Re: Belief in Christ saves us - what exactly is "belief?"
Posted: Mon Jul 27, 2015 1:00 pm
I don't think that it makes any sense to talk about faith without an object of faith. You can't "faith" something in abstraction. You must necessarily place your faith in something. It's just part of the nature of the thing.
Anyway, I think there's an invalid distinction being made here between intellectual assent and "real faith" or "heart faith." I don't say that to reduce the latter to the former. I'm saying that the phrase "intellectual assent" is probably pretty close to an oxymoron if taken technically and just redundant if taken liberally. To assent is a matter of the will. The mind gives assent to an idea by way of metaphor to what the will does. Strictly, the mind has no choice in anything. The mind doesn't have a free will. The mind is one faculty of man, the will another. The role of the mind is to perceive truth. It is the choice of the will to give assent to that truth. And there's no distinction between "head consent" and "heart consent."
There is, though, a difference in being persuaded to accept a concept and having faith in something or someone. The latter includes the former but is not limited to it. For the former is strictly a matter of declaring something true, while the second is that, but more, entrusting one's self to that truth. It is to declare the person/thing reliable in light of the truth/testimony considered. To believe "with the heart" is just to say that you've entrusted yourself to Jesus, which is to say, you know what He did on the Cross and by raising from the dead and that is what you are relying on for your salvation. We make that complicated, but it isn't. When I promise my daughter I'll take her to get a treat, she relies on that truth. Yes, she gives "intellectual assent," but she's doing more than that. She is trusting that I'm telling the truth. She may or may not act in light of that trust, but the trust is there all the same.
Unless, of course, she doesn't think that I'm telling the truth. She could either reject the idea itself--daddy can't do that because he doesn't have the money or he is too sick. Or perhaps she accepts that I really do intend to do it, indeed that I can do it, but she doesn't trust me that I will. Maybe she hopes so, but she says, "He's promised me he would do that before and he didn't. I don't believe him." The latter is calling me a liar.
So here we see she either believes in me or calls me a liar. But that's not a general idea. It is with respect to a proposition. And just so with faith in Christ. We don't just put our faith in Him in the abstract. We are putting our faith in Him by believing God's testimony about Him, about who He is and what He has done. We are believing tha God tolthe truth when He said that Jesus is the Christ and therefore our Savior and that we have eternal life. That's no mere intellectual assent. But it also isn't some mysterious "heart faith." It's just relying upon that truth because God is trustworthy (or, to use the language of my article, it's to declare God faithful, to say our aman to Him).
As an aside, I don't put too much stock in the Rom 10:9-10 bit anyway here. I would encourage people to notice that "believe with your heart" is parallel to "confess with your mouth." Paul's point is that the mouth confesses (nothing else does) and the heart believes (nothing else does). Again, there is no distinction between intellectual faith and heart faith. Only the heart believes. Only the heart has faith. And, of course, the heart is a metaphor for the man himself, anyway. The human being believes/puts faith in. The mouth confesses.
So says I.
That and a dollar might get you a cheap cup of coffee. Not at Starbucks, mind you, but somewhere. Maybe Duncan Donuts.
Anyway, I think there's an invalid distinction being made here between intellectual assent and "real faith" or "heart faith." I don't say that to reduce the latter to the former. I'm saying that the phrase "intellectual assent" is probably pretty close to an oxymoron if taken technically and just redundant if taken liberally. To assent is a matter of the will. The mind gives assent to an idea by way of metaphor to what the will does. Strictly, the mind has no choice in anything. The mind doesn't have a free will. The mind is one faculty of man, the will another. The role of the mind is to perceive truth. It is the choice of the will to give assent to that truth. And there's no distinction between "head consent" and "heart consent."
There is, though, a difference in being persuaded to accept a concept and having faith in something or someone. The latter includes the former but is not limited to it. For the former is strictly a matter of declaring something true, while the second is that, but more, entrusting one's self to that truth. It is to declare the person/thing reliable in light of the truth/testimony considered. To believe "with the heart" is just to say that you've entrusted yourself to Jesus, which is to say, you know what He did on the Cross and by raising from the dead and that is what you are relying on for your salvation. We make that complicated, but it isn't. When I promise my daughter I'll take her to get a treat, she relies on that truth. Yes, she gives "intellectual assent," but she's doing more than that. She is trusting that I'm telling the truth. She may or may not act in light of that trust, but the trust is there all the same.
Unless, of course, she doesn't think that I'm telling the truth. She could either reject the idea itself--daddy can't do that because he doesn't have the money or he is too sick. Or perhaps she accepts that I really do intend to do it, indeed that I can do it, but she doesn't trust me that I will. Maybe she hopes so, but she says, "He's promised me he would do that before and he didn't. I don't believe him." The latter is calling me a liar.
So here we see she either believes in me or calls me a liar. But that's not a general idea. It is with respect to a proposition. And just so with faith in Christ. We don't just put our faith in Him in the abstract. We are putting our faith in Him by believing God's testimony about Him, about who He is and what He has done. We are believing tha God tolthe truth when He said that Jesus is the Christ and therefore our Savior and that we have eternal life. That's no mere intellectual assent. But it also isn't some mysterious "heart faith." It's just relying upon that truth because God is trustworthy (or, to use the language of my article, it's to declare God faithful, to say our aman to Him).
As an aside, I don't put too much stock in the Rom 10:9-10 bit anyway here. I would encourage people to notice that "believe with your heart" is parallel to "confess with your mouth." Paul's point is that the mouth confesses (nothing else does) and the heart believes (nothing else does). Again, there is no distinction between intellectual faith and heart faith. Only the heart believes. Only the heart has faith. And, of course, the heart is a metaphor for the man himself, anyway. The human being believes/puts faith in. The mouth confesses.
So says I.
That and a dollar might get you a cheap cup of coffee. Not at Starbucks, mind you, but somewhere. Maybe Duncan Donuts.
