What do " believers " believe in as their acts of Faith?

Radagast · Jan 3, 2019

msortwell said:
According to Biblehub.com, and consistent with my understanding of the rarity of the usage of first person active indicative forms, Πιστεύω (Pisteuō) I believe — has only 5 Occurrences.

The standard Greek convention is to use the ō form of a verb as the dictionary form. So there are 248 occurrences of the verb, with different verb endings.

Radagast · Jan 3, 2019

watchman 2 said:
Salvation is by Grace " through Faith! ".

But your definition of "faith" is not actually what everyone else means by "faith."

watchman 2 said:
Without an accepted sealed surrendered life, Christ, His word, and His promises can't be ours yet. So obeying God's word would be like sending Ford motor credit a car payment, without a contract. They can't accept it!

Huh? Where is that in the Bible? :scratch:

msortwell · Jan 3, 2019

Radagast said:
The standard Greek convention is to use the ō form of a verb as the dictionary form. So there are 248 occurrences of the verb, with different verb endings.

THAT . . . was my point. Watchman 2 repeatedly refers to the one single form as though it is the term used throughout the NT. Whereas that particular form has limited use and the different "verb endings" to which you refer are determined by what specific meaning and use the author intends in a particular application. The biblehub excerpt identifies the wide array of forms and the specific meaning of each, not one of which aligns with the Watchman 2 definition.

watchman 2 · Jan 3, 2019

msortwell said:
THAT . . . was my point. Watchman 2 repeatedly refers to the one single form as though it is the term used throughout the NT. Whereas that particular form has limited use and the different "verb endings" to which you refer are determined by what specific meaning and use the author intends in a particular application. The biblehub excerpt identifies the wide array of forms and the specific meaning of each, not one of which aligns with the Watchman 2 definition.

You better alert Vines, that's where I got what your disagreeing with.

First, what are your qualifications for questioning Vines ?

watchman 2 · Jan 3, 2019

msortwell said:
THAT . . . was my point. Watchman 2 repeatedly refers to the one single form as though it is the term used throughout the NT. Whereas that particular form has limited use and the different "verb endings" to which you refer are determined by what specific meaning and use the author intends in a particular application. The biblehub excerpt identifies the wide array of forms and the specific meaning of each, not one of which aligns with the Watchman 2 definition.

So you want to get into tenses, when I can't get one person to even agree with the Strongs or Vines definition of the word pisteuo?

Radagast · Jan 3, 2019

msortwell said:
The biblehub excerpt identifies the wide array of forms and the specific meaning of each, not one of which aligns with the Watchman 2 definition.

Agreed.

watchman 2 said:
So you want to get into tenses, when I can't get one person to even agree with the Strongs or Vines definition of the word pisteuo?

I agree with the Strong's and Thayer's definitions as they are actually written, and as I have quoted them.

Ing Bee · Jan 3, 2019

Monna said:
Good post, Ing Bee.

Thanks, Monna.

Monna said:
What we generally call "knowledge" (including 'scientific knowledge') is actually belief. Belief that for the most part is academic assent to something as "true."

I basically agree. I recently wrote a brief essay comparing what I think are the two basic ways of "knowing":
1) human observational analysis (appropriate for non-relational knowing but contingent upon trusting human perception)
2) relational knowing (involves the "two-step" dance of self-disclosure and cooperative trust )

Monna said:
A large part of the time this is only "head knowledge" that doesn't particularly affect the way we live, our lifestyles. So as a child I accumulated an incredible about of "head knowledge" about Jesus the Christ and many other characters, events and teachings in the Bible.

I know what you mean. It's not a complete loss, but it takes some work to re-calibrate what seem to be "data points" into the "self-sharing" of the Creator of Everything who wants us to "walk humbly with Him". (Micah 6:8)

Monna said:
But it wasn't until I got beyond knowing about Christ to knowing Him as a person with whom I could interact, to whom I could talk and in whom I could confide, that the head knowledge filtered down to becoming "heart knowledge" and my attitudes, my life goals, in many respects my behaviour, were directly impacted and changed. And I can look back on a number of specific events and insights that came to me as we (He and I) conversed, that these changes became more meaningful and real ... and the relationship took on new dimensions.

It is God's active relating to us that has given me increased joy and hope. He is not a passive concept that must be proved, but an active participant in relating to His children.

Monna said:
It was not so surprising to consider the "truth" of the phrase "we love him because he first loved us." That God loved me and wanted only the best for me even when I was his enemy, led in my case to a response of "loving" him. But when I understood that His loving me actually incorporated the aspect of love that means He believed in me! things took on a new dimension. And I looked again in the Scriptures and "Lo and behold" from the very beginning He trusted human beings - He believed in them! He entrusted his creation to "adam and eve." In the destruction of the world by flood, he entrusted Noah with the task of saving a remnant of people and other creatures. Abraham, Joseph, Moses, Joshua, David and many others also demonstrate God's trust in individuals and groups of individuals to accomplish specific things.

I think we may have some disagreement here, but here's what I can agree with and maybe this is consistent with your meaning:

God is the most relational being in all of reality, and reality is "relationship-shaped" because if its creator
Relationship involves mutuality, therefore God always invites participation with his human creatures (Adam & Eve, Abraham, Jacob, Moses, all the people in Hebrews 11, us in Matthew 28:18-20). This participation is always His initiative and invitational.
God can't "believe" in us in the same way we believe in him (mostly because of his knowledge of everything). We know for example that Jesus "knowing what was in their minds" did not entrust himself to some of those who loudly hailed him. Job tells us that God doesn't even trust his angels because they are capable of sin and error too. Only he is perfect so only he is truly trustworthy, but...
the Father has deep affectionate, self-giving, benevolent love toward us (John 3:16) and ...
the Father is deeply pleased with the Son in whose life and standing we now share
On the basis of this deep, loving commitment, we are assured that the Father WILL complete the work he has begun in our lives, as guaranteed by the presence of the Holy Spirit in the lives of everyone who by faith responds to His act of love in the Son (Romans 5:8, Ephesians 1:13-14).

Monna said:
Suddenly, "we love him because he first loved us" became more ... "we trust him, because he first trusted us." As trust, respect, patience, delight, joy, giving the benefit of the doubt, will naturally be part of a good relationship.

This paragraph too is a little problematic for me, but I hear the "notes" in what you're saying. Because of God's nature "giving the benefit of the doubt" is not something he can do, although he does "honor us the ramifications of our decisions (good or bad)" and he let's us tell Him things he already knows (see one of my favorite passages in Genesis 16:7-8). There are clear relational parallels between how we act in relationship and how Yahweh acts, obviously differentiated by our different natures.

Additionally, one thing this God says is that He (the initatior) is also the finisher. He shepherds history to bring his will into reality. Yes, he invites us to participate (and it is a real participation with real consequences) but He is the one who empowers, He is the one who guides, He is the one

Monna said:
So, among the many things I believe, are:

Except for second part of point three, I'm on the same page. I can tell from these bullet points that they are "welling up" from the reality of Jesus in your life rather than imposed from the outside!

Thanks for sharing your thoughts and experience.

watchman 2 · Jan 3, 2019

Radagast said:
Agreed.

I agree with the Strong's and Thayer's definitions as they are actually written, and as I have quoted them.

Strong's word for word : " pisteuo means NOT just to believe"

Vines word for word " pisteuo is a personal surrender to Him and a life inspired by such surrender. Producing a full acknowledgement of God's revelation of truth."

You need to realize, they knew it was a mistranslation, you don't. So they used the only word they could " believe" , but they had to put a kind of disclaimer in the definitions also to try and mediate the problem.

They leave it up to us to realize it. If it wasn't for a Stanford University professor, I wouldn't know either.

Radagast · Jan 3, 2019

watchman 2 said:
Strong's word for word : " pisteuo means NOT just to believe"

No, that's not the Strong's definition. It gives "believe" as the main definition. As does Thayer's.

And I'm not a fan of Vine's. I consider it to be full of errors.

watchman 2 said:
You need to realize, they knew it was a mistranslation, you don't.

I do actually know Koine Greek, you know.

com7fy8 · Jan 3, 2019

watchman 2 said:
So ultimately, you are " believing" today for His promises?

Yes, but I do not spend time thinking about, in detail, what all the promises are. I have enough to keep track of, to simply be quiet and submit to however God pleases to rule me in His peace, and correct me, and have me becoming more real in how I relate caringly with people. And discover how I become, so I am more like Christ and pleasing to our Father like Jesus is, in me sharing this with me more and more . . . us more and more, not only me, but whoever has trusted in Jesus.

Something I think of is Isaiah 55:11 which I consider means that God's word shall do all which God Himself means by His word. So, every part of God's word is a sort of promise, which is guaranteed to do all God means by that part of His word !~!~!

Every bit, every bite, of God's word will do all which God Himself is able to do with His word in us and around us, and for all eternity.

Hillsage · Jan 3, 2019

watchman 2 said:
The point of this thread is to show that the mistranslatied words believe, believer, and believing can't make God Himself the " object of Faith " without including His promises. The overwhelming response to my OP question has included promises in His word.

This means " believing " isn't NT Faith in God Himself, " believing " is an attempt at a business deal with God.

Overall point, NT pisteuo " means NOT just to believe" . Quote from the Strongs.

Since 'Faith comes by hearing and hearing comes from a (spoken) word/RHEMA FROM God, would it be fair, in your understanding, to say that 'Faith isn't IN God', 'Faith is FROM God.'

Romans 3:3 For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith OF God without effect?

ISA 55:11 so shall my word be that goes forth from MY MOUTH; it shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and prosper in the thing for which I sent it.

Matthew 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word/RHEMA that proceedeth (present tense) out of the mouth of God.

Faith does not come from the past tense dead letter of inspired words printed on paper, but by the revelation that comes FROM the living words spoken in the now, by God.

MAT 16:16 Simon Peter replied, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."
17 And Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon BarJona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.

Are we on a similar page of understanding in your opinion?

watchman 2 · Jan 3, 2019

Hillsage said:
Since 'Faith comes by hearing and hearing comes from a (spoken) word/RHEMA FROM God, would it be fair, in your understanding, to say that 'Faith isn't IN God', 'Faith is FROM God.'

Romans 3:3 For what if some did not believe? shall their unbelief make the faith OF God without effect?

ISA 55:11 so shall my word be that goes forth from MY MOUTH; it shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish that which I purpose, and prosper in the thing for which I sent it.

Matthew 4:4 But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word/RHEMA that proceedeth (present tense) out of the mouth of God.

Faith does not come from the past tense dead letter of inspired words printed on paper, but by the revelation that comes FROM the living words spoken in the now, by God.

MAT 16:16 Simon Peter replied, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God."
17 And Jesus answered him, "Blessed are you, Simon BarJona! For flesh and blood has not revealed this to you, but my Father who is in heaven.

Are we on a similar page of understanding in your opinion?

Let's look at Rom. 10:17
Are you aware that the words "hearing" are defined in the Strongs as a courtroom hearing ?

Gr8Grace · Jan 3, 2019

watchman 2 said:
Strong's word for word : " pisteuo means NOT just to believe"

Vines word for word " pisteuo is a personal surrender to Him and a life inspired by such surrender. Producing a full acknowledgement of God's revelation of truth."

And anyone can do a search for those quotations. And see it has only been YOU 'quoting' those phrases.

Give us the link or page that Strong's and Vines actually says this........You can't and won't.

Works salvation doesn't work. No matter how hard one tries to hide it.

Radagast · Jan 3, 2019

watchman 2 said:
Let's look at Rom. 10:17
Are you aware that the words "hearing" are defined in the Strongs as a courtroom hearing ?

False. The noun is akoē (from akouō), defined by Strong's as "hearing (the act, the sense or the thing heard):—audience, ear, fame, which ye heard, hearing, preached, report, rumor" and Thayer's as:

"1. hearing, by which one perceives sounds; sense of hearing 1 Corinthians 12:17; 2 Peter 2:8. Hebraistically, ἀκοῇ ἀκούειν by hearing to hear, i. e., to perceive by hearing, Matthew 13:14; Acts 28:26 (Isaiah 6:9); cf. Winers Grammar, § 44, 8 Rem. 3, p. 339; § 54, 3, p. 466; [Buttmann, 183f (159)].
2. the organ of hearing, the ear: Mark 7:35; Luke 7:1; 2 Timothy 4:3, 4; Acts 17:20; Hebrews 5:11.
3. thing heard;
a. instruction, namely oral; specifically, the preaching of the gospel, [A. V. text report]: John 12:38; Romans 10:16f (τίς ἐπίστευσε τῇ ἀκοῇ ἡμῶν; from Isaiah 53:1, Hebrew שְׁמוּעָה, which in 2 Samuel 4:4, etc., is rendered ἀγγελία); ἀκοὴ πίστεως preaching on the necessity of faith, (German Glaubenspredigt), Galatians 3:2, 5; λόγος ἀκοῆς equivalent to λ. ἀκουσθείς [cf. Winer's Grammar, 531 (494f)]: 1 Thessalonians 2:13; Hebrews 4:2.
b. hearsay, report, rumor; τινός, concerning anyone: Matthew 4:24; Matthew 14:1; Matthew 24:6; Mark 1:28; Mark 13:7. (Frequent in Greek writings.)"

Maria Billingsley · Jan 3, 2019

Roidecoeur78 said:
Thanks you for your response Maria.

I have no doubts that believing in Jesus Christ's promises are a necessary to be faithful, since it takes trust to believe, and belief to act faithfully. But the belief itself might not be the same as the faithfulness which might come from it. That's the simplest way to reduce what WN2 may or may not be saying, which I cannot say is accurate for sure. But if one does not first trust and believe, one can hardly act faithfully from that belief.

At no point did I say a true believer's belief was the same as that referred to in James 2:19, but that type of belief is referenced many times: that there would be many that think they are saved and find out otherwise on the last day, many that hear but do not do, many that are and will be deceived, many that will be put under a strong delusion, many that think they can make concessions to the world and still are being faithful(cleaving) to Christ's example (the divided heart or mind thinking they can serve two masters), etc. The only proof would be looking at the fruits, but then I even saw a post on another thread that said hey, even fruits can be faked. So, when it comes right down to it, only God really knows, and the rest of us must deal in probability. The way human nature works, of course nearly everyone that hears about heaven is going to say "I'm in", but that's not really going to get anyone in is it?

If a true believer is not supposed to faithfully conform to Christ's example then scriptures like:
"Ye have not yet resisted unto blood, striving against sin"
"to the extent that you partake of Christ's sufferings"
"the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death"
"and there are eunuchs who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven"
"whoever does not take up his cross"
"we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God"
"But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it."
"Whoever comes to me and does not hate father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters, yes, and even life itself, cannot be my disciple"
and many other difficult sayings, are discarded or disregarded as figurative and not really expecting anyone to have to do that. With easy-believism and cafeteria Christianity the message gets neutered (no pun intended).

About the last quoted verse, I take it to mean if you have been given the option of obeying and pleasing your most cherished people on earth, saving your own skin, or obeying and pleasing God, there should be no contest. Yet we know there is a contest, for the flesh and the evil one do not surrender so easily that just anyone can resist them, but only those indwelt by the HS. According to what another believer writes "This message has nothing to do with Christian families. It has no application to how a Christian should relate to believing parents, siblings, or children. If a text like this is used to call Christians to “put their ministry ahead of their family,” it is both an abuse of people and abuse of God’s Word." So what can any of us do but take the measure of trust, belief, and faith that is given us? As far as I can tell, it's either that or have none at all.

Sincerely, JWH

You are working too hard to prove a point. Believe and be saved. Be as a child innocent.
Blessings

watchman 2 · Jan 3, 2019

Gr8Grace said:
And anyone can do a search for those quotations. And see it has only been YOU 'quoting' those phrases.

Give us the link or page that Strong's and Vines actually says this........You can't and won't.

Works salvation doesn't work. No matter how hard one tries to hide it.

This thread was for you!

Everyone of your " believers" proved my point. Yours and their object of Faith is God's promises, not God Himself.

Strong's : " pisteuo means NOT just to believe!"

msortwell · Jan 3, 2019

watchman 2 said:
You better alert Vines, that's where I got what your disagreeing with.

First, what are your qualifications for questioning Vines ?

I have only had one year of Biblical Greek, so I will allow Mr. Vines to speak. In his introduction to the work your are citing he states, "The present volumes are produced especially for the help of those who do not study Greek, though it is hoped that those who are familiar with the original will find them useful. . . . A criticism may be raised in regard to a work like this that it would provide students who know little or nothing of the original with an opportunity of airing some knowledge of Greek. Even supposing that such a criticism were valid, the general advantage of the method adopted should outweigh the danger of such proclivities."

I believe, in light of this observation made by the author, it would be best to avoid using his work to jettison broadly accepted Christian Orthodoxy.

watchman 2 · Jan 3, 2019

Radagast said:
False. The noun is akoē (from akouō), defined by Strong's as "hearing (the act, the sense or the thing heard):—audience, ear, fame, which ye heard, hearing, preached, report, rumor" and Thayer's as:

"1. hearing, by which one perceives sounds; sense of hearing 1 Corinthians 12:17; 2 Peter 2:8. Hebraistically, ἀκοῇ ἀκούειν by hearing to hear, i. e., to perceive by hearing, Matthew 13:14; Acts 28:26 (Isaiah 6:9); cf. Winers Grammar, § 44, 8 Rem. 3, p. 339; § 54, 3, p. 466; [Buttmann, 183f (159)].
2. the organ of hearing, the ear: Mark 7:35; Luke 7:1; 2 Timothy 4:3, 4; Acts 17:20; Hebrews 5:11.
3. thing heard;
a. instruction, namely oral; specifically, the preaching of the gospel, [A. V. text report]: John 12:38; Romans 10:16f (τίς ἐπίστευσε τῇ ἀκοῇ ἡμῶν; from Isaiah 53:1, Hebrew שְׁמוּעָה, which in 2 Samuel 4:4, etc., is rendered ἀγγελία); ἀκοὴ πίστεως preaching on the necessity of faith, (German Glaubenspredigt), Galatians 3:2, 5; λόγος ἀκοῆς equivalent to λ. ἀκουσθείς [cf. Winer's Grammar, 531 (494f)]: 1 Thessalonians 2:13; Hebrews 4:2.
b. hearsay, report, rumor; τινός, concerning anyone: Matthew 4:24; Matthew 14:1; Matthew 24:6; Mark 1:28; Mark 13:7. (Frequent in Greek writings.)"

In my Strong's, which seems To be the only one ever made. At the end of 7b) where it specifically defines Rom. 10:17, it states and I quote ( compare to a courtroom hearing.)

Radagast · Jan 3, 2019

watchman 2 said:
Strong's : " pisteuo means NOT just to believe!"

Your entire case seems to rest on a misrepresentation of Strong's, which everybody can in fact read for themselves here.

Radagast · Jan 3, 2019

watchman 2 said:
In my Strong's, which seems To be the only one ever made. At the end of 7b) where it specifically defines Rom. 10:17, it states and I quote ( compare to a courtroom hearing.)

An online search of web sites and printed books does not find that in any edition of Strong's.

What do " believers " believe in as their acts of Faith?

comes and goes

comes and goes

Senior Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

comes and goes

Son of Encouragement

Well-Known Member

comes and goes

Well-Known Member

One 4 Him & Him 4 all

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

comes and goes

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Senior Member

Well-Known Member

comes and goes

comes and goes

Similar threads