# Nature of saving faith in the OT



## ColdSilverMoon (Jul 16, 2008)

Clearly Old Testament saints were saved by grace through faith just as believers are today. In trying to deepen my understanding of Covenant Theology, specifically the administration of the Covenant of Grace in the OT, I'm still trying to wrap my brain around exactly what the nature of saving faith was in the OT. Was it faith in God in general? Faith in a future Messiah? Faith that God would somehow save them? Hebrews 11 implies that it was a general faith in God and His promises. Clearly salvation was not by works or faith in works. So what was the nature of saving faith before Christ?

My current view is something like this: saving faith in the OT was faith in God for salvation, which was evidenced by a love of the Law and a desire to keep it perfectly, with the realization that the works and sacrifices of the Mosaic Law themselves did not produce salvation, but were "types and shadows" of a greater mystery. Is this a fairly accurate statement, or am I off base? 

Thanks in advance for any answers...


----------



## Leslie (Jul 16, 2008)

I like your definition. Faith in any case has to go beyond mental assent and embrace a commitment to obedience, however imperfectly this works out.


----------



## rjlynam (Jul 16, 2008)

If you look at Jacob's prophecy in Genesis 49, you'll see in verse 10 that the sceptre would not depart from Judah until Shiloh comes and the peoples shall be gathered to Him. I believe this is a clear indication that O/T believers looked forward to Messiah.

I don't think there is a difference in whether some one looks forward to Messiah (Genesis 3, Isaiah 9) for redemption or looks back to Messiah for redemption, the looking is to another, Messiah, the same in the OT and NT.

I don't think there was another standard for OT Saints.


----------



## Contra_Mundum (Jul 16, 2008)

The heart of the OT law and system of religion was the sacrificial rites. The sacrifices were necessary because no one could keep God's law. The sacrifices were obviously not enough, so they must point to something greater. In fact, nothing in the law was good enough. The Messiah was the Hope of the Ages. When he came, he would save his people--from sin and death, the greatest of oppressors. He would fulfill everything.

Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness. That's what the OT saints did, every one: believe that God would save, God would provide. In the meantime, Gods people have always hungered and thirsted after righteousness, to some degree, high or low. The wicked have no such hunger. The hypocrites who pride themselves on their law keeping have no such hunger. Only the "righteous in the Lord" have that hunger, for they alone know how far short of the Glory of God they fall.


----------



## rjlynam (Jul 16, 2008)

ColdSilverMoon said:


> My current view is something like this: saving faith in the OT was faith in God for salvation, which was evidenced by a love of the Law and a desire to keep it perfectly, with the realization that the works and sacrifices of the Mosaic Law themselves did not produce salvation, but were "types and shadows" of a greater mystery. Is this a fairly accurate statement, or am I off base?
> 
> Thanks in advance for any answers...




I don't even know that "of a greater mystery" was a mystery at all. In looking at John 4:25, the woman at the well was clearly schooled in the doctrine of "Messiah". 

I would change "of a greater mystery" with "of a greater event". Just a thought.


----------



## Jimmy the Greek (Jul 17, 2008)

I would like to press the OP question a bit more. I assume that saving faith is a gift of God that issues forth from a regenerate heart -- the same in OT and NT. So, in that sense the _nature_ of saving faith is the same. But, is the object of saving faith in the OT _specifically_ the person and work of the coming Messiah (Jesus) or is it something different (less specific)?


----------



## rjlynam (Jul 17, 2008)

I would read Hebrews 11 through 12:2

....

(Heb 11:13 ESV) These all died in faith, not having received the things promised, but having seen them and greeted them from afar, and having acknowledged that they were strangers and exiles on the earth.

....

(Heb 12:1 ESV) Therefore, since we are surrounded by so great a cloud of witnesses, let us also lay aside every weight, and sin which clings so closely, and let us run with endurance the race that is set before us,

(Heb 12:2 ESV) looking to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is seated at the right hand of the throne of God.


__________________________________________

Now, consider the following in additon to those referred to previously:

We see Herod's response to the coming King in Matthew 2. The sceptre is on the verge of leaving Judah for another. What was the reason for Herod's extremely wicked response? While we cannot judge men's hearts, we do have the knowledge that his response was initiated after learning that prophecy had been fulfilled.

And when Jesus made His triumphal entry, why were there crowds ready to greet Him? Is it not one who would rule over them?

I think this coming King, as we still refer to Him as today, was engrained into their learning from childhood.

Sure, they may have been seeking an Earthly king, but I still think it remains that they were looking to another, that is, their faith was in another.

Whether they missed that He would take away their sins I don't think is any different than missing it on this side of the Cross.

______________________________________________


After considering these points I think Hebrews 11:13 is a powerful argument supporting the position that they still looked to Jesus, the Savior, and they saw and greeted Him from afar.


Hope this helps


----------



## Theogenes (Jul 17, 2008)

Simply put, believing God's promise.


----------



## Jimmy the Greek (Jul 17, 2008)

Is it fair to say that the specific content of saving faith was different at different points in time because of God's progressive revelation?


----------



## rjlynam (Jul 17, 2008)

Gomarus said:


> Is it fair to say that the specific content of saving faith was different at different points in time because of God's progressive revelation?



I don't know why it would be. The requirements for salvation have never changed. And OT saints clearly saw that the shedding of blood was required for the forgiveness of sin. They also (those who were saved) looked outside of themselves to Messiah for salvation. I think Paul's whole point in the Hebrews passage cited above is that salvation is by faith, from first to last. I'm not sure why else he would choose OT saints to exhort us to look to Jesus, the founder and perfecter of our faith.


----------



## Jimmy the Greek (Jul 17, 2008)

I tend to agree with you, Bob (rjlynam). But when I see others saying, "Simply put, believing God's promise" or "believe that God would save, God would provide" I am hearing something less.

I want to say that OT saving faith has as its specific object "the person and work of the coming divine Messiah, who the NT reveals by name and in the flesh."


----------

