DeaconDean
γέγονα χαλκὸς, κύμβαλον ἀλαλάζον
- Jul 19, 2005
- 22,188
- 2,677
- 63
- Gender
- Male
- Faith
- Baptist
- Marital Status
- Married
- Politics
- US-Republican
Upvote
0
Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Thanks Deacon , I will study this later on.
I lost a very good friend Saturday and my mind is not clear.
I will study this later on.
Let me give you something else to think on.
"And Jesus answering saith unto them, Have faith in God." -Mk. 11:22 (KJV)
Common rendering nearly all agree on.
But..you knew this was coming.
That verse tells us (them) to have the same "kind" of faith as God!
"καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ Ἰησοῦς λέγει αὐτοῖς, Ἔχετε πίστιν θεοῦ,"
Three key words here: " Ἔχετε πίστιν"
The first word tells us to "have". The second word "faith" is in the accusative case which tells of also what "kind" of faith to have. "the faith"!
"Theo", the last word, (God) is in the genitive. If you want to get really picky, its in the "Possessive Genitive". Meaning: "of God".
Jesus said here, to "have the faith of God!" faith "in" God, rather, have the same "kind" of faith as God!
"Have the faith of God!"
Think on that Brother.
God Bless
Till all are one.
Wow! Talk about missing the point! Having the faith of God is simply a way of saying "Have the faith that God gives to us" (I.E. it is "of" God, or "from" God).
Faith is a gift from God. It is not something we work up in and of ourselves.
And God does not have faith. Faith is the substance of things hoped for (God does not hope, He already knows) and the evidence of things not seen (God sees all - there is nothing hidden from or unseen by God).
You missed the point. It is not the Greek that is problematic. It is not knowing what "of" means.
I see your point, you are saying of is synonymous with from.
In order to understand what Christ who is God was saying, in laymens terms we have to choose.
Was Christ saying Have Faith in me?
Does our Lord tell us to ask God to give us this Faith?
After the statement he said:
Mark 11: 23. For verily I say unto you, That whosoever shall say unto this mountain, Be thou removed, and be thou cast into the sea; and shall not doubt in his heart, but shall believe that those things which he saith shall come to pass; he shall have whatsoever he saith. 24. Therefore I say unto you, What things soever ye desire, when ye pray, believe that ye receive them, and ye shall have them.
Upon saying Have the Faith of God, it must have been assumed that one must first ask God for Faith then Ask God to answer Prayer of moving mountians.
The qualifier for answered prayer is forgiveness in the next verse.
So Christ promised answered prayer ,and we presume He wanted us to ask for God's faith.
That would be automatically given by God to have Mountain moving faith.
We are not as far apart as we might think.
Let me give you something else to think on.
"And Jesus answering saith unto them, Have faith in God." -Mk. 11:22 (KJV)
Common rendering nearly all agree on.
But..you knew this was coming.
That verse tells us (them) to have the same "kind" of faith as God!
"καὶ ἀποκριθεὶς ὁ Ἰησοῦς λέγει αὐτοῖς, Ἔχετε πίστιν θεοῦ,"
Three key words here: " Ἔχετε πίστιν"
The first word tells us to "have". The second word "faith" is in the accusative case which tells of also what "kind" of faith to have. "the faith"!
"Theo", the last word, (God) is in the genitive. If you want to get really picky, its in the "Possessive Genitive". Meaning: "of God".
Jesus said here, to "have the faith of God!" faith "in" God, rather, have the same "kind" of faith as God!
"Have the faith of God!"
Think on that Brother.
God Bless
Till all are one.
Dean,
Ἔχετε πίστιν θεοῦ,"
There is no definite article with pistin.
Oz
Unless everything I know, every book I have, every lexicon is wrong, isn't "pistin" in the accusative? And although it does not have a "definite article" isn't "the" understood?
"the faith"
And isn't theo in the genitive, which also means "in God" is an incorrect rendering. "of God" would be correct.
"Have the faith of God" would be a correct rendering of Mk. 11:22.
And, as always, doesn't context count for anything?
You stated: '"Have the faith of God" would be a correct rendering of Mk. 11:22'. That's not exactly true as the Greek states: Eχετε πίστιν θεοῦ, i.e. Echete pistin theou. Literally it states: 'Have a faith of a god', because there is no definite article, ton, associated with pistin and there is no definite article tou associated with theou.
Do you realize that you just gave evidence to support JW's belief in 3 separate god's?
While I appreciate you input, I'm going to go with what I know.
I was taught my a professor with a Phd in Greek.
"b. Possessive Genitives
To an English-speaking student, this is likely the most familiar function of a genitive, since our English "possessive" case corresponds directly to the genitive case. However, the Greek genitive case is really more about "generating" than just possessing. Only in this category is the genitive a substantive indicating who or what owns, possesses or holds decision-making authority (in the way that an owner does) over the head noun. But Wallace warns that, "A genitive should not be labeled possessive unless this is the narrowest sense it can have."
So key words like "owned by," "possessed by," or "belonging to" should be able to be inserted before the translation of the genitive, and fit in well. Of course, these key words need not be used in the actual translation. Most often one should use a possessive form with an apostrophe ("God's people") or the preposition "of" ("the people of God"). But the key words should make sense if they were to be used, and get across the main idea implied by the genitive ("the people owned by God")."
Source
Noted Greek scholar A.T. Robertson, in his book "A New Short Grammar of the Greek New Testament" says:
"But in "Ἔχετε πίστιν θεοῦ," (Mk. 11:22)...In itself, the case means only the God-kind of faith".
Its also stated that way in several version:
“And Jesus answering saith to them, ‘Have faith of God” (Young’s Literal Translation)
“And Jesus answering, saith to them: Have the faith of God.” (Douay Rheims Bible)
And Jesus, answering, saith unto them, “Have the faith of God.” (Worrell New Testament)
“And Jesus, answering, said to them, Have God’s faith.” (The Bible In Basic English)
“He responded, “Have the kind of trust that comes from God!” (The Jewish New Testament by David Stern)
In Albert Barnes’ notes about this verse we read:
Verse 22. Have faith in God. Literally, “Have the faith of God.” This may mean, Have strong faith. or have confidence in God; a strong belief that he is able to accomplish things that appear most difficult with infinite ease, as the fig-tree was made to wither away by a word. {2} “Have faith in God” or, “Have the faith of God”
As much as I don't like Adam Clarke, his comments are:
“Have faith in God – Εχετε πιϚιν θεου is a mere Hebraism: have the faith of God, i.e. have strong faith, or the strongest faith, for thus the Hebrews expressed the superlative degree; so the mountains of God mean exceeding great mountains – the hail of God, exceeding great hail, etc.”
W. B. Godbey’s comments:
“And Jesus, responding, says to him, have the faith of God.” There is a difference between faith in God and the “faith of God,” the latter being a perfect faith, admitting no admixture of doubt. In justification, we have faith in God; while entire sanctification, eliminating all doubt and every other phase of depravity, is characterized by the “faith of God.” Here, Jesus imputes wonderful efficiency to the faith of God.”
John Gill comments saying:
"have faith in God;
or "the faith of God", so the Vulgate Latin, Syriac, Persic, and Ethiopic versions; that is, exercise, and make use of that faith which has God for its author, which is the work of God, and of his operation, a free grace gift of his; and which has God for its object; and is supported by his power, and encouraged by his goodness, truth, and faithfulness: and so the Arabic version renders it, "believe in God"; not only that such things may be done, as the drying up a fig tree, but those that are much greater."
While I think we all would agree that we have "saving faith", I personally have not seen anyone exercising a "God-kind" of faith, raising the dead, healing all infirmities, commanding mountains to move, etc.
I think I'll take his word over yours.
And again, context don't mean a thing to you does it?
The disciples saw the withered tree and asked about it.
Jesus had told them He couldn't do nothing other than what He seen God do, and no other than that.
SO Jesus was instructing them that if they had the same kind of faith as God, they could command mountains to move and they would move.
Like I said, that verse was one in particular that was pint in class.
While I do appreciate your input, I'll take the Phd's word and all my Greek bibles and lexicons, and thr TDNT over your opinion.
God Bless
Till all are one.
Literally it states: 'Have a faith of a god', because there is no definite article, ton, associated with pistin and there is no definite article tou associated with theou.
No, his statement does not agree with the JWs. The JWs error is not in the presence or lack of an article. The JW's error is that they failed to understand the importance of the emphatic position of the final θεος.The JW's do not accept a "Trinitarian" view because of John 1:1.
Your statement above, agrees with JW thinking: "have a faith of a god"
My statement to you was in reference to:
The JW's do not accept a "Trinitarian" view because of John 1:1.
Your statement above, agrees with JW thinking: "have a faith of a god"
Again, I'll stay with what I know and was taught.
God Bless
Till all are one.
No, his statement does not agree with the JWs. The JWs error is not in the presence or lack of an article. The JW's error is that they failed to understand the importance of the emphatic position of the final θεος.
The verse reads, John 1:1 ᾿Εν ἀρχῇ ἦν ὁ Λόγος, καὶ ὁ Λόγος ἦν πρὸς τὸν Θεόν, καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ Λόγος.
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and God was the Word."
Notice the last clause where "God" is first in the clause which places it in the emphatic position.
A similar meaning can be found in English.
"The coffee is hot." Simple declarative statement.
"HOT coffee!" An emphatic statement.
John 1:1 says, in effect, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was most emphatically God!"
The presence or lack of the article has nothing to do with it.
One other point Ozpen,
I'm almost sure you have Kittle's Theological Dictionary of the New Testament.
Check out Vol IX, page 206.
It agrees with me.
God Bless
Till all are one.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?