Oh, love the LORD, all you His
saints!
For the LORD preserves the
faithful,
and fully repays the proud
person.
Psalm 31:23
We last left off this blog with a question about a couch in a room as to whether or not it was still in the room after you left or was it simply in your mind? We know what is present to the mind, the couch was present in the mind while we were in the room with it, and we believe with the mind that the couch is still in the room when we are absent. In fact, if we came back to the room where the couch was and it was gone, we still can imagine it in the room, in the same place we last saw, with all its beauty, but it is absent, and therefore we still believe it existed, in fact we have the knowledge that it existed, only now that knowledge is belief, not the actual presence of the couch. There are two questions that object to this definition of faith. First, the objection is to this presentation and that is the ambiguity of the words present and absent as used. Let me ask this; when is an object present? When is it absent? Sounds like easy questions, and they are when it comes to objects that are material or an external event. Now when the senses are affected, the objects are present and when not present the senses are not effect. Just like that couch, when we actually saw it it was present and it affected the senses, but when we left the room the couch remains (unless moved) where it is, and we recall the image of it. I hear the question: " What does all that have to do with faith?" Hang on!
How is all this with propositions? Does not the Bible say all men are sinners? That is a proposition, there is no actual external source, unless you add the actions of a sinful person, yet once you see their actions there is knowledge as with the couch, and then we would wander off into an exegesis of sin which is a different hypothesis to examine, but what about this proposition, "all men are sinners?" The truth, when the Bible announces that proposition is present in the mind. We do not know it. We cannot prove it. It cannot be known or proven even by external actions of themselves, so how do we know or prove that "men are sinners?" By the authority of God. Does not the Scriptures teach that Christ died as a ransom for many? Was not Christ born, even born of a virgin (Mary) live as a child, grew up to be a man, preached and taught for some 3 1/2 years, die upon a cross? Is this not a historical fact that has been announced? Not only that the purpose of His death is announced. We have a truth present in the mind, and this is an object of our faith. I will address, after the blogs on faith, the existence of God, and the infallibility of Scripture, but faith must be understood first, for without faith have proven ground to stand upon, any consideration of faith will be fallible, and unstable, further we would have no ground for our faith.
Another objection to these terms, present and absent for they are ambiguous in regards to the definitions thus given but as just stated, it is not true that an object must be absent in order to be an object of faith. In other words, the difference between knowledge and faith is not found in the presence or absence of their objects. Why? Because we can know what is absent, and we can believe what is present. Take that couch, when it was present, before our very eyes we believe that it was a couch and it was there, and after we left, even in our minds, we know it, its place, everything about it; therefore the object of our faith is not predicated upon its presence or absence.
Another objection is presented for examination: that the conviction we have of the reality or truth of what we distinctly remember is knowledge, and not distinctively faith, unless we choose to establish a new and arbitrary definition of the word knowledge. Now, when we saw the couch, we perceived it by our senses, in other words, if the couch was perceived as ugly, we acted one way, if perceived as beautiful we acted happily, and the mind sees and knowledge is established, we know it by the mind, and in our memory we know distinctly or discursively that it is true, the couch existed; therefore the conviction in all these cases is of the same nature. How? It must be by the veracity of our conscious, for we are conscious of what we perceive sensible objects. We are even conscious that we have cognized certain truths. We are conscious that we remember in our memory certain events. What is involved in these cases is that the consciousness of conviction of the reality or truth of what is seen, mentally apprehended (as in the proposition that "all men are sinners"), or remembered. There is the same ground for this conviction that is as strong as in one case or another. Therefore there is no reason for calling one knowledge and the other belief. Here is the axiom to remember: Memory is as much a knowledge of the past, as other forms of consciousness are a knowledge of the present.
When I thought we were done with objections another raised its ugly head and mention a denial that that memory gives us the knowledge of the past. That is contrary to established usage. Ok, Ok, it is true that we are uncertain as to the truth of certain memories, memories that we admit to believing. So does this not prove the objection? No! It is because in one of the established meanings of the word, belief expresses a less degree of certainty than knowledge. "Wait a minute, wait a minute," you exclaim, "how can this be?" If we are certain, absolutely certain of past events and believe in their expression we never speak of them as to their experience. Wow! That is hard to wrap my mind around! I know that I was alive yesterday, in fact, I am absolutely certain of it, and have no need to speak to the knowledge of my past life for certainty is greater than knowledge in this case. Both convictions exist, only absolute certainty is greater in degree and overrides any need to add to my knowledge. I knew my mother and father for many years, have no need to say I believe that I knew them. Why? Things distinctly remembered are known, and not merely believed.
One of the definitions to faith is it is the persuasion of the truth of things not seen. This definition is correct if we mean by "things not seen" to be those things which are not objects of the senses, not of intuition, nor of demonstrative proof. What about those things that "are not seen" and are special objects of faith, those things remembered and not now present in the mind? This meaning seems to be correct to be added to the above list of "things not seen." This sense to add to the list these objects of faith assigned to be "things not seen" or present in the mind, to be defective because their ground has not been assigned to their their truth. The answer to complete an aid in understanding as to the above statement is in a question, one that many do ask: "Why do we believe things to be true, which we have never seen and which we cannot prove? There are a host of answers given to that question, and to not give a definition that gives no answer to it must be considered defective.
As a side note: A common objection to Christians is that we cannot prove that there is a God. In other words, we know that which we cannot prove and we call that faith and expect others to appreciate that fact that it is by faith we believe and expect other to acknowledge our faith. We give many answers in refutation and far too often we are inarticulate and we come away discouraged. That is the purpose of this study on faith, to give ground, one that we can stand upon in defense of our faith: "But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts, and always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear" (1 Peter 3:15). Let me make it easier for you: in those cases, turn it around, turn it around on them, ask: Give me proof that God does not exist! Put it back on them, you believe in Christ, eternal life is our hope and we have ground on which to stand, and after this study the ground should be firmer. What ground do they have to stand on? Ask!
"For there is one God
and one Mediator between God and men,
The Man Christ Jesus" (2 Timothy 2:15).
The Lord Jesus Christ
Be with your spirit.
Grace be with you.
Amen. (Titus 4:22).
God Bless You
Richard L. Crumb
No comments:
Post a Comment