn't justify us more, or maintain that justification, it merely evidences who we really are, in Christ or not.
Dave
"
13. THE INTERNAL ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF TRUTH, WHICH IS FAITH, EXISTS WITH NONE BUT THOSE WHO ARE IN CHARITY.
We have already said what faith is, and will now say what charity is. In its origin or beginning, charity is the affection of good, and as good loves truth, the affection of good produces the affection of truth, and through it the acknowledgment of truth which is faith. Through this succession, the affection of good* comes forth into manifest being, and becomes charity. This is the progressive advance of charity from its origin which is the affection of good, through faith which is the acknowledgment of truth, to its final end in view, which is charity. The final end is the doing. And this shows how love, here the affection of good, produces faith-which is the same thing as the acknowledgment of truth-and through this produces charity-which is the same thing as the working of love through faith.
* The Latin here reads "affection of truth," which is evidently a slip of the pen or else printer's error, as the context shows. [TR.]
14. More clearly:-Good is nothing but Use, so that in its very origin charity is the affection of use; and as use loves the means, the affection of use produces the affection of the means, and from this the knowledge [cognitio] of them, and through this progression the affection of use comes forth into manifest being [existit], and becomes charity.
15. The progression of these things is precisely like that of all things of the will through the understanding into bodily acts. The will brings forth nothing from itself apart from the understanding, nor does the understanding bring forth anything from itself apart from the will. In order that anything may come forth into manifest being, the two must act in conjunction. Or, what is the same: Affection, which belongs to the will, brings forth nothing from itself except by means of thought, which is of the understanding (the converse also being true), for in order that anything may come forth into manifest being the two must act in conjunction. For consider: If you take away from thought all affection belonging to some love, can you exercise thought? Or if from the affection you take away all thought, are you then able to be affected by anything? Or, what is much the same, if you take away affection from thought, can you speak anything? Or if you take away thought or understanding from affection, can you do anything? It is the same with charity and faith.
16. All this may be illustrated by comparison with a tree. The prime source of a tree is a seed, and in this there is an endeavor to bring forth fruit. This endeavor, roused to activity by heat, brings forth first a root, and then from that a stem or stalk with branches and leaves, and at last the fruit; and in this way the endeavor to bear fruit comes forth into manifest being. From this it is evident that the endeavor to bring forth fruit is constant through the whole progression until it attains manifest being, for if it ceased the capacity to vegetate would die at once. This is the application: The tree is man; in him the endeavor to bring forth the means is from his will in his understanding; the stem or stalk with branches and leaves, in him are the instrumental means, and are called the truths of faith; the fruits which in the tree are the ultimate effects of the endeavor to bear fruit, in man are uses and in these his will comes forth into manifest being. From this it may be seen that the will to bring forth uses by means of the understanding is constant through the whole progression, until it comes into manifest being. (Concerning the will and the understanding, and their conjunction, see the Doctrine of Life for the New Jerusalem, n. 43.)
17. From what has now been said it is evident that charity, insofar as it is the affection of good or of use, brings forth faith as a means through which it may come into manifest being; and therefore that charity and faith, in working uses, act in conjunction; and also that faith does not bring forth good or use from itself, but from charity, for faith is charity in its mediate stage. It is therefore a fallacy that faith brings forth good as a tree does its fruit. The tree is not faith. The tree is the man himself.
18. Be it known that charity and faith make a one as do the will and the understanding, for charity is of the will, and faith is of the understanding. And in the same way, that charity and faith make a one as do affection and thought, because affection is of the will, and thought is of the understanding. And also that charity and faith make a one as do good and truth, because good is of affection which belongs to the will, and truth is of thought which belongs to the understanding. In a word, charity and faith make a one as do essence and form, because charity is the essence of faith, and faith is the form of charity. This shows that faith without charity is like a form without an essence, which is not anything at all; and that charity without faith is like an essence without a form, which likewise is not anything at all.
19. Charity and faith in a man are related to each other precisely as are the motion of the heart called systole and diastole, and that of the lungs called breathing. Moreover there is a full correspondence of these two with man's will and understanding, and therefore with charity and faith. For this reason the will and its affection are meant in the Word by the "heart," and the understanding and its thought by the "breath" [animam], and the "spirit" [spiritum], on which account to "give up the breath [animam]," or "yield up the spirit [spiritum]," means to cease to respire, or to expire. This shows that there cannot be faith without charity, nor charity without faith; faith without charity being like breathing with the lungs in the absence of a heart, which is impossible in any living being, but only in some artificial apparatus; and charity without faith being like a heart without any lungs, which can afford no conscious life; and therefore charity performs uses by means of faith, just as the heart does its work by means of the lungs. So great is the likeness between the heart and charity, and between the lungs and faith, that in the spiritual world every one is known in respect to the quality of his faith by his mere breathing, and in respect to that of his charity by the way his heart beats. For angels and spirits live by a heartbeat and breathing just as men do, and it is for this reason that they, equally with men in this world, feel, think, act, and speak.
...."
(out of "Doctrine of Faith", by Em. Swedenborg).
The initial faith could still be of grace. The presence of God, the Word of God, etc. My guess would be a common grace. It's just not from being born again and the life that is given. That's the result of that initial faith. I still think that the presence of God is most likely the answer. That presence was limited in the OT, but in the NT that presence is with every believer because of the indwelling that placed us in Christ that began to be given at Pentecost. All believers in the NT have the Spirit of Christ in them.
The question is ordo salutis and what does scripture teaches us.
We know that the grammar in Ephesians does not support "faith" simple, initial faith as being part of the gift because we a are dealing with a gendered language which makes is clear.
I don’t know about you, but I learned the gospel through the natural senses of hearing (Faith comes by hearing) and seeing (they searched the scriptures to see if these things were true).
Your distinction does not make any sense to me. It seems to be an arbitrary unscriptural distinction. Where do we find your theory presented in scripture?
Dave we were known by God the Father before the foundation of the cosmos. You can`t reconcile the spirit with any man made argument. The reason we strive and struggle (Christians) is to glorify the Son, through whom all things have been made.
I agree with our friend, before I had any knowledge of Scripture I had a moral compass and ``feeling`` guiding me ever since the age of 5 that I can remember. Then when I heard of Jesus it was named this spirit that dwelt within me.
You learned about the gospel through your natural senses, but you didn't believe until the Spirit employed the word of God to give you hearing. Faith doesn't come by hearing the word of God. Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
Initial faith and ongoing faith distinctions?
The Three Tenses Of God's Eternal Salvation Plainly Clears These Distinctions Up
For me. Amen.
------------------
And, precious friend(s), Please Be Very Richly Encouraged and Edified
In The Lord Jesus Christ and In His Precious Word Of Truth, Rightly
Divided:
The Bible: The BIG Picture
Amen.
The Three Tenses Of God's Eternal Salvation Plainly Clears These Distinctions Up
For me. Amen.
------------------
And, precious friend(s), Please Be Very Richly Encouraged and Edified
In The Lord Jesus Christ and In His Precious Word Of Truth, Rightly
Divided:
The Bible: The BIG Picture
Amen.
Where does it say that we were known by Him from the foundations of the cosmos? You are aware that "known" carries with it a pregnant meaning, right?
I'll start a thread on Romans 8:28-29 when these other threads that I'm involved in slow down a little. Please note, Romans 8:28-29 doesn't say 'whom He foreknew from the foundations of the cosmos'. That would be adding to the Word and a man made doctrine. I critiqued another who wrote about that passage from the reformed perspective. I actually once defended that idea. I understand why some would read that into that passage, but I believe that, as James White said when critiquing the Arminian view of that passage, that 'from the foundations of the world' is not part of the Text, and therefore not necessary to add to the meaning of the word foreknew in that passage. Also, we are elect "in Christ". As I said earlier to someone else, you have two choices, either we are 'in Christ' from the foundations of the world, or become elect when we are placed into Him. I think the latter is Biblical.
I was you. I know the whole schmeal. lol Well talk later, Lord willing.
Regarding OT believers, they were also justified by grace thru faith.
Abraham believed God and it was accounted to him for righteousness..before he offered up his son Isaac.
Job believed in a redeemer.
And Jesus, referring to the OT.. said search the scriptures, in them think ye have eternal life.
I can hear a car coming toward me on the road outside. I believe, from what I am hearing that there is a car coming from the east and heading west outside my house. My faith regarding the approaching vehicle comes by hearing, and my hearing the approaching car comes by the sound the vehicle is emitting. There is no special spiritual hearing implied by the preceding sentence.
Faith comes by hearing the word of God, and hearing the word of God comes by the word of God being audibly expressed to me. I see no implication here that the hearing of the word of God is spiritually different from my hearing of any other sounds. I could not believe news I had never imagined nor heard of; and once I did hear the news, I was able to believe it, or to decide to deny it.
If faith came simply by hearing the audible word of God, everyone who heard the word of God would believe. Since both subjectively and objectively we know know this isn't the case, perhaps there is more to hearing.
Jesus said that His sheep hear His voice. He doesn't say everyone hears My voice. Yet, we know that everyone who was present heard His voice audibly.
In Romans 1 Paul says he is not ashamed of the gospel because it is the power of God to those who believe. That power of God in the gospel is His grace exercised to the sheep. Just as Jesus opened the understanding of the 2 men He walked with on the road to Emmaus and gave them spiritual understanding, in like manner, God opens the understanding of those He saves. He gives them new hearts and spirits, and places His Spirit within them. Further, He writes His law both in their hearts and minds. This is what causes the individual to respond in faith and obedience.