As we saw in the previous chapter the Hardshell Primitive Baptists give a definition to "faith" (noun - Greek "pistis") and "believe" (verb - Greek pisteuō) that is unscriptural. See my post "pisteuō and pistis" (here) for a larger commentary on the meaning of these Greek words.
There are several errors that people have on "faith" (pistis) as it is used in the Bible. Some say there are two kinds of faith, one that denotes belief and another that denotes the ability to believe. I will have more to say on this shortly. Another error that some have is to say that "faith" sometimes means "faithfulness" in the Bible. It is true that the verb "believe" is often in a present tense linear form so as to mean "believing habitually" but that is not the same as "faithfulness." It is interesting that the Hebrew word for "faith" in "the just shall live by faith" (Habakkuk 2: 4) is the same word translated as "faithfulness" in many places in the old testament. However, in the KJV new testament the Greek word for "faith" is never translated as "faithfulness." Also, we have the adjective pistos and would in that case include the idea of faithful, or simply mean "man of faith."
Dr. Mack Griffin who tutored me in Greek taught that the noun faith had a drastic difference in meaning than the verb believe. I disagreed and argued with him about that. I told him that there was no essential difference in me saying "I love (verb) you" versus "I have love (noun) for you." When Jesus said "have faith in God" (Mark 11: 22) he means "believe and trust God."
Many think that when Paul spoke of unbelief not making "the faith of God without effect" (Rom. 3: 3) that "faith of God" means "faithfulness of God." However, I think that is quite unlikely. I give several reasons why this is not so in my eleven part series titled "God's Faith?" You can read them in the archives of this blog for January through March of 2016. It is clear from the context that "faith of God" denotes the same thing as the creed of God as when Jude says believers should "contend earnestly for the faith." (Jude 3)
Faith is belief in something, assurance of truth, a persuasion of religious doctrine, and when directed towards a person involves trust. It also may denote the set of beliefs that are believed. By its very nature it is cognitive and involves the mind and a person's thoughts or creed. To speak of "faith" as not involving belief, or cognition, or being below consciousness, is totally without foundation in scripture, nor do people use the word in this manner in common speech. I will enlarge upon this in this and the next chapter. For now let us return to what Elder Sylvester Hassell wrote in "The Gospel Messenger" for May 1926, in an article titled "ANOTHER UNPROFITABLE AND DEPLORABLE STRIFE OF WORDS." He wrote:
"All Primitive Baptists are agreed upon the unconditionality of our eternal salvation, and the inability of those who are dead in sin to render spiritual obedience to the law of God. Instead of repentance and faith being conditions prerequisite to salvation, we understand that they are the work of the Holy Spirit in the renewed heart, and are thus essential parts of salvation; and, until this spiritual renewal, the fallen child of Adam will love sin and hate holiness and continue in rebellion against God."
So, according to Hassell, is faith and repentance necessary for salvation? He says that they do not precede salvation, but he does affirm that both are "essential parts of salvation." That is not what most "Primitive Hardshell Baptists" believe today. If faith and repentance are essential parts of salvation, then he must affirm that the preaching of the gospel is a means in producing faith and repentance. We have already seen where the apostle Paul says "faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God." (Rom. 10: 17) And, repentance is likewise a result of hearing the word of God. The same apostle said:
"6 And you became followers of us and of the Lord, having received the word in much affliction, with joy of the Holy Spirit, 7 so that you became examples to all in Macedonia and Achaia who believe. 8 For from you the word of the Lord has sounded forth, not only in Macedonia and Achaia, but also in every place. Your faith toward God has gone out, so that we do not need to say anything. 9 For they themselves declare concerning us what manner of entry we had to you, and how you turned to God from idols to serve the living and true God, 10 and to wait for His Son from heaven, whom He raised from the dead, even Jesus who delivers us from the wrath to come." (I Thess. 1: 6-10 nkjv)
Here we see that the saved people Paul addresses in the church of Thessalonica had become followers of the Lord as a result of "having received the word" that he preached and revealed to them. We also see that they became believers or possessed faith as a result of hearing Paul preach the word. We also see how their repentance, or their having "turned to God from idols," which is what repentance is, was the result of having heard the preaching of Paul.
Elder R.H. Pittman, who compiled these Questions and Answers in 1935 while Sylvester was still alive, responded to the following question with his own answer (emphasis mine):
"Q. How shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? and how shall they preach except they be sent? Does this mean that there is no salvation in heaven where there are no preachers to preach?
A. No. Paul was defending the preaching of the gospel, to the Gentiles. And remember, there is a gospel faith - a belief of gospel truths, separate and distinct from the faith of God's elect. The saving faith of God's elect may exist in those who never hear or understand the preaching of the gospel. Infants, idiots, the deaf, and millions cannot be reached by the preached gospel, and surely there is salvation for them. However, there is need for the preached gospel, and a belief of gospel truths is proof that such believer "hath everlasting life." The right living and right preaching of a minister also saves from false ways and false doctrines. In this sense they cannot believe and cannot be saved without the preacher, and there cannot be preaching unless one is sent to preach."
Notice that Pittman gives no scripture that says 1) that the faith of God's elect is not a faith in the gospel or word of God, and 2) that "saving faith of God's elect may exist in those who never hear or understand the preaching of the gospel." Further, how can he say this since his mentor, Sylvester Hassell, is on record as saying: "Jesus is the Great Preacher, and, by His omnipresent Spirit, He preaches His gospel savingly to His people (Isa. 61:1-3,10,11; Luke 4:16-30; Heb. 2:11,12; Psalm 110:3)"? How can he say this when Paul says "faith comes by hearing the word of God"? (Rom. 10: 17) Paul did not say: "one kind of faith comes by the word of God and another kind of faith does not come by the word of God."
Notice also that Pittman not only gives no scripture to support his assertions but relies on human reasoning or philosophy, saying "Infants, idiots, the deaf, and millions cannot be reached by the preached gospel, and surely there is salvation for them." How does he know that? The scriptures do not address this question and "secret things belong unto the Lord." (Deut. 29: 29) On that we will have more to say in the next chapter.
Also, notice that according to Pittman God's salvation of millions does not save them from "false ways and false doctrines." This is what the Hardshells more and more began to believe as the 19th century was coming to an end. A person could be regenerated or born again and yet still believe in many false gods and false religions. On the argumentation that the salvation of infants proves that the word of God is no means in salvation, I will have more to say shortly.
The hermeneutical method Hardshell apologists use to defend their tenet that says the written word of God or the Gospel is no means in salvation, whether in the new birth, or in eternal salvation, when confronted with texts that seem to contradict that tenet, is to say that when the salvation of a text is conditioned upon hearing or believing the word of God, or on anything a person does, then it is not talking about eternal salvation, or regeneration, but a "time salvation" which is not necessary for eternal salvation. In this post (here) I cited from Elder David Montgomery of recent years who cited from Elder Afton Richards (who I met in 1976 when I was preaching in Texas Primitive Baptist churches) and his book "Why I Am A Primitive Baptist" (1956). In it Richards gave us the Hardshell method for dealing with texts that say faith and hearing the gospel are means in salvation, writing the following:
"When salvation refers to what God does for man without action on his part, and by the meritorious work of Christ, they (Hardshells) know and realize that it refers to salvation in its highest order; preparing one to live with God in glory after death. When salvation is mentioned in connection with the acts of men; or man is to perform some action to bring about a better situation for himself, they know it is to be to the child of God (one freed from the guilt of sin), and refers to a timely deliverance, or something that is for man's benefit while he lives here in the world."
By this we see how their denial of means controls how they interpret scripture regarding salvation. They believe their proposition is absolute, inspired truth, and they pervert scripture to make it agree with their proposition, a proposition which is not taught in scripture. However, they should revise their man-made propositions to conform with scripture. The same is true with their hermeneutical method regarding faith and its relation to salvation. That method is stated by Pittman in the above citation.
Most times the Hardshells will say that "faith" is no means, nor condition, nor necessary prerequisite for being eternally saved, affirming that it only 1) saves in a temporal sense and not in an eternal sense, and 2) when a text is dealing with eternal salvation to say that the "faith" is a "seed faith" which is "hidden" or "dormant" or "latent" in a person and which does not believe any gospel truth. In my post "Hassell on Faith" (here) I cited from his editorial "Faith and it's Relation to Salvation" in "The Gospel Messenger" for May, 1898. In it he wrote the following about this "latent faith":
"Even in that fear of the Lord which is the beginning of wisdom, and in evangelical repentance towards God for sins against Him, there is latent or hidden faith, just as there may be in a liquid a dissolved and unseen solid; and this latent faith, while it does not comfort, yet does something even more important in humbling the soul and causing it to hate sin..."
Hassell gives no scripture to prove his thesis about faith. His analogy of "latent faith" being a kind of deposit or solid substance deposited in water, thus becoming an "unseen solid," is an invention that has no support in scripture. A better metaphor for this view of "latent faith" would be to compare it to a virus, parasite, or germ. In fact many who hold this view say it is comparable to a "seed" and so speak of "seed faith." This view was borrowed from the Paedo Baptists as a result of their practice of baptizing infants.
"Latent" or "Seed" Faith
Paedo Baptist theologian Francis Turretin (1623 -1687) wrote (as cited here; emphasis mine):
“Although infants do not have actual faith, the seed or root of faith cannot be denied to them, which is ingenerated in them from early age and in its own time goes forth in act (human instrumentation being applied from without and a greater efficacy of the Holy Spirit within)” (Institutes 15.14.13, vol 2, p. 586)."
You can read more about what Turretin wrote on this in his "The Faith of Infants" (here). The Rev. Dr. Robert S. Rayburn of Good Shepherd PC, Minneapolis said the following in elaborating this view of the infant baptizers (See here; emphasis mine):
"This sermon relates in a general way to the baptism of my granddaughter, but as often as I have preached about baptism and infant baptism, I don’t believe I had ever preached on the subject of infant faith, on our covenant children as believers even when they are babes in arms and still incapable of instruction in the gospel, of making a choice to believe, or of confessing their faith. It is that infant faith that is my subject this evening. In Minneapolis they live in Lutheran country. Actually, so do we here in Tacoma. Lutheran theology has a strong doctrine of infant faith. The great John Gerhard, perhaps the most influential of Lutheran theologians after Luther himself, wrote: “We are not solicitous about the mode of this faith, but we simply acquiesce in the fact that infants really believe.” [Cited in Schmid, Doctr. Theol. of the Evan. Luth. Ch., 549] I mention that simply to assure you that the idea of believing infants is not unique to the Reformed Church. The Lutherans, however, are more likely to derive their doctrine of infant faith from the logic of salvation (if justification is by faith and necessary for salvation, then infants, especially those who die in infancy, must have faith); the Reformed from the plain-speaking of the Bible."
Again, there are no scriptures that say that infants have faith. Those who try to find scripture to support that view will often 1) go to Bible passages where it seems to affirm that some dying infants are saved and then reason that they must have had faith, and 2) go to Bible passages that speak of little children praising God or coming to Christ. In my series "The Hardshell Baptist Cult" (See here), chapter 41, I dealt with the issue of "infant regeneration." (See here)
For instance, those who say infants have faith will cite the words of Christ who said "suffer the little children to come unto me and forbid them not" (Matt. 19: 14) and say this proves infants have faith. But, the "little children" are not infants, but little children who are capable of being exhorted and who can "come" to Christ with their hearts and minds. Some will cite the words of the Psalmist who said that the Lord had made him "hope upon his mother's breast." (Psa. 22:9) However, "upon mother's breast" does not necessarily denote an infant sucking the breast, for many little toddlers lay upon mother's breast after they have been weaned. Jesus did say that "out of the mouths of babes and sucklings" comes praise. (Matt: 21:16) But, clearly these are not infants because Jesus quotes Psalm 8:2 in the temple when children were shouting "Hosanna to the Son of David" and while the chief priests and scribes were trying to silence them. Infants do not shout such praises.
The chief text, however, that Paedo Baptists have used to affirm infant faith is the case of John the Baptist who "leaped for joy" at the greeting of Mary the mother of Jesus. (Luke 1: 41) However, this does not seem to be merely a latent faith of the babe, but a cognitive faith, and this was a miracle and unique to the Baptist who was "filled with the Holy Spirit from the womb." (Luke 1: 15) On this we will have more to say in the next chapter when we look at what John Spilsbury in the early 17th century had to say about it in his debate over this question with a Paedo Baptist.
Rayburn said further:
"Taking all that the Bible says together, mysterious as this may be in some respects, our fathers concluded that since faith is a fundamental disposition of the soul as well as a specific action, infant faith is first what theologians call a habitus, by which is meant a capacity or a spiritual disposition, we can speak of even babies in the womb as possessing that. Our theological tradition uses a rich terminology to speak of this capacity of faith from which actual acts of faith eventually spring. They spoke of faith as a seed; they spoke of the root of faith in an infant’s heart; of an inclination to faith; of faith as a principle already present perhaps even in the womb. [Bavinck, Saved by Grace, xxxii; citing Ref. Dogm. IV, 525] Calvin spoke of “a tiny spark” of the Lord’s presence in an infant’s heart which heart “[God] will illumine in the future with the full splendor or his light…” [Inst. IV, xvi, 19-20]"
This is what Hardshell Baptists also have come to argue. They too say there are two kinds of faith. In this post (here) I cited from Elder Zack Guess on how the Hardshells define faith. He first rightly said:
"The Greek word most commonly translated "believe" in the New Testament is PISTEUO. The meaning is "to believe, be persuaded of, to place confidence in." (W. E. Vine)."
But he then disregarded this and said:
"Faith" is "the ability to believe." So, if one believes, he is exercising the faith which he already has."
That is exactly what Turretin and Rayburn and the Paedo Baptists affirm. But, it is not what Baptists have historically believed and is why they only baptize those who have come to faith or actual belief in Christ and the Gospel.
Rayburn said further:
"But, if so, how much more with little children, who have the root or the seed of faith which only slowly grows to bear fruit that we can see. When we stop to ponder this, as we should, we realize that our own salvation, however it came to us, whether as very little children or as adults, is a supreme mystery of divine grace and power. What precisely is the new birth? How does the Holy Spirit bring it to pass within us? How do we become and in what respects do we become new creations in Christ? What actually changes? Our appearance is the same, our personality remains largely the same, our powers of intellect and will, our dispositions, our talents remain much the same, and yet we are new people, new from the bottom up and from the inside out. The change occurs down deep, below our conscious awareness."
Again, this is what Hardshells believe and teach. But, it is all an invention for the scriptures do not teach such nonsense.
Rayburn said further:
"It is only the Christian who has forgotten what an utter mystery his own salvation is who can quibble at the Bible’s assertion that babies in the womb are spiritual beings who can have faith, even if it is faith only in the seed or the root...This fact of infant faith is a grand demonstration of the nature of our salvation as the gift and the work of God, mysterious as it must be."
Again, this is what Hardshell Baptists teach but it is not taught in scripture. It is a wonder that the Hardshells do not baptize infants of believers.
Faith is Belief
"But someone will say, “You have faith, and I have works.” Show me your faith without your works, and I will show you my faith by my works. You believe that there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe—and tremble!" (James 2: 18-19 nkjv)
"But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him." (Heb. 11: 6 nkjv)
These texts show that "faith" involves believing truth propositions. A person who has faith believes in "one God," and believes that "God is," and believes that God "is a rewarder of those who diligently seek him." It also involves "coming to God" with the heart and mind. Some of those who teach that faith is not a means of salvation but merely an evidence of salvation will cite verse one of Hebrews chapter eleven where the inspired writer says -- "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."(vs. 1) They stress the interpretation that faith, actual faith, not seed faith, is what follows (in some cases, but not in all cases) regeneration, being "evidence" of a salvation that preceded faith. However, that is not what the verse is saying. See my post on this text (here). The problem with this interpretation is that the Greek word for "evidence" (hupostasis) is misunderstood. In that post I wrote:
"Hupostasis is a very common word from Aristotle on and was used in Greek to describe that which stands under anything such as a building, a contract, a promise. It is common in the papyri in business documents as the basis or guarantee of transactions or with the meaning of a title deed. Thus one translation renders it "Faith is the title-deed of things hoped for."
A T Robertson on hupostasis: "It is common in the papyri in business documents as the basis or guarantee of transactions."
So, unless you have actual faith that believes the things enumerated in the context, you do not have a right or title to eternal life. Greek scholar Kenneth Wuest translates the text as: "Now faith is the title deed of things hoped for, the proof of things which are not being seen."
No comments:
Post a Comment