What is "Dead Faith?"

[Brandan Kraft]

Thank you dear! I deem that post of the day! That is a NOTEWORTHY POST indeed!

[Mickey]

1 Cor 4:3-4, (KJV), But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of man's judgment: yea, I judge not mine own self. (4) For I know nothing by myself; yet am I not hereby justified: but he that judgeth me is the Lord.

Paul is defending his position as an Apostle against the wrongful judgments of his Corinthian accusers. By the intended usage of this text to refute the position that works should be judged, the judgment of the Church has been usurped. How then are elders or deacons to be tested? This is the context of these verses. I suggest reading Calvin’s commentary on these verses and you will see how this is a wrongful application.

3. But with me it is a very small thing. It remained that he should bring before their view his faithfulness, that the Corinthians might judge of him from this, but, as their judgment was corrupted, he throws it aside and appeals to the judgment-seat of Christ. The Corinthians erred in this, that they looked with amazement at foreign masks, and gave no heed to the true and proper marks of distinction.9 He, accordingly, declares with great confidence, that he despises a perverted and blind judgment of this sort. In this way, too, he, on the one hand, admirably exposes the vanity of the false Apostles who made the mere applause of men their aim, and reckoned themselves happy if they were held in admiration; and, on the other hand, he severely chastises the arrogance10 of the Corinthians, which was the reason why they were so much blinded in their judgment.
But, it is asked, on what ground it was allowable for Paul, not merely to set aside the censure of one Church, but to set himself above the judgment of men? for this is a condition common to all pastors -- to be judged of by the Church. I answer, that it is the part of a good pastor to submit both his doctrine and his life for examination to the judgment of the Church, and that it is the sign of a good consciencenot to shun the light of careful inspection. In this respect Paul, without doubt, was prepared for submitting himself to the judgment of the Corinthian Church, and for being called to render an account both of his life and of his doctrine, had there been among them a proper scrutiny,11 as he often assigns them this power, and of his own accord entreats them to be prepared to judge aright. But when a faithful pastor sees that he is borne down by unreasonable and perverse affections, and that justice and truth have no place, he ought to appeal to God, and betake himself to his judgment-seat, regardless of human opinion, especially when he cannot secure that a true and proper knowledge of matters shall be arrived at.
If, then, the Lord's servants would bear in mind that they must act in this manner, let them allow their doctrine and life to be brought to the test, nay more, let them voluntarily present themselves for this purpose; and if anything is objected against them, let them not decline to answer. But if they see that they are condemned without being heard in their own defense, and that judgment is passed upon them without their being allowed a hearing, let them raise up their minds to such a pitch of magnanimity, as that, despising the opinions of men, they will fearlessly wait for God as their judge. In this manner the Prophets of old, having to do with refractory persons,12 and such as had the audacity to despise the word of God in their administration of it, required to raise themselves aloft, in order to tread under foot that diabolical obstinacy, which manifestly tended to overthrow at once the authority of God and the light of truth. Should any one, however, when opportunity is given for defending himself, or at least when he has need to clear himself, appeal to God by way of subterfuge, he will not thereby make good his innocence, but will rather discover his consummate impudence.13
Or of man's day. While others explain it in another manner, the simpler way, in nay opinion, is to understand the word day as used metaphorically to mean judgment, because there are stated days for administering justice, and the accused are summoned to appear on a certain day. He calls it man's day14 when judgment is pronounced, not according to truth, or in accordance with the word of the Lord, but according to the humor or rashness of men,15 and in short, when God does not preside. "Let men," says he, "sit for judgment as they please: it is enough for me that God will annul whatever they have pronounced."
Nay, I judge not mine own self. The meaning is: "I do not venture to judge myself, though I know myself best; how then will you judge me, to whom I am less intimately known?" Now he proves that he does not venture to judge himself by this, that though he is not conscious to himself of anything wrong, he is not thereby acquitted in the sight of God. Hence he concludes, that what the Corinthians assume to themselves, belongs exclusively to God. "As for me," says he, "when I have carefully examined myself, I perceive that I am not so clear-sighted as to discern thoroughly my true character; and hence I leave this to the judgment of God, who alone call judge, and to whom this authority exclusively belongs. As for you, then, on what ground will you make pretensions to something more?"
As, however, it were very absurd to reject all kinds of judgment, whether of individuals respecting themselves, or of one individual respecting his brother, or of all together respecting their pastor, let it be understood that Paul speaks here not of the actions of men, which may be reckoned good or bad according to the word of the Lord, but of the eminence of each individual, which ought not to be estimated according to men's humors. It belongs to God alone to determine what distinction every one holds, and what honor he deserves. The Corinthians, however, despising Paul, groundlessly extolled others to the skies, as though they had at their command that knowledge which belonged exclusively to God. This is what he previously made mention of as man's day -- when men mount the throne of judgment, and, as if they were gods, anticipate the day of Christ, who alone is appointed by the Father as judge, allot to every one his station of honor, assign to some a high place, and degrade others to the lowest seats. But what rule of distinction do they observe? They look merely to what appears openly; and thus what in their view is high and honorable, is in many instances an abomination in the sight of God.(Luke 16:15.) If any one farther objects, that the ministers of the word may in this world be distinguished by their works, as trees by their fruits,(Matthew 7:16,) I admit that this is true, but we must consider with whom Paul had to deal. It was with persons who, in judging, looked to nothing but show and pomp, and arrogated to themselves a power which Christ., while in this world, refrained from using -- that of assigning to every one his seat in the kingdom of God.(Matthew 20:23.) He does not, therefore, prohibit us from esteeming those whom we have found to be faithful workmen, and pronouncing them to be such; nor, on the other hand, from judging persons to be bad workmen according to the word of God, but he condemns that rashness which is practiced, when some are preferred above others in a spirit of ambition -- not according to their merits, but without examination of the case.16
4. I am not conscious to myself of anything faulty. Let us observe that Paul speaks here not of his whole life, but simply of the office of apostleship. For if he had been altogether unconscious to himself of anything wrong,17 that would have been a groundless complaint which he makes in Romans 7:15, where he laments that the evil which he would not, that he does, and that he is by sin kept back from giving himself up entirely to God. Paul, therefore, felt sin dwelling in him, and confessed it; but as to his apostleship, (which is the subject that is here treated of,) he had conducted himself with so much integrity and fidelity, that his conscience did not accuse him as to anything. This is a protestation of no common character, and of such a nature as clearly shows the piety and sanctity of his breast;18 and yet he says that he is not thereby justified. that is, pure, and altogether free from guilt in the sight of God. Why? Assuredly, because God sees much more distinctly than we; and hence, what appears to us cleanest, is filthy in his eyes. Here we have a beautiful and singularly profitable admonition, not to measure the strictness of God's judgment by our own opinion; for we are dim-sighted, but God is preeminently discerning. We think of ourselves too indulgently, but God is a judge of the utmost strictness. Hence the truth of what Solomon says --
"Every man's ways appear right his own eyes, but the Lord pondereth the hearts." (Proverbs 21:2.)
Papists abuse this passage for the purpose of shaking the assurance of faith, and truly, I confess, that if their doctrine were admitted, we could do nothing but tremble in wretchedness during our whole life. For what tranquillity could our minds enjoy if it were to be determined from our works whether we are well-pleasing to God? I confess, therefore, that from the main foundation of Papists there follows nothing but continual disquietude for consciences; and, accordingly, we teach that we must have recourse to the free promise of mercy, which is offered to us in Christ, that we may be fully assured that we are accounted righteous by God.

[beloved57]

Men are simply afraid to have a theology of Grace - to have every aspect of every doctrine centered on GRACE. Works? Yeah - the Christian will have them. They are NEVER the focus! NEVER! I COUNT my works as DUNG. MY WORKS MEAN NOTHING TO ME! NOTHING!

Kyle - what do works mean to you? What do they mean to you? Do they give you assurance that you are elect? Do they give you assurance that Christ died for you?

I'm being confrontational because I see this as an extremely serious matter. Grace means everything to me, and it is what binds me to others.

Brandon, Lets please be sure to use pauls word in context, when he was a pharisee he thought that by his attemts to keep the law he was pleasing God. Thats what he designates dung....

Thats entirely different though from the same paul in titus 3 : 8 who states that good works are profitable to men

This is a faithful saying, and these things I will that thou affirm constantly, that they which have believed in God might be careful to maintain good works. These things are good and profitable unto men.

Now Brandon, bob, whoever please explain to us all what paul is saying about good works in this verse....

[Eileen]

A myriad of ways for each of us to say the same thing.

I agree wholeheartedly with you Brandan in that I find no assurance in my ‘doings’, (my mind doesn't go there for assurance), I find assurance ONLY in Christ and His work on my behalf. Justified freely by His Grace I now have peace with God. In Christ I have been elected (Eph 1:15), called, justified, glorified (Romans 8:30), redeemed, sanctified (1 Co 1:30) adopted (Gal 4:5) and reconciled (Col 1:21).

However, if our boasting is all in Christ I don’t think as Christians we should reject, (although we will always, in this life, struggle with sin) but rejoice in the fact that we have grown in Grace and in knowledge of the Lord Jesus by the truth (John 17:17) , rejoice that there is a battle within us between the old man and the new, rejoice that we have begun in this life to sow to the Spirit and not to the flesh, rejoice that we have begun to bring thoughts captive to Christ, that our minds have been renewed and rejoice that a sin we used to love, now we hate! We grow by Grace in realizing just exactly what we are already in Christ.

As Christians we abhor any ‘works of the flesh’, but we love ‘serving in newness of spirit’ (Romans 7:6)

Eileen~

[Mickey]

Michael, I think I MAY understand what you mean, but you do state-perhaps this is just one example????? that if you turn away brothers and sisters in need, you should examine whether Christ's merits have been applied to you. Well, here lies the problem. What do you consider turning away? Not talking to enough, not feeding, not giving money???? Just what is enough? What is the official amount of "work" one should do.
Do you understand?

You have to examine that yourself.

For example, let's say I judge you unregenerite because you do not "help" another brother enough...is it any of my business what is "enough?"

There isn’t a set amount in scripture so you would have no ground to stand on.

If you knew me well, and judged me on my works, you would have to conclude that I am not regenerate....I am not very good to my brothers and sisters, heck, I am not even that good to my husband if we are judging works....Yeah The world wouold say I am a good wife, but I know at least some of my sin, and it is sickenning....
I am a good wife by many standards, but the perfect standard of Christ, I cannot live up to no matter what I do, cause I will screw it up, so I must try my best, and look to Christ, becasue he has accomplished what I strive to be-perfect-but really, I am so sinful, I wouldn't even call it striving, but because I can look to Christ, I am assured of my salvation....
Make sense??

Your attitude or acknowledgement of your indwelling sin is right but it does not prove me wrong it actually proves me right. Are you remorseful and repentant after a fight or do you continue in your rebellion? Do you have any fruit in your life? If I knew you well I would be able to judge these things; whether your profession is genuine and your struggle with sin marked that of a believer.

[Brandan Kraft]

You have to examine that yourself.

This discussion is more than that. We're now going to start determining if men are justified or not because of what James teaches! Lately Michael, have you been good to your brethren?

[Brandan Kraft]

As Christians we abhor any ‘works of the flesh’, but we love ‘serving in newness of spirit’ (Romans 7:6)

Eileen - Amen on your whole post. I love serving the Lord. But even my service is something I count as dung compared to the riches of GRACE found in Christ Jesus. I surely could not find any assurance at all in any works or service to Christ.

[Mickey]

This discussion is more than that.

You're right and I posted more than that but you only quoted that one sentence.

Michael, have you been good to your brethren?

I don't know of any wrong I have done to my brethren lately, so I would say yes. If you or anyone else knows of anything, I need to know, right? So I can seek to reconcile.

[Brandan Kraft]

I don't know of any wrong I have done to my brethren lately, so I would say yes.

Well how can you be sure if you have or haven't. Just because you don't - why that doesn't mean anything. A bunch of religionists think they're doing good to their "brethren." What differentiates you from them? What gives you confidence that you're being good to the brethren?

[Mickey]

Well how can you be sure if you have or haven't. Just because you don't - why that doesn't mean anything. A bunch of religionists think they're doing good to their "brethren." What differentiates you from them? What gives you confidence that you're being good to the brethren?

First of all, what do you mean by "doing good to my brethren."?



Second, your questions have absolutely nothing to do with this discussion. Whether or not I live up to the commands of scripture is irrelevant.

Third, you are asking me if I have sinned against any of my brethren. I don't deny that I have sinned against my brethren in the past, however, I cannot think of anything off the top of my head that I have done recently. If I have offended someone and am unaware of it then there is nothing I can do unless the Spirit reveals this to me or they let me know I have offended them.

Often in prayer I ask the Lord to reveal those sins that I'm not aware of and I confess that I have not loved the Lord as I ought to and I have not loved my neighbor as myself. God have mercy on me a sinner!

What is puzzling to me is why you are asking me these questions. Do you think that if you can trap me that it will give you an excuse to dismiss everything I have stated?

[Mickey]

Well how can you be sure if you have or haven't. Just because you don't - why that doesn't mean anything. A bunch of religionists think they're doing good to their "brethren." What differentiates you from them? What gives you confidence that you're being good to the brethren?

Also, by the way you are asking me these questions it's obvious that you think you are not 'being good to your brethren' so I will ask you...What have you done to not 'be good to your brethren'? How have you sinned against your brethren lately?

Now it is easy to make a huge list of offences that one can do to another. I want specific examples of offences that YOU have committed to brethren as of late.

[beloved57]

A myriad of ways for each of us to say the same thing.

I agree wholeheartedly with you Brandan in that I find no assurance in my ‘doings’, (my mind doesn't go there for assurance), I find assurance ONLY in Christ and His work on my behalf. Justified freely by His Grace I now have peace with God. In Christ I have been elected (Eph 1:15), called, justified, glorified (Romans 8:30), redeemed, sanctified (1 Co 1:30) adopted (Gal 4:5) and reconciled (Col 1:21).

However, if our boasting is all in Christ I don’t think as Christians we should reject, (although we will always, in this life, struggle with sin) but rejoice in the fact that we have grown in Grace and in knowledge of the Lord Jesus by the truth (John 17:17) , rejoice that there is a battle within us between the old man and the new, rejoice that we have begun in this life to sow to the Spirit and not to the flesh, rejoice that we have begun to bring thoughts captive to Christ, that our minds have been renewed and rejoice that a sin we used to love, now we hate! We grow by Grace in realizing just exactly what we are already in Christ.

As Christians we abhor any ‘works of the flesh’, but we love ‘serving in newness of spirit’ (Romans 7:6)

Eileen~

Eileen, My sister...I agree in that our works should not be the basis of our assurance of salvation.. but would you give me your understanding of titus 3: 8
"This is a trustworthy saying. And I want you to stress these things, so that those who have trusted in God may be careful to devote themselves to doing what is good. These things are excellent and profitable for everyone" NIV

[Whammer]

A myriad of ways for each of us to say the same thing.

I agree wholeheartedly with you Brandan in that I find no assurance in my ‘doings’, (my mind doesn't go there for assurance), I find assurance ONLY in Christ and His work on my behalf. Justified freely by His Grace I now have peace with God. In Christ I have been elected (Eph 1:15), called, justified, glorified (Romans 8:30), redeemed, sanctified (1 Co 1:30) adopted (Gal 4:5) and reconciled (Col 1:21).

However, if our boasting is all in Christ I don’t think as Christians we should reject, (although we will always, in this life, struggle with sin) but rejoice in the fact that we have grown in Grace and in knowledge of the Lord Jesus by the truth (John 17:17) , rejoice that there is a battle within us between the old man and the new, rejoice that we have begun in this life to sow to the Spirit and not to the flesh, rejoice that we have begun to bring thoughts captive to Christ, that our minds have been renewed and rejoice that a sin we used to love, now we hate! We grow by Grace in realizing just exactly what we are already in Christ.

As Christians we abhor any ‘works of the flesh’, but we love ‘serving in newness of spirit’ (Romans 7:6)

Eileen~

Great post sister, we are saying the same things, some dont see it though, and have taken to cutting off brethren for gross misunderstandings......stubborn pride....but your post is right on

[melted]

Kyle - your ego is getting the better of you. I suggest you take a break. - Brandan

Of course, you're right. This will be my last post on this topic. I apologize to God foremost and to the forum for the arrogance that has shown through in my posts.

In re-reading the correspondences here, one thing seems more apparent to me now. Some are equivocating "justification" with "assurance". They are not the same thing Scripturally or semantically, and to equivocate them will surely lead to confusion. Especially in post #118 Brandan again and again equivocates justification with assurance.

I maintain that justification before the Christian's conscience is by faith alone - look to any of my offerings to confirm this, either on this forum (even in an earlier post in this very thread) or my website. Justification is the legal declaration of being righteous on account of Christ's work alone, and this is by faith. I am sorry that this was not made more obvious.

Assurance is not justification. Assurance is the Holy Spirit using faith (growth in knowledge of doctrine and truth) AND good works of His own production to continually ASSURE us that our faith is not dead and that our regeneration is real, for true faith is not alone and true regeneration is accompanied by good works. John wrote 1st John so that we might "know that we have eternal life" - he wrote so that we would be assured of our truly possessing eternal life, and in doing so many times does he include following the commandments of God as part of this assurance. This cannot be denied.

The reprobate can be falsely justified in his own mind by what he THINKS is faith, but he will never have the assurance of the indwelling Holy Spirit in this way, as the true Christian does.

This is what I see Scripture say, so this is what I will continue to say, regardless of how I am judged by men. I maintain that I will not take part in calling the Holy Spirit's work in me or in any other Christian "dung". I consider this to be an exceedingly dangerous position to take.

Thanks, and God bless!

[Whammer]

Amen Kyle!

[Robert R. Higby]

Notitia, Assensus, and Fiducia (knowledge, assent, and trust). In Gordon's Clark book "What is Saving Faith" he shows how the Latin understanding has compartmentalized these 3 into separate experiences, with the assumption that all of them must be present for faith to be real (as opposed to 1 or 2 of them). I think our differences on this subject boil down to the correct understanding of this.

For me, knowing the truth, rejoicing in the truth, and assurance in the truth through reliance upon Christ's work are not separate entitites. To know the gospel is to rejoice in it, love it, and rely upon it. So mental assent itself is equal to faith or belief, knowing the truth is equal to faith or belief, and confident trust in the gospel is equal to faith or belief.

Most assume that one can know the truth without assenting to it and relying upon it. I do not share that view. Those who don't rejoice in the gospel don't know what it is nor have assurance based on it.

Anyway, if the conscience before God is secured SOLA FIDE by the Holy Spirit, then the assurance generated by the work of the Holy Spirit in works/other fruit does nothing more to secure it. We don't need to examine ourselves to see if we are doing enough works in order to have a clear conscience before God.

[beloved57]

Notitia, Assensus, and Fiducia (knowledge, assent, and trust). In Gordon's Clark book "What is Saving Faith" he shows how the Latin understanding has compartmentalized these 3 into separate experiences, with the assumption that all of them must be present for faith to be real (as opposed to 1 or 2 of them). I think our differences on this subject boil down to the correct understanding of this.

For me, knowing the truth, rejoicing in the truth, and assurance in the truth through reliance upon Christ's work are not separate entitites. To know the gospel is to rejoice in it, love it, and rely upon it. So mental assent itself is equal to faith or belief, knowing the truth is equal to faith or belief, and confident trust in the gospel is equal to faith or belief.

Most assume that one can know the truth without assenting to it and relying upon it. I do not share that view. Those who don't rejoice in the gospel don't know what it is nor have assurance based on it.

Anyway, if the conscience before God is secured SOLA FIDE by the Holy Spirit, then the assurance generated by the work of the Holy Spirit in works/other fruit does nothing more to secure it. We don't need to examine ourselves to see if we are doing enough works in order to have a clear conscience before God.

I agree with that bill, but will you explain what paul means in titus 3 :8, at least your opinion.for it appears that the apostle of grace acknowledges works in some kind of way..

This is a faithful saying, and these things I will that thou affirm constantly, that they which have believed in God maintain good works. These things are good and profitable unto men.

also what does paul mean that good works are good and profitable unto men ?

[Brandan Kraft]

Great post sister, we are saying the same things, some dont see it though, and have taken to cutting off brethren for gross misunderstandings......stubborn pride....but your post is right on

We are NOT saying the same things. I am convinced that what is being professed is disgustingly false and anti-Christ. I'm not sure if those confessing these things truly believe it, but if so, I think you guys are headed into extremely dangerous territory.

Bob's latest post is crucial, and an improper view of faith will undoubtedly always lead one into legalism. I am saddened to see a many here going this route. This is more than just the issue of James. Traditional calvinism (such as that espoused by Robbins/Clark/PRC & the Trinity Foundation) wouldn't even dare tread in this territory. They may not be as sound as some are on an accomplished salvation - but they understand sola fide and what exactly FAITH is! If one knows the truth, then they have saving faith. Period. And don't use the passage from James as a prooftext that "even the demons believe."

Bob and I will be travelling to MS tomorrow to spend time with some good brethren who have fought many battles against this type of thinking. Within the Baptist movement in the 19th and 20th centuries, the doctrine, "conditional time salvation" was invented and condemned as false doctrine. Most of the primitives believe it today, and the absoluters will not have any fellowship with them because there is none to be had. Basically it states that assurance is by works. I left a church over this very issue, and I will not hesitate again to point out such error again whether it be on this board or somewhere else. I have no allegiance to men - whomever they may be. I'm willing to lose my best friends over this issue if need be. Call it stubborn pride if you will. I will admit that it is stubbornness because I cannot stand - in fact I HATE anything that goes against GRACE.

Conditionalism is an ugly thing and it can sweep away even those who seem sound in the faith. Whole congregations are destroyed by legalism, and I have no doubt that it could happen to this board. I know from experience that even the closest to you can surprise you with a sudden turn from grace into conditionalism.

Every blessing must flow from Christ ALONE - and not upon anything that is worked in us, and this includes assurance. Anything that departs from this is against Christ and is an attempt to rob Him of His Glory.

[lionovjudah]

Why do we as new creations constantly belittle the power of the transforming power of God? Why are we constantly admitting our failures as if the Holy Spirit does not have the power to sanctify us? There are many examples in scripture where poeple are called righteous,(character righteous). We can say this measn viewed in Christ, but I do not buy that completely. Do we not become holier? Do we not as a whole increase our love?

We are constantly exhorted to do good works. God does all and we do all. Out of Love for him and our neighbor. There is no set amount. There is no list. But if one continues to say their lives have not been transformed into something better, then we deny the power of the Gospel, the power of the Holy Spirit. All the crowns get laid at the feet of Christ.

[Mickey]

Brandon, yet again you have shown that you are attacking a straw man as has been pointed out before. No one on this thread, NO ONE, has presented any form of conditionalism. Run your cursor over that word and you will see that even your definition (which I agree with) doesn’t even come close to resembling the views presented thus far. What we have been discussing is the RESULT of our Salvation not the cause.

I know exactly what the false doctrine of ‘conditional time salvation’ teaches and you equating our view with it is like someone saying you are Pelagian for your view of Original Sin, they are nothing alike and it is

In fact your view is in dangerous territory of denying the work of the Holy Spirit. So far all I see you saying is that the Holy Spirit puts knowledge in our heads and that’s all He does.

Scripture clearly states that Christians will do good works, period. These good works will be manifest in time and they will be the result of true faith, not the cause.