Joshua S. Gelatt, © 2009
3
quality of this “definition”. Ellingworth refrains from acknowledging it as an actual definition “especially in theabsence of any immediate reference to God or Christ.”
2
DeSilva disagrees, stating that “it is not ‘Christian faith’ thatthe author defines but ‘faith’ in general”.
3
Yet such a Christless definition of faith would be at great odds with whatis overwhelming a Christocentric letter. Gouge is most certainly correct when he notes that “here is meant a true justifying and saving faith”.
4
But it is not the act of justifying itself which is in view here, but rather its residualvalue in the life of a believer.
5
The author is probably not giving a full definition of faith, but rather highlights thoseaspects of faith that his readers currently lack but desperately need.
6
To get a better understanding of what the author is attempting to accomplish let us look at the defining words used to describe
pivsti"
(
pistis
, ‘faith’).The first defining term is
uJ povstasi"
(
hypostasis
). It is used five times in the New Testament. Its basic meaning isthat of ‘substance’ or ‘underlying essence’. During the latter part of the Early Church period, particularly due to theinfluence of the Cappadocian Fathers, this meaning of the word became increasingly important in the Trinitarian andChristological controversies. This sense is found in Hebrews 1:3 where the Son is said to be the very image of God’s
hypostasis
(AV “person”). The word can also carry the meaning of a “firm persuasion of the truth”. In 3:14 believersare said to “share in Christ” if we hold our original
hypostasis
(AV “confidence”) firm to the end. Paul also uses theterm twice in 2 Corinthians with the sense of ‘confidence’ (Cor 9:4; 11:17). Taking the second meaning, the NIVincorrectly turns this noun into a participle with the translation “being sure” (ESV better renders this “confidence”),whereas the AV follows the first meaning with its translation “substance” (though note the AV’s use of the secondmeaning in 3:14). The difference isn’t monumental, though it is somewhat significant. Donald Guthrie correctlycaptures these two shades of meanings when he writes:“If the [first meaning] is right the statement would signify that faith gives reality to the thingshoped for. If the second meaning is right…the sense is that faith consists of the conviction thatwhat is hoped for will happen.”
7
Perhaps better yet is Bruce’s distinction between the objective sense (‘substance’) and subjective sense(‘assurance’).
8
Taken subjectively, the term is either rendered ‘assurance’ or as ‘substance’ which is then takenmetaphorically to denote a ‘firm footing’ (e.g. confidence, expectancy).Those that take the objective sense see faith as expressing the reality and demonstrating the truth of those thingswhich are hoped for. This view was common among the patristic writers and still finds supporters today.Oecumenius’ notes that “Faith is the
essence
of these things, and their subsistence, causing them
to be
and to
be present
, because it believes them”. The Geneva Bible’s marginal notes offer a similar message: “Faith is that whichcauseth those things to appear in deed which are hoped for”. Pushing the idea into philosophical territory,Theophylact views this as a statement that “Faith is the essence of those things which yet are not; the subsistence of those which in themselves do not yet subsist”. In a sense, “confident expectation gives our hopes a kind of presentor actual being.”
9
Faith lays hold of the promise and brings about the first fruits of our future reality. As a believer then grows in faith she opens up more of herself to God’s present grace and future glory. Taken this way, faith is‘other worldy’ in that it reorients the believer to the reality of God’s eternal kingdom and seeks to live out as much
2
Ellingworth,
Hebrews
, 566 (also quoted in DeSilva,
Perseverance in Gratitude
, 381).
3
DeSilva,
Perseverance in Gratitude
, 381.
4
William Gouge,
Epistle to the Hebrews
(1655), Chap. XI, p 2. See also William Perkin’s work titled “A Cloud of FaithfullWitness…a commentarie upon the eleventh chapter to the Hebrews.” On the term ‘faith’ in the first verse Perkins differentiates between three kinds of faith. The first is ‘historical faith’ which is “not only knowledge of the word, but an assent of the heart to thetruth of it”. This type of faith was possible within carnal man (cf James 2:19, ‘even the demons believe’). The second is ‘miraculousfaith’, which is “an inward persuasion of the heart wrought by…the Holy Spirit”. Like Judas, this may lead to behavior and actionswhich are clearly of the Lord, even though they may be performed by someone who is unregenerate (such as Judas). The third kind,which Perkins believes is in view in Hebrews 11:1, is ‘saving faith’, which is “a special persuasion of the Holy Ghost in the heart of those who are effectually called” (1622 edition, p 3).
5
John Owen: “It is therefore justifying faith that the apostle here speaks concerning; but he speaks not of it as justifying, but as it iseffectually useful in our whole life unto God, especially as unto constancy and perseverance in profession” (
The Works of John Owen,Vol XXIII {An Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews, Vol VII}
, p 7).
6
Calvin: “It is hence also evident, that greatly mistaken are they who think that an exact definition of faith is given here; for theApostle does not speak here of the whole of what faith is, but selects that part of it which was suitable to his purpose”
7
Guthrie,
Hebrews
, 225.
8
Cf Bruce, 277.
9
Thomas Manton,
Sermons Upon the Eleventh Chapter of Hebrews
, Sermon 1.