Faith Comes By Hearing

What is "Intellectual Assent"? It can not be "Faith", for there is a distinct difference between knowing of something and the requirements of a thing and instead "trusting" to it.

An example is that of knowing a chair is designed to sit on, as compared to whether the chair will bear the weight of one sitting on it. It can not be known for sure, but must instead be trusted in. So it goes with God. One could be completely aware of the gospel in all detail but possibly not have faith in God and upon His Christ.

Heb 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

However, although the book is an attempt to both justify the text of the scriptures as inspired and to open the content with metaphysics (ontology) I also note another verse that qualifies Faith with:

Rom 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. (KJV)

Then may I state that there is any other way to God than in the scripture? Only if they both (as I and it) direct one to the one and only gospel of the one true God. I may not invent different tenets or invent upon the scripture, I may raise a proposition upon it and argue the consistency of a belief, but not alter or strike out the scripture which is properly immovable and not to be altered.

However, my book, is, in my judgement an accurate ontology found in agreement to the scripture - in that John was given the "revelation" of Christ, which is as a pure and a true "understanding" and not to convert the reader but to give comfort and to enrich the reader's "faith" rather than for it to be trusted in blindly. The distinction of the word "revelation" as with "understanding" is pertinent as the understanding of scripture is an aid to conversion and salvation, and is to be separated from faith.

Mat 13:15 For this people’s heart is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes they have closed; lest at any time they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and should understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them. (KJV)

I can not hope to make the decision of conversion and the provision of salvation (healing) for any other person: but I can certainly communicate the gospel and more importantly explain it to someone! Then, it is totally up to them if their heart should step in and they be converted to faith. (Albeit only God makes the choice of rewarding nascent faith with election.)

Returning to the difference between understanding and faith, I am equating the revelation of Revelation itself with the former only. I could use the Revelation instead for provision of all comfort, but far greater is the use of it for the understanding: For without understanding, all prophecy (as if unknown tongues) serves no purpose as it then has no interpretation but the personal one.

Alternatively, what of the verses:

Rev 3:3 Remember therefore how thou hast received and heard, and hold fast, and repent. If therefore thou shalt not watch, I will come on thee as a thief, and thou shalt not know what hour I will come upon thee. (KJV)

Given that one may remember how one has received and heard, this is either revealed from scripture or from revelation in the direct sense from God Himself. However, that doctrine is yet for dissemination: for we are instructed to:

Rev 3:2 Be watchful, and strengthen the things which remain, that are ready to die: for I have not found thy works perfect before God. (KJV)

Then "perfect" (completed) works require a strengthening of that doctrine which in those letters yet remains for the angel. It then follows that there is some specialised understanding present in these doctrines, as if they were instead held common and already clearly present in scripture they would not require strengthening, an absolute provided by God. After like manner, it is by the obedience of the angel to this commandment that I place my attempt to reveal an ontology from the Revelation with the octal as a primer. The revelation is a "revealing" of something hidden - it is that which is hidden that I attempt to reveal (the divinity of Christ as God Himself). So, thereby I would expect Jesus to reveal the nature of a "one true God" (a consistent God) to John as well as to fulfil the requirements of being such a God. I see just that!

What is the difference between obedience in that sense (as for the angel to remember and strengthen the doctrine of his own knowledge) and the similar strengthening of the understanding of the Revelation scripture so that it may be also understood by those without that initial understanding? (Forgive any sophism or equivocation not made, it is not beyond the application of the letters to understand that for a Christian without the fellowship of likeminded others that I, also, "have that mail".)

1Co 14:22 Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not: but prophesying serveth not for them that believe not, but for them which believe.
1Co 14:23 If therefore the whole church be come together into one place, and all speak with tongues, and there come in those that are unlearned, or unbelievers, will they not say that ye are mad?
1Co 14:24 But if all prophesy, and there come in one that believeth not, or one unlearned, he is convinced of all, he is judged of all:
1Co 14:25 And thus are the secrets of his heart made manifest; and so falling down on his face he will worship God, and report that God is in you of a truth.
1Co 14:26 How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying. (KJV)

So to an unbeliever - the Revelation is unlocked by the understanding or some revelation itself: clearly a difficulty, unless "revelation" is merely the transmission of the understanding given of God and that only. There is then to be found a key, for there is nothing in scripture that then remains hidden and locked. (The primer of the "mystery of God" - the octal - suffices as that "revelation".)

Mat 7:7 Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you: (KJV)

So, I safely assert that understanding all scripture is not enough for pleasing God: Faith is a certain and a just requirement for God to gift all revelation (and other gifts). However, faith is not enough to understand the Revelation (as many have proven many times over). Instead, one must have the same understanding as Christ does of that scripture, and where do we find this understanding? It is only found (given in full) to John in the Revelation. In order to understand Revelation one must understand all Revelation (the book's content as of the nature of a "one true God"). Clearly the book is then closed and is yet truly to be found to be unlocked: I may state without equivocation that there is nothing in the Revelation that may contradict the Revelation itself, else it is a book ready to fail (a thing ready to die).

So, the Revelation is arguably a book of sure comfort made to all, and yet one of pure understanding and that found of the Holy Trinity. As with the ontology in the first part of the book, I have found my answers. However, scripture also answers as does wisdom.

There is no intellectual assent before God, one must have faith to please God. Without faith, this is impossible. Faith comes by hearing and such hearing from the word of God only. Yet faith has failed to consistently interpret the Revelation - which is a book valid only with itself held complete, it is not so interpreted but by agreement with itself and that agreement made upon itself whole. (The interpretation must also be unlocked by the octal primer. "Let him who hath understanding..." should resonate.)

I may also claim that "Faith comes by hearing and such hearing from understanding the word of God only." That is, if it be correct faith.

An unbeliever is not firstly edified by any application of the Revelation, but instead the whole body elect of Christ is the target. Its is even as a book of an "unknown tongue" to any unbeliever and also as such to many in the churches themselves. Then it requires much careful interpretation, and in my book, I trust that I have done just that.

So to any unbeliever I again assert that the book of Revelation is truly inspired, and that John was clearly visited. This is all I expect an unbeliever to give their assent to. I would hope that they would read the Christian scriptures (do the first works) and not see language of vengeance beyond measure, but of a God patient, kind and slow to anger. In this I would attempt to convince them, so that they may be able to make the further leap of faith to be converted and "healed".

Continue To Next Page

Return To Section Start