A large distinction between Jac's and my position on "faith in Christ" is that Jac largely believes it to be intellectual assent to certain propositions. So for example, Christ being divine, dying to enable us to be reconciled to God, and His rising again would perhaps be some propositions Jac sees as required for true belief in Christ. On the other hand, I took an approach where faith in Christ is not necessarily believing in certain propositions as true, but rather faith in the person of Christ Himself.zoegirl wrote:Well put, Kuriero
In so far as none of us can truly comprehend the nature of God, I agree with you. However, to deny Christ's divinity to me seems paramount to denying *what* He did on the cross, considering we would be denying His ability to conquer death and be an atoning sacrifice for us....the perfect lamb...the substitutionary death. To that end I think it is imperative to believe not only what Christ did but who He was (which really amounts to the same thing).
I see Jac raises what on first appearance appears to be a dilemma to my position. The question I have to answer in my position on "faith in Christ" is what is essential to believing in the "true" Christ. It certainly seems an intellectual assent of some sort is required to believe in a "true" Christ. For example, someone may put their faith in Christ (e.g., Fortigurn???) while believing Christ was only a man and not in any sense God. Yet if this is the case, then Fortigurn is not really believing in the same person of Christ that I do. Now while I see none of us can completely know or understand who Christ is, I think we are right to draw a line when we say deity is an essential attribute that should not be denied of Christ.*
An appropriate question this raises is why is Christ's deity an essential attribute? I personally see it is because Christ made a promise to us that we can come to God through Him. This promise is based upon Christ's death and resurrection, and Christ's claim to divinity which I see as an important element behind Christ's authority to forgive our sins against God. If Christ was just a man, albeit a righteous man, who died then I see the promise that we are forgiven of our sins against God becomes quite hollow. To have faith in Christ, is to believe in the person of Christ and apart of this is believing the Gospel as being true. His being God is a crucial part to such a promise. You deny His deity, and I see His promise becomes empty. Jesus becomes no more useful towards us than being simply a "wise" man like that of Buddha, Ghandi, or take your pick from history. This is why Jesus' deity matters. If someone rejects it, then I do not see how it is possible Christ's promises are not made vacuous and empty. Christ is simply a "good" man, and we are still in our sins.
* I think it important to note that absence of belief is different to denial of belief. One may not understand Christ's claim of divinity, or even understand the theology surrounding Christ, but they came to have a basic understanding that a person - Christ - died for them and was resurrected which they accepted and put their trust in this person. Such a person I see has "faith in Christ" and so would be saved by grace through their faith in Christ. On the other hand, say such a person was fully aware of the theology of Christ being God which they denied. I say they have denied an essential part of who Christ is. So in this way belief in Christ deity may not be essential to being saved, but it is essential that it not be denied if we are to be talking about the same person - Christ.