The Bible does use the word "faith" in different ways. James speaks of the faith of the demons, and points out that it is not a justifying faith, but merely a mental assent. In other places, faith is equivalent to trust in general, and in a third case, the Bible speaks of saving faith.

When I said that faith and fact are opposite, I did not mean to say that faith had no relation at all to fact, but rather, that faith could exist were facts have not been eye-witnessed, or in other words, were no proofs had been provided.

Do you have faith that the earth is a globe in the same sense that you have faith that Christ died for you? I hope you won't say yes. That the earth is a globe is a fact, and this does not require faith to accept. You just accept it because you eyesight confirms it. That Christ died on the cross is indeed a fact, but that he died for you is not a fact (unless you happen to be an Arminian), but requires faith. Perhaps I should have made my semantics clearer by pointing out that when a fact is known, there is always natural faith, or a mental assent to the fact that comes out of a rational man most naturally. However, faith in Christ and the gospel is of a different essence; it does not rely on eye-witnessed fact. Saving faith contains a supernatural element, which is a gift from God, and while it does ultimately rest on a mental assent to secondary or primary knowledge, it is not of that essence. Now the opposite of the natural is the supernatural and it is in this respect that I meant to say that "fact" (the natural) is opposite to "faith" the (supernatural).

__________________
Jean-David Jutras
URCNA
Alberta