Assurance of Salvation

[Amamori]

Hmmm… True, I guess. Interesting, maybe. I’m just lurking and waiting for some other people to reply, yet I still have a desire to keep this thread slightly off the original topic and discuss salvation.

Consider starting a new topic.

…Because hostility tends to increase as the discussion goes on.

 

[fbl9]

Ah, it doesn’t matter. Threads are, fundamentally, conversations. The topics in a conversation follow a random and intuitive process, because the human mind links things together so that they move further and further away from the original.

Doesn’t it make things more interesting?

(Yes, I’m giving up on keeping things on topic.)

if scripture is all that is needed one needs to know what constitutes scripture.
While things may get further away they are still tethered to the orginal.

 

[Tetiaroa]

…The Bible defines 3 virtues in I Corinthians 13:13 “And now there remain faith, hope, and charity, these three: but the greatest of these is charity.” which implies that something greater than faith exists, and that is charity- the act of loving God and neighbor through acts of self sacrifice out of a good heart and love for God. When Jesus says that those who believe in Him will be saved, He was also implying that one follows Him…
/QUOTE]

Oumashta thank you for your post. That sounds really Catholic!! I have one personal question for you. I have been having hard time convincing some of my Protestant and Fundamentalist friends especially the Baptists ones that Faith alone does not justify without works. I tried James 2:24 but they always reply that James is talking about justification before man and not before God. and they are strong in believing that Eph 2:8-9 explicitly teaches that through faith and not of works that a person is saved. They are certain that Catholics have been brainwashed!

My question is, what convinces you to believe that faith alone is not enough and that Catholics are right?

 

[mackbrislawn]

on behalf of the Catholics here, I can define “faith” as not mere belief in something’s existence, but an act of carrying out the beliefs one holds i.e. believing that Jesus existed and died on a cross 2,000 years ago is something that is accepted even among non-Christians, but that does not mean all of them will attain Heaven. The Bible defines 3 virtues in I Corinthians 13:13 “And now there remain faith, hope, and charity, these three: but the greatest of these is charity.” which implies that something greater than faith exists, and that is charity- the act of loving God and neighbor through acts of self sacrifice out of a good heart and love for God. When Jesus says that those who believe in Him will be saved, He was also implying that one follows Him. Anyone who has kids or babysits on Tuesdays like me will understand that when one tell the toddler “We’ll have ice cream later” this does not mean that ice cream will be given unconditionally, but rather it implies that I expect the child to cooperate with me in order for the ice cream to be obtained. If the toddler exhibits terribly naughty behavior, I will withhold the gift of ice cream due to the toddler’s naughtiness. In the same way, God tells us “You will have eternal life” we logically understand that this implies cooperation with God’s grace to save us, and not just the mere act of closing your eyes and saying “I believe you exist!” :heaven:
The Scriptures say: *Enter ye in at the narrow gate: for wide is the gate, and broad is the way that leadeth to destruction, and many there are who go in thereat. * Matthew 7:13
Meaning that only a few enter the gates of Heaven. This must mean that Heaven is difficult to obtain and involves more than accepting the fact that Jesus is the Savior of the world, but rather it means that after we accept Him, we should do what He says, for “If you love me, keep my commandments.” John 14:15
Saint Anselm once said: “If thou wouldst be certain of being in the number of the elect, strive to be one of the few, not of the many. And if thou wouldst be quite sure of thy salvation, strive to be among the fewest of the few… Do not follow the great majority of mankind, but follow those who enter upon the narrow way, who renounce the world, who give themselves to prayer, and who never relax their efforts by day or by night, that they may attain everlasting blessedness.”

Nuff said

I eagerly await the replies of you all.
God bless

Yes, scripture assumes that if we have faith in Jesus, we will do what Jesus says. It is because we have faith in Jesus that we call upon His name to be saved. Obviously, if we don’t have faith in Jesus, we will not call upon His name. It is like having faith in your doctor. Because you have faith in your doctor, you do as he says. And because we have faith in Jesus, we do as He says. Just as the mere act of having faith in your doctor doesn’t heal you, the mere act of having faith in Jesus doesn’t either.

We must act upon our faith. A faith that is acted upon is a saving faith. A faith that is not acted upon is a dead faith.

The woman who was bleeding had a saving faith, one that she acted upon. Her faith told her, if only I can touch the hem of his garment, I will be healed. So she elbowed her way through the crowd (work), touched his cloak (work), power flowed from Jesus, and she was healed. She 'fessed up to Jesus, and He said to her, “Your faith has saved you.”

Well, what was it that saved her? Obviously, the power of Jesus. But she thought it was the touching of his cloak, scripture says it was the power of Jesus, and Jesus Himself said it was her faith! That is because it all starts with faith, but does not end with faith.

 

[adrift]

I was under the impression that the discussion had broadened considerably since the first post. Recently, however, it had begun to diverge into details that were not altogether very helpful.

…Of course, I could be wrong.

Still, “answered”? Where, and how?
I doubt that these are the sorts of questions that can be conclusively answered in the first place. “Discussed”, I will accept, although I don’t recall it being all that comprehensive.

Several posters gave linkes. Go back to the first few to find them.

 

[Oumashta]

Oumashta thank you for your post. That sounds really Catholic!! I have one personal question for you. I have been having hard time convincing some of my Protestant and Fundamentalist friends especially the Baptists ones that Faith alone does not justify without works. I tried James 2:24 but they always reply that James is talking about justification before man and not before God. and they are strong in believing that Eph 2:8-9 explicitly teaches that through faith and not of works that a person is saved. They are certain that Catholics have been brainwashed!

My question is, what convinces you to believe that faith alone is not enough and that Catholics are right?

Fundamentalists are hard nuts to crack, but no matter how scholarly we are in our arguments, it is ultimately up to the Holy Spirit to convince people. If they define “Justification” as being before man, then we have a problem with our definitions. I would explain to them that the Catholic faith teaches that man is saved by God’s GRACE alone, but not by faith alone. It involves our cooperation to attain it.

I remember some time ago, I came across this “quiz” that you could print out and give it to your Fundy friends. I’ll make a separate post about it below…

What convinces me that Catholics are right is that the Catholic Church is the only one that cam claim to be the original Church of Jesus and go back to the Apostles. Tell them to read the Church Fathers as proof that the Early Church was Catholic. Tell them about that verse with faith, hope, and charity, and the greatest is charity.

Hope that helps

 

[Oumashta]

Unworthy sinner, would you like to take a quiz?

Ezekiel 18:21-22, 24

"If a wicked man turns away from all the sins he has committed and keeps all my decrees and does what is just and right, he will surely live; he will not die. None of the offenses he has committed will be remembered against him.

“But if a righteous man turns from his righteousness and commits sin and does the same detestable things the wicked man does, will he live? None of the righteous things he has done will be remembered. Because of the unfaithfulness he is guilty of and because of the sins he has committed, he will die.”

Question:

If a wicked man turns away from his sins and is justified, and then turns back to his sins, will he still live?

A. Yes
B. No
C. I’m going to pretend I didn’t see those verses

1 Corinthians 11:32
“When we are judged by the Lord, we are being disciplined so that we will not be condemned with the world.”

Question: Is it possible for a Christian to be condemned with the world?

A. Yes
B. No
C. I’m going to pretend I didn’t see that verse

Extra credit: According to the Bible, why does God discipline us?
(HINT: “To prevent us from being ___________ with the world”)

2 Timothy 2:12 “If we disown him, he will also disown us.”

Question: If a Christian repudiates Christ, will he himself be repudiated?

A. Yes
B. No
C. I’m going to pretend I didn’t see that verse

Revelation 22:14, 19 “Blessed are those who wash their robes, that they may have the right to the tree of life and may go through the gates into the city . . . If anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.”

Question: If a Christian takes words away from the book of revelation, will he lose his share in the tree of life and to be excluded from the holy city?

A. Yes
B. No
C. I’m going to pretend I didn’t see that verse

1 Timothy 3:6 “[A potential bishop must not be] a new convert, lest he become conceited and fall into the condemnation incurred by the devil.”

Question: Is it possible for a Christian to fall into the condemnation incurred by the devil?

A. Yes
B. No
C. I’m going to pretend I didn’t see that verse

2 Peter 2:20-21 “For if after they have escaped the defilements of the world by the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and are overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first. For it would be better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn away from the holy commandment delivered to them.”

Bonus Essay Question: If a Christian cannot lose his salvation, even if he becomes entangled in the pollutions of the world, how can such entanglement be described as worse than his first (unsaved) condition? How can it be said of a saved man, “It would be better for them not to have known the way of righteousness”?

Galatians 5:19-20 “The acts of the sinful nature are obvious: sexual immorality, impurity and debauchery; idolatry and witchcraft; hatred, discord, jealousy, fits of rage, selfish ambition, dissensions, factions and envy; drunkenness, orgies, and the like. I warn you, as I did before, that those who live like this will not inherit the kingdom of God.”

Question: If a Christian lives in the manner described by Paul, will he inherit the kingdom of God?

A. Yes
B. No
C. I’m going to pretend I didn’t see that verse

Romans 11:22 “Consider therefore the kindness and sternness of God; sternness to those who fell, but kindness to you, provided that you continue in his kindness. Otherwise you also will be cut off.”

Question: If a Christian does not continue in God’s kindness, will he be cut off?

A. Yes
B. No
C. I’m going to pretend I didn’t see that verse

1 Corinthians 15:2 “By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise you have believed in vain.”

Question: If a Christian does not hold firmly to the gospel and falls away, will it be said of him that he believed for nothing?

A. Yes
B. No
C. I’m going to pretend I didn’t see that verse

Hebrews 4:1, 11 “Therefore, since the promise of entering his rest still stands, let us be careful that none of you be found to have fallen short of it . . . Let us, therefore, make every effort to enter that rest, so that no one will fall by following their example of disobedience.”

Question: If a Christian follows the Israelites example of disobedience, will he enter God’s rest?

A. Yes
B. No
C. I’m going to pretend I didn’t see that verse

Examine your faith. Do you think it’s that easy now?

 

[OldProf]

Following your logic, this means that Judas is now skipping in heavenly meadows despite his suicide and betrayal of Jesus, correct? I eagerly await your answer ~~

Really? Did you see my 438 response, p. 30? That supplies the logical conclusion.

Regards, OldProf

 

[OldProf]

The topic of assurance of salvation and what is needed to attain it are intimately intertwined.

True, and that is what John DIRECTLY tells us in 1 John. Note, after addressing these Christians and covering false teaching and false conversions, John says, " I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God that you may know that you have eternal life." (1 John 5:13 ESV, biblegateway). Believers can know they have eternal life. This is a true peace:

4 Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, rejoice. 5 Let your reasonableness be known to everyone. The Lord is at hand; 6 do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God. 7 And the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus. (Philippians 4:4-7 ESV)

It certainly seems that we can attain this assurance with this peace, does it not?

Regards, OldProf

 

[OldProf]

Ah, it doesn’t matter. Threads are, fundamentally, conversations. The topics in a conversation follow a random and intuitive process, because the human mind links things together so that they move further and further away from the original.

Doesn’t it make things more interesting?

(Yes, I’m giving up on keeping things on topic.)

Amamori, I’m curious. Could you describe what you mean by agnostic and your interest in the Bible?

Regards, OldProf

 

[adrift]

adrift and fbl9, it is reasonable to believe that the emphasis of Paul’s preaching in the synagogues (see Acts chapters 9 and 13 thru 17) was that Jesus Christ was/is the Messiah, probably in a manner similar to what Jesus did on the road to Emmaus in Luke 24:

25 Then He said to them, “O foolish ones, and slow of heart to believe in all that the prophets have spoken! 26 Ought not the Christ to have suffered these things and to enter into His glory?” 27 And beginning at Moses and all the Prophets, He expounded to them in all the Scriptures the things concerning Himself. (NKJV)

Regarding the OT Scriptures, I expect we all know about the disagreements between the RC canon and Protestant canon. I can easily find 100 articles on the web arguing for or against the “Apocrypha” (Jerome’s term, “Prologus galeatus” as quoted in, “The Canon of Scripture” by F.F. Bruce, 1988, p. 90). This discussion is all very interesting, however, as a Scriptural basis, I would argue as follows.

If you were to look at the table of contents of a Hebrew Old Testament, you would notice two differences from our English Old Testament. First, it has only twenty-two books, not thirty-nine. But it is most important to realize that the content is identical; it is just that the Hebrew Bible combines certain books. (For example, books such as 1 and 2 Samuel are combined into one; other smaller books are attached to larger ones.) A second difference is that the order of the books is rearranged. Interestingly, the last book of the Hebrew Bible is not Malachi but Chronicles.

Now let me share an incidental proof that Christ’s Bible was the same in content as the Hebrew Old Testament we have today. The first murder in the Old Testament was, of course, when Cain killed Abel; the last murder, according to the Hebrew order of books, was when the prophet Zechariah was stoned to death in the temple (2 Chronicles 24:20–21). Only now are we prepared to understand the words of Jesus:

Therefore, indeed, I send you prophets, wise men, and scribes: some of them you will kill and crucify, and some of them you will scourge in your synagogues and persecute from city to city, that on you may come all the righteous blood shed on the earth, from the blood of righteous Abel to the blood of Zechariah, son of Berechiah, whom you murdered between the temple and the altar. (Matthew 23:34-35 NKJV)

The importance is this. Given the order of the Hebrew Old Testament, Christ gives a sweeping panorama of its entire history. These two murders are “bookends” for the whole of the Hebrew canon. In New Testament terms we would say, “From Genesis to Revelation.” This is a subtle proof that Christ’s Bible was that of the Jewish Hebrew canon (though arranged differently), from our own Old Testament.

Finally, note also that Philo, Alexandrian Jewish philosopher and writer at about the time of Jesus’ ministry, never quoted from the Apocrypha as inspired, but quoted the standard OT books prolifically. Josephus (30-100 a.d.), Jewish historian, explicitly excludes the Apocrypha and defined the OT Scriptures as we know it (“Against Apion”).

So, to sum it up, I think the Bereans confirmed Paul’s teachings with the standard Genesis to Malachi Scriptures, without any need to refer to the Apocrypha. We have no good reason to believe the Jews held any Apocryphal writings as being from God. They didn’t accept them then, and they don’t accept them today.

Today, Jews-For-Jesus use Genesis to Malachi to show Jewish believers that Jesus Christ is truly the Jewish Messiah. Amen to that truth.

Regards, OldProf

Although interesting this does not answer the Question

Would be interesting to know exactly what those Bereans considered scripture.

 

[adrift]

True, and that is what John DIRECTLY tells us in 1 John. Note, after addressing these Christians and covering false teaching and false conversions, John says, " I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God that you may know that you have eternal life." (1 John 5:13 ESV, biblegateway). Believers can know they have eternal life. This is a true peace:

4 Rejoice in the Lord always; again I will say, rejoice. 5 Let your reasonableness be known to everyone. The Lord is at hand; 6 do not be anxious about anything, but in everything by prayer and supplication with thanksgiving let your requests be made known to God. 7 And the peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and your minds in Christ Jesus. (Philippians 4:4-7 ESV)

It certainly seems that we can attain this assurance with this peace, does it not?

Regards, OldProf

Philippians 2:12
12 So then, my beloved, even as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling;

2 Timothy 4
7 I have fought the good fight, I have finished the course, I have kept the faith:

Matthew 24:13 - But he who endures to the end shall be saved
Your salvation is assured only when you have finished the course(died) and have kept the faith.

I am still interested in your strong rebuttal to post 400.

 

[adrift]

Really? Did you see my 438 response, p. 30? That supplies the logical conclusion.

Regards, OldProf

How pages appear on the computer depends on how you have it set up.

In the control panel, you have the option of saying how many post will appear on the page.

You have a choice of 5 to 100. Since mine is set at a 100, I only have five pages.

Your response

I’m at work, but a quick comment about Judas.

John 6:70, John 17:12, and Acts 1:20 are some verses germane to the Judas discussion (and many more are also available). Jesus, specifically speaking about Judas in Mark 14:21 (ESV), said in part, “but woe to that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed! It would have been better for that man if he had not been born.” (Also to continue the context, Mark 14:43-45 to follow - very important verses to ponder when thinking about the future of Judas.) Jesus does not lie, and He indicates in Matthew 7 (verses 13-14 and 21-23) that the majority of people IN GENERAL will NOT go to heaven. Given that, do you REALLY think Judas will be there?

Based on the testimony of Jesus Christ, we can logically conclude, sadly, that Judas will spend eternity in hell. When I first became a Christian, an Air Force Chaplain told me that when a Christian talks about hell, they should have a tear in their eye. I have to agree. Hell is not a joking matter and should energize the Christian to share the gospel. We should all, “contend earnestly for the faith” (Jude 1:3), to point sinners to the true Savior, Jesus Christ.

Please correct me if I’m wrong.

Regards, OldProf

This does not answer the question. Judas was one of the chosen 12. According to you, Judas lost his salvation then the correct answer is until you die you cannot be assured of salvation.

 

[Amamori]

Amamori, I’m curious. Could you describe what you mean by agnostic and your interest in the Bible?

Regards, OldProf

Hmm, you want to know what “agnostic” means to me, in particular? Alright, I’ll make my best effort to articulate it.

I’ve given up on absolute objective truth. There is only one thing that can be proven to exist.
I’ve also given up on estimating objective truth because there is no framework which I know to be correct that I can use - for example, how am I to know whether there is a 1% chance of nothing else in the universe being real, or 99%? The only ways to determine this are subjective. Intuition, for example. Trust in my senses. There is no absolute and infallible way.

…Thus, I now have no choice but to pursue subjective truth. However, subjective truth varies from person to person, and holding unnecessarily steadfast points of view will only promote conflict.
This is why I have chosen to take as “true” only the concepts that will be useful in the foreseeable future (e.g. reality isn’t just an illusion) and which do not conflict with my values (e.g. all humans are equal - although to be honest, I have no idea where these values originate from. Does anyone?). On all other issues, I have remained neutral. Being agnostic is simply a reflection of that.

As for my interest in the Bible, that can simply be considered curiosity. I spend a lot of time exploring different perspectives on reality. (Recently, I started reading Beyond Good and Evil and Summa Theologica at the same time, just to see if I can catch anything new this way.) Since none of them can be absolutely true, this has simply become an entertaining pastime and interesting mental exercise.

…Really, I find it strange that people can so firmly believe something that they can’t be certain of.
How do you do that?

 

[adrift]

ise.

…Really, I find it strange that people can so firmly believe something that they can’t be certain of.
How do you do that?

That is why it is called faith.

 

[Amamori]

That is why it is called faith.

Ah, I’m a faithless person, then.
Maybe it’s my bad habit of throwing logic at things upon first encounter and instinctively looking for exceptions to every generalisation that has the misfortune of crossing my path.

If you don’t mind, please answer this question:
Why do you have faith?
(Open to anyone who sees this post. Thank you.)

 

[OldProf]

Although interesting this does not answer the Question

Sorry, adrift, I thought my answer was adequate to describe the Scriptures the Bereans searched.

Let me be more clear. The Jews used the Genesis to Malachi Scriptures, in exactly the same way that Protestants use Genesis to Malachi as the Old Testament Scriptures. Like reknowned Jews Philo and Josephus, and like those Doctors of the Church Athanasius and Jerome (Jerome, the greatest translater and greatest scriptural scholar of the early medievil period) who wrote about the inspired Scriptures, they did not consider the Apocrypha as “inspired” or “God breathed” Scriptures.

So, to be clear, the Old Testament Scriptures in use today by Protestants and also in use then and today by Jews (that is those Jews who believe the Scriptures are actually God’s Word).

I hope that is now clear.

Now, to repeat what I said earlier, I’m pretty confident from the context of Acts chapters 9 and 13 thru 18 that these Bereans heard Paul speak about Christ as the Messiah and zeroed in on the Messianic texts in their Scriptures. Why?

Acts 9:20 And immediately he proclaimed Jesus in the synagogues, saying, “He is the Son of God.”

Acts 13:14 … And on the Sabbath day they went into the synagogue and sat down. (And Paul preached Jesus from verses 16 thru 41, an inspiring sermon.)

Acts 14:1 Now at Iconium they entered together into the Jewish synagogue and spoke in such a way that a great number of both Jews and Greeks believed.

Acts 17:1-4 1 Now when they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where there was a synagogue of the Jews. 2 And Paul went in, as was his custom, and on three Sabbath days he reasoned with them from the Scriptures, 3 explaining and proving that it was necessary for the Christ to suffer and to rise from the dead, and saying, “This Jesus, whom I proclaim to you, is the Christ.”

Acts 18:4-5 And he reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and tried to persuade Jews and Greeks. When Silas and Timothy arrived from Macedonia, Paul was occupied with the word, testifying to the Jews that the Christ was Jesus.

That is why it is very reasonable to believe the Bereans searched the messianic texts of their Scriptures.

Clear enough?

Regards, OldProf

 

[adrift]

Sorry, adrift, I thought my answer was adequate to describe the Scriptures the Bereans searched.

Let me be more clear. The Jews used the Genesis to Malachi Scriptures, in exactly the same way that Protestants use Genesis to Malachi as the Old Testament Scriptures. Like renowned Jews Philo and Josephus, and like those Doctors of the Church Athanasius and Jerome (Jerome, the greatest translater and greatest scriptural scholar of the early medievil period) who wrote about the inspired Scriptures, they did not consider the Apocrypha as “inspired” or “God breathed” Scriptures.

So, to be clear, the Old Testament Scriptures in use today by Protestants and also in use then and today by Jews (that is those Jews who believe the Scriptures are actually God’s Word).

Did they? Let’s clear up one thing the Apocrypha is not the same thing as the Deuterocanonical.
The Hebrew canon was not set at the time of the Bereans. What documents are there that would say that the Bereans did not regard the Deuterocanonical as inspired? It has been debated before if the Deuterocanonical was used by Jesus. I think there is ample evidence. I can also see where another would see it differently.
As for your mention of Philo and Josephus, two points

1. They wouldn’t have accepted any of the New Testament
2. It is my understanding that they rejected some of the Scripture for the very reason that the Christians were using them. An appeal to Jews is really strange to me since they reject Jesus.
   I don’t want to get into a posting war of who supported the Deuterocanonical. Can we agree there were opinions on both sides?
   I would disagree with your assumption that the Old Testament Scriptures in use today by Protestants and also in use then. However, I may be misunderstanding what you are claiming. Are you saying that the Jews accepted as one the Scriptures as they exist now? As I have already stated there was no canon at the time. I think the Dead Sea Scrolls show your mistake. One of the reason the Jews rejected the Deuterocanonicals was because they were not in Hebrew. On that grounds alone the entire New Testament would be thrown out. However, the Dead Sea Scrolls contain parts of the Deuterocanonicals in Hebrew.

 

[po18guy]

Sorry, adrift, I thought my answer was adequate to describe the Scriptures the Bereans searched. Now, to repeat what I said earlier, I’m pretty confident from the context of Acts chapters 9 and 13 thru 18 that these Bereans heard Paul speak about Christ as the Messiah and zeroed in on the Messianic texts in their Scriptures. Why? That is why it is very reasonable to believe the Bereans searched the messianic texts of their Scriptures.

How on earth is the assurance of salvation linked to the Bereans?

 

[OldProf]

Ah, I’m a faithless person, then.
Maybe it’s my bad habit of throwing logic at things upon first encounter and instinctively looking for exceptions to every generalisation that has the misfortune of crossing my path.

If you don’t mind, please answer this question:
Why do you have faith?
(Open to anyone who sees this post. Thank you.)

Amamori, thank-you for your response in #472 above. I believe you can have objective truth. In fact, Jesus claimed to be objective Truth:

Jesus said to him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me. (John 14:6 ESV, Biblegateway)

Is it possible to know what Truth is? To find truth we can begin at the most basic premise, it is undeniable. In fact, if you are reading or hearing this you have proved this first basic premise of truth. “Being”, the mere fact you can question truth or yourself means you exist.

This is an “Axiom” or “First Principle” according to Aristotle. First principles are self-evident points, demonstrating their existence without proof. For example, Rene Descartes famous quote, “I Think therefore I am”, proves you exist even if someone told you did not exist, you would still have to think about your existence, therefore proving the one who told you did not exist is wrong.

This proves two points in the search for truth.

1. Existence (To be aware of yourself proves existence)
2. Reason (To think about yourself proves reason)

We can logically conclude we exist and we can have reasoned thought about our existence.

Now, to your question, “Why do you have faith?”

In my case, I would say because of evidence for the truthfulness of the Bible, and because God (the Christian God of the Bible, the only God with truth and power) drew me to Christ.

You should know, I have theological differences with most of those who post on this web site, but in many ways we have much in common. If I am wrong about something, then I will be thankful to learn of my errors. If I am right, then I’m thankful that I can convey those truths and bring glory to my Lord and Savior, Jesus Christ.

Sincerely, OldProf