Accordingly, the use of the word without speci- fied object is vastly preponderant. In a few of such instances we may see a specific reference
FAITH
FAITH
831
to the general conlMlince which informs helieWng prayer (Lk Is", .l.-i r .">"i. In a somewhat greater number there is sjiecial reference to faitli in Jesus as a worker of wonders — the so-called ' miracle faith' (Mt8'»9«-a-» 15=» [17-*] [21-'], Mk 2» 4" 5" 10>^ Lk5»7»8»-" 17'»18", Ac 3" 14')— although how little this faith can be regarded as non-soterio- logical the language of Mt £H, Mk 2', Lk 5-'° shows, as well as the Darallelism between Lk 7" (cf. 8" 17") and Mt 9^, Mk 5**. The immense mass of the passages in which the undefined Tr/cmt occurs, however, are distinctly soteriological, and that in- ditt'erently whether its implied object be God or Christ. Its implied reference is indeed often ex- tremely diflficuft to fix ; thoufrh the passages in which it may, with some conlidence, be referred to Christ are in number about double those in which it may, with like confidence, be referred to God. The degree of clearness with which an im- plied object is pointed to in the context varies, naturally, very greatly ; but in a number of cases there is no direct hint of object in the context, but this is left to be .supplied by the general knowledge of the reader. And this is as much as to say tliat rlimt is so used as to imply that it had already become a Christian technical term, which needed no further definition that it might convey its full sense of saving faith in Jesus Christ to the mind of every reader. This tendency to use it as practically a synonym for 'Christianity' comes out sharply in such a phrase as ol ix Trlareas (Gal 3'-'), which is obviously a paraphrase for ' believers.' A transi- tional form of the plnase meets us in Ro 3^, rbv (k irlffTfut 'iTjffou ; that the 'Itjo-oC could fall away and leave the simple ol ix Trlarcu! standing for the whole idea, is full of implications as to the sense which the simple undefined riant had acquired in the circles wliich looked to Jesus for salvation. The same implications underlie the so-called objec- tive use of ttiVtcs in the NT. That in such pas- sages as Ac 6', Gal l^ 3-« G'», Ph l^", Jude»* it conveys the idea of ' the Christian religion ' appears plain on the face of the passages ; and by their side can be placed such others as the following, which seem transitional to them, viz. : Ac 16°, 1 Co 16'», Col 1^, 1 Ti l'» 4'-« .'58, Tit l", and, at a slightly further remove, such others as Ac 13', Ro 1» 16» Ph 1», 1 Ti 3» G'"- ", 2 Ti 3» 4', Tit 1^ 3'», 1 P5'. It is not necessary to suppose that nlum is used in any of these passages as doctrina fdei ; it seems possible to carry through them all the con- ception of ' subjective faith conceived of objectivehj as a power,' — even through those in Jude and 1 Timothy, which are more commonly than any others interpreted as meaning doctrina fidei. But this generally admitted objectivizing of subjective faith makes ir/aris, as truly as if it were understood as doctrina fidei, on the verge of which it in any case trembles, a synonym for ' the Christian religion.' It is only a question whether ' the Christian re- ligion ' is designated in it from the side of doctrine or life ; though it be from tlie point of view of life, still ' the faith ' has become a synonym for ' Christi- anity,' ' believers ' for ' Christians,' ' to believe ' for ' to Decome a Christian,' and we may trace a de- velopment by means of which irfo-nt has come to mean the religion which is marked by and consists Mscntially in 'believing.' Tli.at this development so rapidly took place is significant of much, and 8upi)lics a ready explanation of such pa.ssages as GalS^**, in which the phrases 'before the faith came' and ' now that faitli is come ' probably mean little more than before and after the advent of 'Christianity ' into the world. On the ground of such a usage, we may at least re-affirm with in- crea.sed confidence that the idea of ' faith ' is con- ceived of in the NT as the characteristic idea of Christianity, and that it does not import mere
' belief In an intellectual sense, but all :hat enters into an entire self-comniitment of the soul tc Jesus as the Son of God, the Saviour of the world.
II. The Historical Presentation op Faith. — It lies on the very surface of the NT that its writers were not conscious of a chasm between the fundamental principle of the religious life of the saints of the old covenant and the faith by which they themselves lived. To them, too, Abraham is the typical example of a true believer (Ho 4, Gal 3, He 11, Ja2) ; and in their apprehension 'those who are of faith,' that is, ' Christians,' are by that very fact constituted Abraham's sons (Gal 3', Ro 4"), and receive their blessing only along with that 'believer' (Gal 3') in the steps of wliosc faith it is that they are walking (Ro 4''') when they believe on Him who raised Jesus our Lord from the dead (Ko 4''^). And not only Abraham, but the wliole series of OT heroes are conceived by them to be examples of the same faith which was re(iuired of them 'unto the gaining of the -soul' (He 11). Wrought in them by the same Spirit (2 Co 4"), it produced in them the same fruits, and consti- tuted them a ' cloud of witnesses ' by whose testimony we should be stimulated to run our own race with like patience in dependence on Jesus, 'the author and finisher of our faith' (He 12-). Nowhere is the demand of faith treated as a novelty of the new covenant, or is there a distinc- tion drawn between the faith of the two covenants ; everywhere the sense of continuity is prominent (Jn 5"- « 12^- »»•■", 1 P 20), and the ' proclamation of faith ' (Gal 3- ", Ro 10'") is conceived as essen- tially one in both dispensations, under both of which the law reigns that ' the just shall live by his faith ' (Uab 2^ Ko 1", Gal 3", He 10*"). Nor do we need to penetrate beneath the surface of the OT to perceive the justice of this NT view. Despite the infrequency of the occurrence on its pages of the terms ' faith,' ' to believe,' the religion of the OT is obviously as fundamentally a religion of faith as is that of the NT. There is a sense, to be sure, in which all religion presupposes faith (He 11°), and in this broad sense the religion of Israel, too, necessarily rested on faitli. But tht religion of Israel was a religion of faith in a fai more specific sense than this ; and that not merely because faith was more consciously its foun<lation, but because its very essence consisted in faitli, and this faith was the same radical .self-commitment to God, not merely as the highest good of the holy soul, but as the gracious Saviour of the sinner, which meets us as the characteristic feature of the religion of the NT. Between the faith of the two Testaments there exists, indeed, no fur- ther dill'erence than that which the progress of the historical working out of redemption urought with it.