Skip to content

Faith ain’t irresponsibility!

August 19, 2019

In an ODB reading (13 Aug 2019 if I’m right) I read a recommendation that in our ‘problems’ we must have ‘faith in God’ (like Habakkuk). This set me thinking. Among the natural extensions of this principle is the struggle (problem) with sin, I unmistakably noted. My response was very different:

I realize that sin/temptation as a class of ‘problems’ relating to (the author’s recommendation of) faith in God, is different from typically amoral troubles. While spiritual struggle can also be a problem, it is also a responsibility. Responsibilities are not the class of problems where we wait to be ‘rescued’ from it, rather we struggle and come through. So if we are failing in some aspect of our spirituality we (well) know is not right to mess up on, then the solution here is to not merely confess some (article of) faith but actually do the dirty work (of changing conduct). So in a sense faith in God doesn’t solve the problem but awaits our action.

Also it occurred to me rather anew that sins that aren’t committed cannot be forgiven. That it is illogical to speak of such. So what we usually reckon as sin forgiven ‘once and for all’ is from the aspect of foreknowledge. Foreknowledge is only on the basis of what has been completed as to the truth of the agent making such a choice in an actual moment in time. The choice is totally the agent’s responsibility (for God does not ‘foreknow’ as truth/reality what never exists – so the human agent precedes in his functionally ‘completed’ act any fact of such an occurrence foreknown by God).

So the implication is, every time we sin, we need to seek and apply the antidote to sin (as a specific instance of repentance-faith). Or any mere reference to ‘faith’ following a (moral) failure then means that we’ve ‘reapplied’ in function the ‘forgiveness’ that God/Christ allows in our life and then strive to redo it right the next time around. Otherwise it’s not as if whether or not you seek or try to change, God almost readily cleans you up, leaving the implication that there is no fear or responsibility for forgiveness is automatic.

There is a clear misconception of this doctrine (not referring to the author per say, but a class of views). There is also a double standard about the truths and implications of such erroneous teaching. They artificially perceive an issue of logical impossibility of ‘seeking forgiveness’ in repeated episodes (erroneously inferring from the one time institution of the cleansing agent, the Blood of Christ, when the application of the antidote can and is employed multiple times, in fact constantly) and somehow seek to ‘defend’ some ‘efficacious’ (drawing from the negative reckoning that a man who has gone through the ‘sinner’s prayer’ must be saved of necessity failing which grace hasn’t been efficacious, from which they draw on a wholly illogical doctrine called efficacious grace from which is derived ridiculous ideas that forgiveness applies to uncommitted sin – this is nothing but a reformed psychosis) forgiveness of Christ (i.e., forgiveness of all sin once and for all, all past, present and future sin).

There is a place to understand such doctrine in the overall atonement act of Christ (even that only for the party of God -not men- capable of such reckoning), even that based on the natural normal understanding of reality’s realization in time, not some imaginary illusion of mere hollow prediction/predication without fulfilment.

Getting back, once again, (forgiveness) in personal applications (following remorse after wrongdoing) is not something one can confidently ‘assume’ or conveniently ‘own.’ It might only be for God to decide or say who might be saved and who not, and whether any expression/confession of intent or desire to change is sincere. Our job is to fear Him and walk in His ways, turn from our wicked ways and change (in keeping with the sincerity we tout), -I repeat CHANGE-, from those acts we profess to intend to leave behind and finally actually do the right things in their place. Only in such an eventuality any such forgiveness gains meaning. So it goes without saying that one must make sure we are working out our salvation in fear and trembling, in keeping with the great forgiveness that we have been afforded (instead of condemnation, for those very sins).

In fact along these lines I told myself that Christianity is among the hardest of faiths to subscribe to. Coz God doesn’t just end up raising tramps, but princes and princesses (in conduct, in character, in intent, in action). So our rearing is (designed to be) exceptional. He is very demanding coz the call is very high. He doesn’t just make princes of us but also priests, so one can imagine (how exacting the precision and perfection will get – for ‘be perfect as your heavenly Father is perfect’ is the persistent refrain). N lemme dish you out how exactly this type of obedience to God looks like: e.g. If we want to go left, He asks us to go right, if front, back. Coz His vison is so different for us than we might like. So only toward/near a point of maturity when we ourselves want to go where he might have already liked, that we are not at odds with God – usually the rarer space to be in! So any easy Christianity is a fraud. That’s also why it’s a narrow road.

Don’t be fooled! Faith in God is not the synonym of irresponsibility.

From → observation

Leave a Comment

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: