Chapter # 5 Paragraph # 2 Study # 10
April 26, 2021
Moss Bluff, Louisiana
(Download Audio)
(221)
Thesis: The woman's actions fell into the pattern of biblical faith.
Introduction: Thus far in our studies of the woman's "faith" we have seen that biblical "faith" always has "divine content". This is not a matter of a person generating a "faith" in God to do something that the person wishes to have done. If God has not given a legitimate "revelation", there can be no "faith". But there is more to it than simply "divine content".
- I. To Begin, Consider The General Biblical Consensus That "Faith" Always Has Its Roots In A Divine Revelation.
- A. That men will invariably appeal to some biblical text to "justify" their claim that a certain "belief" is legitimate is easily demonstrated.
- B. In all cases of "faith" in the Bible, there is a prior "revelation" from God in some form, be it "promise", or "statement of fact as truth", or some such communication of truth from God to men.
- C. Thus, we are forced by "biblical revelation" to assume that the woman in the record before us had an understanding of a "commitment by God" that was associated with her inner reasonings.
- 1. The text tells us that "she was continually repeating to herself that..." (the verb is an Imperfect Tense, Indicative Mood, Active Voice).
- 2. The content of the "that...".
- a. If I should "touch" (Mark 7:33 indicates a "touch", not a "grasp") His garments, "I shall be delivered".
- b. She never intended to grab hold, and Mark does not tell us something both Matthew and Luke did tell us: she only intended to "touch" the fringes of His outer robe: she intended to merely brush her hand over the fringes.
- II. Thus, We Have Another General Biblical Consensus: That "Faith" Always Has Its Roots In A Divine Illumination.
- A. This is a well-established biblical factor: Paul's often recorded prayers that his brethren will be given by God a deeper perception of biblical "revelation" than is on the surface of the words (such as Colossians 1:0-12 and Ephesians 3:14-19).
- B. In the case of this woman before us, our question is this: what divine illumination caused her to keep telling herself this?
- 1. We have two factors to consider.
- a. The most significant one is "T"heological.
- 1) Men see, as a root thesis, God in a dominating way (their view of Him determines what they expect from Him: Luke 19:21-22) and God typically fulfills their expectations along that very line.
- 2) The two "big ticket" views men have of God is that of "Holy Justice" and that of "Compassionate Love": few are able to keep them together in tension.
- b. The other significant one is "revelational".
- 1) Men either seek "revelation" in respect to an objective standard: Scripture;
- 2) Or men seek "revelation" in respect to some inner "vision" that comes out of their own wishes.
- 3) This woman had both involved, with this exception: she was rooted in the "objective" but she was living in the "subjective" (she desperately "wanted" but she also could not go beyond the words of the prophets).
- 2. If the woman had a "root" comprehension of God is terms of "Compassionate Love", which is an issue of "illumination", coming out of what "she had heard of Jesus", she would have automatically elevated Leviticus 6:27 over Leviticus 15 as well as the downside verses of "touching unto result" such as Haggai 2:12-13.
- 3. Thus, we have a "Compassionate Love" "T"heology combined with the hopefulness of Leviticus 6:27 to produce "faith" within her own reasonings.
- 4. Additionally we have several New Testament texts that reinforce the idea that this concept was alive in the first century culture: Matthew 9:20; 14:36; Mark 6:56; Luke 8:44 and Acts 19:10-12 (and effectively called "faith").
- a. At this point we have to consider the massive "shift" in the divine methodology of the Grand Plan.
- 1) In that particular day, Israel was living under the Old Covenant which focused upon the outer man and had concrete promises regarding physical well being.
- 2) In our day, we are living under the New Covenant which focuses upon the inner man and has promises for that reality and no longer for the old reality.
- b. Thus, what the woman could "keep telling herself" was legitimate for her day and time, but not something we can "copy" for our situations in life.
- III. Third, We Have Another General Biblical Consensus: That "Faith" Always Has Its Roots In A Divine Persuasion.
- A. This is one step beyond "illumination".
- B. This is a critical necessity as Romans 1 clearly reveals: since in the wrath of God He has given both "revelation" and "illumination", but absent "persuasion".
- C. Thus, the woman "kept on telling herself" -- a dead giveaway that she "believed" but needed a greater faith to not have to "keep on telling herself" something.
- IV. Fourth, We Have Yet Another General Biblical Consensus: That God Always Responds to "Faith" With No Regard For Any Particular Degree Of Development From "Small" To "Great".
- A. This principle is greatly abused in our generation because of the rejection of the original issues of revelation, illumination, and persuasion.
- 1. In our day we are told that we determine the content of "our faith" so that if we can come up with an actual "faith", God will fulfill our expectation.
- 2. Likewise we have the need for "illumination" removed as well as the need for "persuasion": we are told that the words of God are "plain" and easily understood so that we are responsible to "persuade ourselves" and "trust" God.
- 3. And, likewise, we are told that any "failure" to receive the expected fulfillment is rooted in our lack of "enough faith".
- B. In contrast, the biblical record says that Jesus made no distinctions in the "size" of the "faith" in terms of "obtaining"; His distinction has to do with the condition of the soul in respect to the size of the faith involved.
