02.30. Faith.
Chapter 30
Faith.
1. What, according to its etymology (linguistic development) and New Testament usage, is the meaning of the word
It is derived from the verb
1st. To express that state of mind which is induced by persuasion.—Romans 14:22.
2nd. It often signifies good faith, fidelity, sincerity.—Romans 3:3; Titus 2:10 3rd. Assent to the truth.—Php 1:27; 2 Thessalonians 2:13.
4th. Faith towards, on, or in God (
5th. It is used for the object of faith, viz., the revelation of the gospel.—Romans 1:5; Romans 10:8; 1 Timothy 4:1. Robinson’s “Lex. of New Testament.”
2. State the different meanings of the verb
1st. To assent to, to be persuaded of the truth.—Luke 1:20; John 3:12.
2nd. To credit the truth of a person.—John 5:46.
3rd. To trust, to have confidence in.—Acts 27:25. The phrases
3. How may faith be defined?
Faith is a complex act of the soul, involving the concurrent action of the understanding and the will, and modified in different instances of its exercise by the nature of its object, and of the evidence upon which it rests. The most general definition, embracing all its modifications, affirms faith to be “assent to truth upon the exhibition of the appropriate evidence. But it is evident that its nature must vary with the nature of the truth believed, and especially with the nature of the evidence upon which our assent is founded. Assent to a speculative or abstract truth is a speculative act; assent to a moral truth is a moral act; assent to a promise made to ourselves is an act of trust. Our belief that the earth moves round its axis is a mere assent; our belief in the excellence of virtue is of the nature of a moral judgment; our belief in a promise is an act of trust.” So likewise with respect to the evidence upon which our faith is founded. “The same man may believe the same truth on different grounds. One may believe the Christian system simply because others around him believe it, and he has been brought up to receive it without question; this is the faith of credulity. Another may believe it on the ground of its external evidence, e. g., of miracle, prophecy, history, its logical consistency as a system, or its plausibility as a theory in accounting for the phenomena of creation and providence. This is speculative faith. Another may believe, because the truths of the Bible recommend themselves to his reason and conscience, and accord with his inward experience. This faith is founded on moral evidence. There is another faith founded on the intrinsic excellence, beauty, and suitableness of the truth from a sense and love of its moral excellence. This is spiritual faith, which is the gift of God.”—“Way of Life.”
Religious faith is belief of the truth on the testimony of God. It includes, (1) Notitia, knowledge; (2) Assensus, assent; (3) Fiducia, trust.
4. To what extent is faith an act of the understanding, and how far an act of the will? The one indivisible soul knows and loves, desires and decides, and these several acts of the soul meet on the same object. The soul can neither love, desire, nor choose that which it does not know, nor can it know an object as true or good without some affection of will towards it. Assent to a purely speculative truth may be simply an act of understanding, but belief in a moral truth, in testimony, in promises, must be a complex act, embracing both the understanding and the will. The understanding apprehends the truth to be believed, and decides upon the validity of the evidence, but the disposition to believe testimony, or moral evidence, has its foundation in the will. Actual trust in a promise is an act of the will, and not a simple judgment as to its trustworthiness. There is an exact relation between the moral judgment and the affections, and the will, as the seat of the moral affections, determines the moral judgments. Therefore, as a man is responsible for his will, he is responsible for his faith. As far as faith includes an act of “cognition” it is, of course, purely an act of the understanding. But as far as it includes “Assent” and “Trust,” it involves also the spontaneous and active powers of the soul, that is, “the will,” and in its higher exercise it often involves deliberate volition itself.
5. What is the difference between knowledge and faith?
Generally, knowledge is the apprehension of an object as true, and faith is an assent to its truth. It is obvious, therefore, that in this general sense of the term every exercise of faith includes the knowledge of the object assented to. It is impossible to distinguish between the apprehension of the truthfulness of a purely speculative truth and an assent to it as true. In such a case faith and knowledge appear identical. But while the apprehension of the trustworthiness of a promise is knowledge, the actual reliance upon it is faith. The apprehension of the moral truthfulness of an object is knowledge, the assent to it, as good and desirable, is faith.
Sometimes the Scriptures use the word knowledge as equivalent to faith.—John 10:38; 1 John 2:3.
Generally, however, the Scriptures restrict the term knowledge to the apprehension of those ideas which we derive through the natural sources of sensation and reason and human testimony, while the term faith is restricted to the assent to those truths which rest upon the direct testimony of God alone, objectively revealed in the Scriptures, as discerned through spiritual illumination. Thus, faith is the “evidence of things not seen.”Hebrews 11:1. We are commanded “to walk by faith, and not by sight.”—2 Corinthians 5:7. Here the distinction between faith and knowledge has reference particularly to the mode of knowing The one is natural and discursive, the other supernatural and intuitive.
6. What distinction do the Romanists make between implicit and explicit faith?
Romanists and Protestants agree that it is not essential to faith that its object should be comprehended by the understanding. But, on the other hand, Protestants affirm, and Romanists deny, that it is essential that the object believed should be apprehended by the mind; that is, that knowledge of what we believe is essential to faith. The Romanists, therefore, have invented the distinction between explicit faith, which terminates upon an object distinctly apprehended by the mind, and implicit faith, which a man exercises in the truth of propositions of which he knows nothing. They hold that a man exercises explicit faith in a general proposition, he therein exercises implicit faith in every thing embraced in it, whether he knows what they are or not. If a man, for instance, has explicit faith that the church is an infallible teacher, he thereby exercises virtual or implicit faith in every doctrine taught by the church, although he may be ignorant as to what those doctrines are. They distinguish, moreover, between those truths which it is necessary to regard with explicit faith, and those which may he held implicitly. They commonly teach that it is necessary for the people to hold only three doctrines explicitly, 1st, that God is;
2nd, that he is a rewarder, including future rewards and punishments;
3rd, that he is a redeemer.
“This doctrine has been recently revived by the Puseyites, under the title of reserve. The distinguishing truths of the gospel, instead of being clearly presented, should, it is said, be concealed or kept in reserve. The people may gaze upon the cross as the symbol of redemption, but need not know whether it is the form, or the material, or the great sacrifice once enacted on it, to which the efficacy is due. ‘Religious light is intellectual darkness,’ says Dr. Newman. This theory rests upon the same false assumption that faith can exist without knowledge.”—Dr. Hodge.
7. What is the difference between knowing and understanding a thing, and how far is knowledge essential to faith?
We know a thing when we simply apprehend it as true. We understand it only when we fully comprehend its nature, and the perfect consistency of all its properties with each other and with the entire system of things of which it forms a part. We know the doctrine of the trinity when its several parts are stated to us, but no creature can ever understand it. That knowledge, or simple apprehension of the object believed and confided in, is essential to faith, is evident from the nature of faith itself. It is that state of mind which bears the relation of assent to a certain object, involving that action of understanding and of will which is appropriate to that object. If a man loves, fears, or believes, he must love, fear, or believe some object, for it is evident that these states of mind can exist only in relation to their appropriate objects. If a real object is not present the imagination may present an ideal one, but that very fiction of the imagination must first be apprehended as true (or known) before it can be assented to as true (or believed) Just as it is impossible for a man to enjoy beauty without perceiving it in some object of the mind, or to exercise complacent love in a virtuous act without perceiving it, so it is, for the same reason, impossible for a man to exercise faith without knowing what he believes. “Implicit faith” is a perfectly unmeaning formula.
8. How can the fact that knowledge is essential to faith be proved from Scripture?
1st. From the etymology (linguistic development) of the word
2nd. From the use of the word knowledge in Scripture as equivalent to faith.—John 10:38; 1 John 2:3.
3rd. From what the Bible teaches as to the source of faith. It comes by teaching.—Romans 10:14-17.
4th. The Scriptures declare that the regenerate are enlightened, have received the unction, and know all things.—Acts 26:18; 1 Corinthians 2:12-15; Colossians 3:10.
5th. The means of salvation consist in the dissemination of the truth. Christ is the great teacher. Ministers are teachers.—1 Corinthians 4:1; 1 Timothy 3:2; 1 Timothy 4:13. Christians are begotten by the truth, sanctified by the truth.—John 17:19; James 1:18. Dr. Hodge.
9. How are those passages to be explained which speak of knowledge as distinguished from faith?
Although every act of faith presupposes an act of knowledge yet both the faith and the knowledge vary very much, both with the nature of the object known and believed, and with the manner ill which the knowledge is received, and with the evidence upon which the faith rests. The faith which the Scriptures distinguish from knowledge is the strong persuasion of things not seen. It is the conviction of the truth of things which do not fall within the compass of our own observation which may entirely transcend the powers of our understanding, and which rest upon the simple testimony of God. This testimony faith relies upon in spite of whatever to human reason appears inconsistent or impossible.
Knowledge though essential to faith may be distinguished from it—
1st. As faith includes also an act of the will assenting, in addition to the act of the understanding apprehending.
2nd. As knowledge derived through a natural is distinguished from knowledge derived through a divine source.
3rd. As present imperfect apprehension of divine things (i. e., faith) differs from that perfect knowledge oft divine things we shall have in heaven.—1 Corinthians 13:12.
10. If faith necessarily includes knowledge how can men be commanded to believe?
1st. No man is ever commanded to believe that which is not revealed to him, either in the light of nature or by the inspired word.
2nd. No man is ever commanded to believe a purely speculative truth. The truths of religion rest on the testimony of God. They are enforced by moral evidence, and faith in them involves a moral and spiritual knowledge of them, and delight in them. Moral evidence can be appreciated only by a mind possessed of moral sensibility. And such moral insensibility as leads to blindness to the distinction between right and wrong is itself a very aggravated state of depravity. The Scriptures, therefore, luminous with their own self–evidencing light, present the truth to all to whom they come, and demand its instant reception upon the testimony of God. If that evidence is not felt to be conclusive by any one, it must be because of the sinful blindness of his mind. Therefore Christ says, “ye will not come unto me that ye may have life.” And unbelief is uniformly charged to the “evil heart.”
11. What are the ultimate grounds of that assent to the truth which is of the essence of faith? In general, the ultimate ground upon which our assent to the truth of any object of knowledge rests is the veracity of God. The testimony of our senses, the integrity of our consciences, the intuitions of our reasons, all rest upon his veracity as Creator. Practically the mind is moved to this assent through our universal and instinctive confidence in the constitution of our own natures.
Religious faith rests, 1st, upon the faithfulness of, God as pledged in his supernatural revelation, John 3:33;
2nd, upon the evidence of spiritual illumination, personal experience of the power of the truth, and the witness of the Holy Ghost, the Sanctifier, and thus “not in the wisdom of man, but in the power of God.”—1 Corinthians 2:5-12.
12. What are the two kinds of evidence by which we know that God has revealed certain truths as objects of faith?
1st. The evidence which resides in the truth itself. Moral, spiritual, experimental, rational.—John 6:63; John 14:17; John 14:26; Jeremiah 23:29.
2nd. The accrediting evidence of the presence and power of God accompanying the promulgation of the truth, and proving that it is from him. These are miracles, providential dispensations, the fulfillment of prophecy, etc.—John 5:36; Hebrews 2:4.
13. How can it be shown that the authority of the Church is not a ground of faith?
See above, Chapter 5., Question 18.
14. What is the nature of historical faith and upon evidence does it rest? That mode of purely rational faith called historical is that apprehension of and assent to the truth which regards it in its purely rational aspects as mere facts of history, or as mere parts of a logical system of opinion. Its appropriate evidence is purely rational, e. g., the solution afforded by the Scriptures of the acts of history and experience, and the evidence of history, prophecy, miracles, etc.
15. What is the nature of temporary faith, and of the evidence upon which it is founded?
Temporary faith is that state of mind often experienced in this world by impenitent hearers of the gospel, induced by the moral evidence of the truth, the common influences of the Holy Ghost, and the power of religious sympathy. Sometimes the excited imagination joyfully appropriates the promises of the gospel.—Matthew 13:20. Sometimes, like Felix, the man believes and trembles. Oftentimes it is at first impossible to distinguish this state of mind from genuine saving faith. But not springing from a divine work of recreation it has no root in the permanent principles of the heart. It is always, therefore, 1st, inefficient, neither purifying the heart nor overcoming the world; 2d, temporary.
16. What is the specific evidence upon which saving faith is founded? This is the light let into the soul by the Holy Ghost in his work of spiritual illumination. Thus is the beauty, and excellence, and the suitableness of the truth to the practical wants of the subject apprehended. With this the witness of the Holy Ghost with and by the truth cooperates.—1 Corinthians 2:4-5; Romans 8:16; 2 Corinthians 4:6; Ephesians 2:8.
17. How may it be proved from Scripture and experience that spiritual illumination is the ground of saving faith?
1st. The Scriptures, wherever they come, make a demand unconditional, immediate, and universal upon the most intelligent and the most ignorant alike, that they should be received and believed, and unbelief is always charged as sin, and not as mere ignorance or mental incapacity. The faith which they demand must, therefore, be a moral act, and must depend upon the spiritual congeniality of the believer with the truth.
2nd. By nature men are spiritually blind, and subjects of an “evil heart of unbelief.”—2 Corinthians 3:14; 2 Corinthians 4:4.
3rd. Believers are said to be enlightened, and to discern the things of the Spirit.—Acts 13:48; 2 Corinthians 4:6; Ephesians 1:17-18; 1 John 2:20; 1 John 2:27; 1 John 5:9-10.
4th. Men believe because they are taught of God.—John 6:44-45.
5th. Every Christian is conscious of believing, because he sees the truth believed to be true, lovely, powerful, and satisfying.
6th. This is proved by the effects of faith. “We are said to live by faith, to be sanctified by faith, to overcome by faith, to be saved by faith Blind consent to authority, or rational conviction, produce no such effects; if the effects are spiritual, the source must be also spiritual.”
18. What are the different opinions as to the relation between faith and trust? In consequence of their doctrine of implicit faith, that nothing is required beyond blind assent to the teachings of the church, Romanists necessarily deny that trust enters into the essence of saving faith. The Sandemanians, as the Campbellites, holding that faith is a mere affirmative judgment of the understanding passed upon the truth on the ground of evidence, also deny that trust is an element of saving faith.
Some orthodox theologians have held that trust is rather to be regarded as an immediate and invariable consequent of saving faith, than an element of that faith itself.
Religious faith resulting from spiritual illumination, respects the entire word of God and his testimony, and, as such, is a complex state of mind, varying with the nature of the particular portion of revealed truth regarded in any particular act. Many of the propositions of Scripture are not the proper objects of trust, and then the faith which embraces them is only a reverent and complacent assent to them as true and good. But the specific act of saving faith which unites to Christ, and is the commencement, root, and organ of our whole spiritual life, terminates upon Christ’s person and work as Mediator, as presented in the offers and promises of the gospel. This assuredly includes trust in its very essence, and this is called “saving faith” by way of eminence, since it is the faith that saves, and since only through this as their principle, are any other more general exercises of saving faith possible.
19. How may the fact that saving faith includes trust be proved from the language of Scripture? The uniform and single condition of salvation presented in the Scriptures is expressed in the words believe in or on Christ,
20. How may the same be proved from those expressions which are used in Scripture as equivalent to the phrase “believing in Christ”?
“Receiving Christ.”—John 1:12; Colossians 2:6. “Looking to Christ.”—Isaiah 14:22; compare Numbers 21:9 with John 3:14-15. “Flying to Christ for refuge.”—Hebrews 6:18. “Coming to Christ.”—John 6:35; Matthew 11:28. “Committing.”—2 Timothy 1:12. All these illustrate as well as designate the act of saving faith, and all equally imply trust as an essential element, for we can “receive,” or “come to,” or “look to,” Christ only in that character of a propitiation, an advocate and a deliverer, in which he offers himself to us.
21. How may the same be proved from the effects which the Scriptures ascribe to faith? The Scriptures declare that by faith the Christian “embraces the promises,”“is persuaded of the promises,”“out of weakness is made strong,”“waxes valiant in fight,”“confesses himself a stranger and pilgrim seeking a better country.” As faith in a threatening necessarily involves fear, so faith in a promise necessarily involves trust.
Besides, faith rests upon the trustworthiness of God, and therefore necessarily involves trust.—Hebrews 10:23, and the whole of Hebrews 11:1-40.
22. How may it be shown that this view of faith does not confound faith and hope? To our doctrine that saving faith involves trust, the Romanist objects that this confounds faith and hope, which the Scriptures distinguish (1 Corinthians 13:13), since hope is only strong trust. But hope is not merely strong trust. Trust rests upon the grounds of assurance, while hope reaches forward to the object of which assurance is given. Trust is the foundation of hope. Hope is the fruit of trust. The more confiding the trust, the more assured the hope.
23. What are the different opinions as to the relation between faith and love, and the Romish distinction between“fides informis ”and“fides formata ”?
1st. The Romanists, in order to maintain their doctrine that faith alone is not saving, distinguish between a formed, or perfect, and an unformed faith. They acknowledge that faith is distinct from love, but maintain that love is essential to render faith meritorious and effectual as the instrument of our salvation. Fides informis(uniformed faith) is mere assent, explicit or implicit, to the teachings of the Church. It necessarily precedes “justification” as its condition. Fides formata(informed faith) is the fruit of the first justification, and the condition of those good works which merit further grace.
2nd. Some have regarded love as the root out of which faith springs.
3rd. The true view is that love is the immediate and necessary effect of faith. Faith includes the spiritual apprehension of the beauty and excellence of the truth, and an act of the will embracing it and relying upon it. Yet these graces can not be analytically separated, since they mutually involve one another. There can be no love without faith, nor any faith without love. Faith apprehends the loveliness of the object, the heart spontaneously loves it. Thus “faith works by love,” since these affections are the source of those motives that control the will. The Romish doctrine is inconsistent with the essential principles of the gospel. Faith is not a work, nor can it have, when formed or unformed, any merit; it is essentially a self–emptying act, which saves by laying hold of the merits of Christ. It leads to works, and proves itself by its fruits, but in its relation to justification it is in its very nature a strong protest against the merits of all human works.—Galatians 3:10-11; Ephesians 2:8-9. The Protestant doctrine that love is the fruit of faith, is established by what the Scriptures declare concerning faith, that it “sanctifies,”“works by love,”“overcomes the world.”Galatians 5:6; Acts 26:18; 1 John 5:4. This is accomplished thus—by faith we are united to Christ, Ephesians 3:17, and so become partakers of his Spirit, 1 John 3:24, one of the fruits of the Spirit is love, Galatians 5:22, and love is the principle of all obedience.—Romans 13:10.
24. What is the object of saving faith? The spiritual illumination of the understanding and renewal of the affections, which lays the foundation for the soul’s acting faith in any one portion of the testimony of God, lays the foundation for its acting faith in all that testimony. The whole revealed word of God, then, as far as known to the individual, to the exclusion of all traditions, doctrines of men, and pretended private revelations, is the object of saving faith. That particular act of faith, however, which unites to Christ, called, by way of distinction, justifying faith, has for its object the person and work of Christ as Mediator.—John 7:38; Acts 16:31.
25. What is meant by an article of faith as distinguished from a matter of opinion? The Romanists hold that every dogma decided by the church to be true, whether derived from scripture or tradition, is, upon pain of damnation, to be believed by every Christian as an article of faith, if known to him by an explicit, if not known by an implicit faith. On the other hand, with respect to all subjects not decided by the church, every man is left free to believe or not as a matter of opinion.
26. What is the Anglican or Puseyite criterion for distinguishes those doctrines which must be known and believed in order to salvation?
They agree with the Romanists (see above, Question 6) that knowledge is not essential to faith. As to the rule of faith, however, they differ. The Romanist makes that rule the teaching of the Papal Church. The Puseyites, on the other hand, make it the uniform testimony of tradition running in the line of the succession of apostolic bishops.
27. What is the common Protestant doctrine as to fundamentals in religion, and by what evidence can such fundamentals be ascertained?
Every doctrine taught in the Bible is the object of an enlightened spiritual faith. No revealed principle, however comparatively subordinate, can be regarded as indifferent, to be adopted or rejected at will. Every man is bound to credit the whole testimony of God. Yet the gospel is a logically consistent system of truth, some of whose principles are essential to its integrity, while others are essential only to its symmetry and perfection; and ignorance, feebleness of logical comprehension, and prejudice may, and constantly do, lead good men to apprehend this system of truth imperfectly. A fundamental doctrine, then, is either one which every soul must apprehend more or less clearly in order to be saved, or one which when known, is so clearly involved with those the knowledge and belief of which is essential to salvation, that the one can not be rejected while the really believed. A fundamental doctrine is ascertained—
1st. In the same way that the essential principles of any other system are determined mined, by their bearing upon the system as a whole.
2nd. Every fundamental doctrine is clearly revealed.
3rd. These doctrines are in Scripture itself declared to be essential.—John 3:18; Acts 16:31; 2 Corinthians 5:17; Galatians 2:21; 1 John 1:8.
28. What is the object of“fides specialis,”or that specific act of faith whereby we are justified? The person and work of the Lord Jesus Christ as Mediator. This is proved—
1st. The Scriptures expressly declare that we are justified by that faith of which Christ is the object.—Romans 3:22; Romans 3:25; Galatians 2:16; Php 3:9.
2nd. We are said to be saved by faith in Christ.—John 3:16; John 3:36; Acts 10:43; Acts 16:31.
3rd. Justifying faith is designated as a “looking to Christ,” a “coming to Christ,” etc.—John 1:12; John 6:35; John 6:37; Isaiah 14:22.
4th. Rejection of Christ; a refusal to submit to the righteousness of God is declared to be the ground of reprobation. John 8:24; John 3:18-19.
29. How is the Romish doctrine on this point opposed to the Protestant? The Romanists, confounding justification and sanctification, hold that faith justifies through the sanctifying power of the truth. As all revealed truth has this sanctifying virtue, it follows that the whole revelation of God as ascertained by the decisions of the church, is the object of justifying faith. This is refuted by all we have established from Scripture concerning justification, sanctification, and faith.
30. Is Christ in all his offices, or only as priest, the immediate object of justifying faith? In this act the believer appropriates and rests upon Christ as Mediator, which includes at once all his functions as such. These may be analytically distinguished, but in fact they are always inseparably united in him. When he acts as prophet he teaches as king and priest. When he reigns he sits as prophet and priest upon his throne. Besides this, his prophetical and kingly work are consciously needed by the awakened soul, and are necessarily apprehended as inseparable from his priestly work in the one act of faith.
It is true, however, that as the substitutionary work which Christ accomplished as priest is the meritorious ground of our salvation, so his priestly character is made the more prominent, both in the teachings of Scripture and in the experience of his people.
31. To what extent is peace of conscience and peace with God a necessary consequence of faith?
Peace with God is reconciliation with him. Peace of conscience may either mean consciousness of that reconciliation, or the appeasement of our own consciences which condemn us. Faith in every instance secures our peace with God, since it unites us to Christ, Romans 5:1; and in the proportion in which faith in the merits of Christ is clear and constant will be our consciousness of reconciliation with God, and the satisfaction of our own moral sense that righteousness is fulfilled, while we are forgiven. Yet as faith may be obscured by sin, so the true believer may temporarily fall under his Father’s displeasure, and lose his sense of forgiveness and his moral satisfaction in the perfection of the atonement.
32. What are the three views entertained as to the relation between faith and assurance?
1st. The Reformers generally maintained that justifying faith consisted in appropriating the promise of salvation through Christ made in the gospel, i. e., in regarding God as propitious to us for Christ’s sake. Thus the very act of faith involves assurance.
2nd. Some have held that assurance in this life is unattainable. The Romanists, holding that Christian faith is chiefly implicit assent and obedient conformity to the teachings of an infallible, visible society, called the Church, strenuously denied that private individuals have any scriptural authority to entertain an assured persuasion that they are specially objects of divine favor. They were accustomed to assert that it is neither “obligatory,” nor “possible,” nor “desirable” that any one should attain such assurance without a special supernatural revelation. See Bellarmin, etc., quoted below.
3rd. The true view is that “although this infallible assurance does not belong to the essence of faith, but that a true believer may wait long and conflict with many difficulties before he partake of it, yet being enabled by the Spirit to know the things which are freely given him by God, he may, without extraordinary revelation, in the right use of ordinary means attain thereunto. And, therefore, it is the duty of each one to give diligence to make his calling and election sure.” It is agreed by all that a true faith can not admit of any doubt as to its object. What is believed is assuredly believed. But the object of saving faith is Christ and his work as Mediator guaranteed to us in the promises of the gospel on the condition of faith. True faith does, therefore, essentially include the assurance—
1st. That Christ is able to save us.
2nd. That he is faithful and will save us if we believe It is meant that this is of the essence of faith, not that every true believer always enjoys a state of mind which excludes all doubt as to Christ’s power or love; because the spiritual illumination upon which faith rests is often imperfect in degree and variable in exercise. Faith may be weak, or it may be limited by doubt, or it may alternate with doubt. Yet all such doubt is of sin, and is alien to the essential nature of faith. But the condition, if we believe, upon which all assurance of our own salvation is suspended, is a matter not of revelation, but of experience, not of faith, but of consciousness.
Theologians have, therefore, made a distinction between the Assurance’,’of faith, Hebrews 10:22, and the assurance of hope, Hebrews 6:11. The first is of the essence of saving faith, and is the assurance that Christ is all that he professes to be, and will do all that he promises. The second is the assurance of our own personal salvation, is a fruit of faith, and one of the higher attainments of the Christian life.
33. How may it be proved that assurance of our own personal salvation is not essential to saving faith?
1st. From the true object of saving faith as given above.
2nd. From the examples given in the Scriptures of eminent saints who doubted with regard to themselves.—1 Corinthians 9:27.
3rd. from the exhortations addressed to those who were already believers to attain to assurance as a degree of faith beyond that which they already enjoyed.
4th. From the experience of God’s people in all ages.
34. How may it be proved that assurance is attainable in this life?
1st. This is directly asserted.—Romans 8:16; 2 Peter 1:10; 1 John 2:3; 1 John 3:14; 1 John 5:13.
2nd. Scriptural examples are given of its attainment.—2 Timothy 1:12; 2 Timothy 4:7-8.
3rd. Many eminent Christians have enjoyed an abiding assurance, of the genuineness of which their holy walk and conversation was an indubitable seal.
35. On what grounds may a man be assured of his salvation?
“It is an infallible Assurance’,’of faith, founded, 1st, upon the divine truth of the promises of salvation;
2nd, the inward evidence of those graces unto which those promises are made, and,
3rd, the testimony of the spirit of adoption, Romans 8:15-16, witnessing with our spirits that we are the children of God. Which Spirit, Ephesians 1:13-14; 2 Corinthians 1:21-22, is the earnest of our inheritance whereby we are sealed to the day of redemption. Con. of Faith,” Chap. 18. This genuine assurance may be distinguished from that presumptuous confidence which is a delusion of Satan, chiefly by these marks. True assurance, 1st, begets unfeigned humility, 1 Corinthians 15:10; Galatians 6:14;
2nd, leads to ever–increasing diligence in practical religion, Psalms 12:1-8; Psalms 13:1-6; Psalms 19:1-14;
3rd, to candid self–examination, and a desire to be searched and corrected by God, Psalms 139:23-24;
4th, to constant aspirations after neater conformity, and more intimate communion with God.—1 John 3:2-3.
36. How may it be shown that a living faith necessarily leads to good works?
1st. from the nature of faith. It is the spiritual apprehension and the voluntary embrace of the whole truth of God,—the promises, the commands, the threatenings of the Scripture,—viewed as true and as good. This faith occasions, of course, the exercise of the renewed affections, and love acted out is obedience. Each separate truth thus apprehended produces its appropriate effect upon the heart, an) consequently upon the life.
2nd. The testimony of Scripture.—Acts 15:9; Galatians 5:6; James 2:18; 1 John 5:4.
3rd. The experience of the universal church.
AUTHORITATIVE STATEMENTS.
St. Augustine.—“Quid est fides nisi credere quod non vides?”
ROMISH DOCTRINE.—“Cat. Counc. Trent,” i. 1.—1. “We here speak of that faith, by force of which we yield our entire assent to whatsoever has been divinely delivered, . . . . by virtue of which we hold that as fixed whatsoever the authority of our holy mother the church teaches us to have been delivered from God.”
Bellarmin, “Justif.,” 1, 4.—“(Catholics) teach that historic faith, both of miracles and of promises, is one and the same thing, and that this one thing is not properly a knowledge or assurance, but a certain and most fixed assent, on the authority of the ultimate verity. . . . The object of justifying faith, which heretics restrict to the single object of special (personal) mercy, Catholics wish to extend as broadly as the word of God extends; nay, they contend that the promise of special mercy belongs not so much to faith as to presumption. Hence they differ (from Protestants) as to the faculty and power of mind which is the seat of faith. Inasmuch as they (Protestants) locate faith in the will, they define it to be assurance (fiducia)(or trust), and so confound it with hope, for trust (or assurance) is nothing more than strong hope, as holy Thomas teaches. Catholics teach that faith has its seat in the intellect. Lastly (they differ) as to the act itself of the intellect (in which faith consists). They (Protestants), indeed, define faith as a form of knowledge, we (Catholics) as assent. For we assent to God, although he proposes things to us to be believed which we do not understand. Ch. 7.—In him, who believes, there are two things, apprehension, and judgment or assent. But apprehension is not faith, but something that precedes faith. Besides apprehension is not properly called knowledge. For it may happen that an unlearned Catholic may only very confusedly apprehend the three names (of the Trinity), and nevertheless may truly believe in them. But judgment or assent is twofold, the one follows reason and the evidence of a thing, the other follows the authority of the propounder, the first is called knowledge, the latter faith. Therefore the mysteries of faith, which transcend the reason, we believe but do not understand, so that faith is distinguished as opposite to science, and is better defined as ignorance than as knowledge.”
“Cans. Counc. Trent,” Sess. 6, ch. 9.—“For even as no pious person ought to doubt of the mercy of God, of the merits of Christ, and of the virtue and efficacy of the sacraments, even so each one, when he regards himself and his own weakness and indisposition, may have fear and apprehension touching his own grace; seeing that no one can know with a certainty of faith, which can not be subject to error, that he has obtained the grace of God.”
Bellarmin, “Justif.,” 3, 3 says, “The question in debate between Romanists and the Reformed was, Whether any one should or could, without a special revelation, be certain with the certainty of a divine faith, to which error can in no way pertain, that his sins are remitted?” THE PROTESTANT DOCTRINE OF FAITH AND ASSURANCE.
Calvin’s “Institutes,” B. 3, ch. 2, sect. 7.—“We shall have a complete definition of faith, if we say that it is a steady and certain knowledge of the divine benevolence towards us, which, being founded on the truth of the gratuitous promise in Christ, is both revealed to our minds and confirmed to our hearts by the Holy Spirit.”
“Heidelberg Cat.,” Ques. 21.—“What is true faith? It is not a mere knowledge, by which I firmly assent to all that God has revealed to us in his word, but it is also an assured confidence kindled in my heart by the Holy Ghost through the gospel, whereby I acquiesce in God, certainly knowing, that not to others only, but to me also, remission of sins, eternal righteousness and life, is given gratuitously, of the mercy of God, on account of the merit of Christ alone. ”
“Apol. Augb. Confession,” p. 68.—“But that faith which justifies is not merely a knowledge of history; but it is assent to the promise of God in which is freely, for Christ’s sake, offered the remission of sins and justification. . . . This special faith, therefore, whereby each one believes that his own sins are remitted to him for Christ’s sake, and that God is reconciled and propitious through Christ, (is the faith that attains remission of sins, and (that) justifies.”
“West. Confession Faith,” ch. 18, sect. 2.—“This certainly is not a bare conjectural and probable persuasion, grounded upon a fallible hope, but an infallible Assurance’,’of faith, founded on (a) the divine truth of the promises (b) the inward evidence of those graces to which the promises are made, and (c) the testimony of the Holy Spirit . . . . Sect. 3.—This infallible assurance doth not so belong to the essence of faith, but that a true believer may wait long and conflict with many difficulties before he partake thereof. . . Yet he may, without extraordinary revelation, in the right use of ordinary means attain thereto. And, therefore, it is the duty of every one to give all diligence to make his calling and election sure.”
Turretin, 2. 15, Q. 10.—“The diversity (of expression) which occurs between the orthodox has arisen from a different usage of the word fiducia(confidence), which may be taken in three senses:1. For confident assent, or persuasion, which arises from the practical judgment of the understanding, concerning the truth and goodness of the evangelical promises, and concerning the power, willingness, and faithfulness of God promising. In which sense