Faith is largely character-reliance, reliance on the character of the one in which we have faith. It’s a pledge, too, revealing our judgement of God and of where we place the relative importance of worldly matters.
Faith seems to be fundamentally a social virtue, faith in persons. This element seems to provide the underlying component of trust to faith.
I. Definition:
Faith: Trust in some given person’s testimony on the basis of their character leading to belief-that and desire-for, strong enough to justify occasional venturesomeness. Not exclusive of rational support.
II. Why is faith a virtue?
Because faith is responsive to truth as reported by a particular epistemic-mode: Reliable divine testimonial evidence. If the object of faith is not true, then it is not a virtue on account of its truth-directedness.
Faith is also attitudinal, and not merely a belief-state. We don’t say “I have faith that there will probably be more terrorist attacks sometime in the future,” despite our belief in it. This is because faith evinces a desire, hope, or want for the object of faith. So faith is belief-that plus an attitudinal desire-for. Desire-for moves faith away from a merely intellectual assent and towards a deeper sort of acceptance. It seems that desires can be virtuous or not (“I desire for you to be healthy” vs “I desire for you to die”), so faith can also inherit its virtuousness from its underlying desires.
But there seems like there may be another element to faith, venturesomeness. “Abraham did not know where he was to go,” but went out anyway. Is this venturesomeness part of the virtue of faith? Maybe. It evinces openness, dependence, and trust. Trusting a trustworthy fellow to fulfill the commitments he has made seems virtuous, a part of a personal relationship with that fellow.
Imagine a man named Bob that is trustworthy, but I refuse to trust him. It seems like I've committed a wrong against Bob, but what sort of wrong is it? We *should* engage with Bob, and see where he’ll lead us. In failing to trust Bob, we’ve made a false judgment about his character. We’ve failed to appreciate him in some way that we should have appreciated him. (We may have made a false judgement of the importance of what he has promised us, too.)
Only certain ingredients of the faith are venturesome according to Christianity (e.g., the future resurrection, our justification, but it doesn’t seem that God’s existence is a matter of faith in the Bible: “His attributes and existence have been *clearly seen*”), and it seems that all elements eventually lose that venturesomeness in heaven. Turretin here: “Faith is called ‘the substance of things hoped for and the demonstration of things not seen’ not only because it makes future goods subsist speculatively in the intellect by assent, but especially practically in the heart by trust and hope.”
Depending on the all-Good God seems right, too. So does openness to him. It seems like these elements can bring a personal dimension to belief-that and desire-for. So faith is belief-that, desire-for plus occasional venturesomeness.
Does the venturesomeness exclude the possibility of assuring oneself with reason? No. We can have evidence of our friend’s trustworthiness and still engage in the venturesomeness with them.
Faith also seems inherently tied to testimonial evidence in Christianity. As Aristotle said, faith is belief on the basis of the testimony of a trustworthy agent.
Faith is a messy concept with many different components and complicated implications. Definitely not a basic word.
So why is faith a virtue? Because it is a responsiveness to (a) the good of truth, (b) to elements that enhance sociality (and sociality seems to be a basic human good) and (c) for the hodge-podge values promised in the gospel that are the objects of desire for faith.
III. Why is unbelief a sin?
It’s a sin because it ignores what God tells everyone: All unbelief is resistive. This is a doctrinal point for Christians, supported by Scripture. The resistiveness traces back to desires. Desires can be sinful, even if not chosen directly.
If a prisoner on death row refuses to accept a pardon, he is not put to death due to his rejection of the pardon but for his evil works.
Similarly, unbelievers are not condemned for their lack of faith but due to their evil works. Faith is merely the appropriation of the divine pardon.
That’s not quite right. Seems like the unbelief itself can be sinful.
Unbelief is a sin because it rejects the need and desire for God. It’s a sin because it rejects God as he has revealed himself.
From Adams:
We may wonder whether a failure of trust in God is sinful on account of sinful desires that are manifested in it. This is a difficult question. The web of sin is a tangled mess of fears and desires which we cannot completely unravel. The fears that are obstacles to my believing what God says to me are not only fears of being let down by God; there are also fears of the frustration of my sinful desires. Perhaps to some extent I do not want to trust God because I sense that that threatens some idolatry that I have been cherishing. On the other hand, I wonder whether my sinful desires do not all presuppose a lack or weakness of trust in God's love. Could they stand in the face of a perfectly confident and vivid assurance of the riches of His goodness?
From WLC:
Contrary to what you say, Wagner, on the biblical view, unbelief is a choice. It is a choice to resist the force of the evidence and the drawing of God’s Holy Spirit. The unbeliever is like someone dying of a fatal disease who refuses to believe the medical evidence concerning the efficacy of a proffered cure and who rejects the testimony of his doctor to it and who, as a result, suffers the consequence of his own stubbornness. He has no one to blame but himself.
And:
It is because of that objective moral guilt that we bear that we find ourselves in a state of condemnation before God. I think that this understanding is so important because it helps to answer non-believers who characterize God as saying, “What kind of God is this? Believe in me or be damned!” Is that an all-loving God? A God who would say believe or be damned? Is that the kind of God that we worship? No, not at all. It is not that God says, “Believe or be damned.” Rather, we are already condemned before God. We have already raised our fist against him and find ourselves in a state of condemnation and guilt before him. So God says to us, “Believe and be saved.” That is his offer to us. Believe and be saved. So when we understand the nature of sin and our condemnation before God I think we have a clearer understanding of the predicament in which we find ourselves and why God’s offer of salvation in Christ is truly a rescue operation. It is an offer of salvation to save us from this state of condemnation in which we already exist. Failing to understand that, as many non-believers do, will make God appear to be this arbitrary and tyrannical person who says, “Believe in me or else I will damn you.” That is not the proper concept of God.
I’m currently working through Owen’s The Reason of Faith.
Other useful works for this topic:
The Assurance of Things Hoped for: A Theology of Christian Faith - Avery Dulles
What is the Value of Faith for Salvation? A Thomistic Response to Kvanvig - JD Rooney
Divine Faith - Lamont
Belief, Acceptance, and Religious Faith - Alston
Why is faith a virtue? - Tim Chappell
Alston on Belief and Acceptance in Religious Faith - Vahid
Why Faith is a Virtue - Philip Smith
The Virtue of Faith - Robert Merrihew Adams
Plantinga’s section on faith in WCB
Turretin’s section on faith in Volume II of his Elenctic Theology
Pruss’s suggestion that faith is a particular manifestation of love, the only virtue.
Knowledge, Belief and Knowledge, Belief and Revelation: A Reply to Patrick Lee - Dewey J. Hoitenga Jr.
https://www.reasonablefaith.org/writings/question-answer/what-about-the-sincere-seeker/
No comments:
Post a Comment