That's the truth, I've seen it many times, all the bickering and arguing specially in those Free Will and Elect non-Elect threads. I normally don't participate in them, but I have learned some things just by reading through them.
Resolving Problematic Interpretations of Scripture
- Thread starter GWH
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
That's the truth, I've seen it many times, all the bickering and arguing specially in those Free Will and Elect non-Elect threads. I normally don't participate in them, but I have learned some things just by reading through them.
I see you are having your second anniversary on CC. Hope you and timf will enjoy participating on the threads I sponsor,
which are too boring for those who like to play verbal ping-pong.
Got a topic? Insight? Question?
Well, as a seeker of unity I tend to find synonyms (both-and) more readily than contradictions (either-or),
and I know that incomplete understanding of a word or verse can make a person susceptible to going astray.
Maybe if you would try to help people see what you think is the true meaning of pisteuo in the words they normally use (believe/trust) you would have more success and wouldn't feel so lonely.
Another Scripture cited out of context by tulipists is 1 Corinthians 2:14, “The man without the Spirit does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.”
In order to understand Scripture correctly, one must consider both the immediate context and NT teaching. Here is relevant immediate context for that verse:
1Cor. 1:21b, “God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe.” God’s method of saving sinners or natural men is via revealing the Gospel, and we know from 1Tim. 2:3-4 that God desires all to believe it and be saved.
1Cor. 1:23-24, “We preach Christ crucified… to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.” Again, “We preach to all natural men”, and “to those natural men God has called”.
This prompts the question: Is “desire” in 1Tim. 2:3-4 synonymous with God’s “calling” in 1Cor. 1:24–and we might add with God’s “drawing” in John 12:32 and with God’s “invitation” in Matt. 22:14? The last verse and John 13:18 indicate that although God loves and wants to save every natural man, some ignore/reject/resist His desire/calling/drawing/invitation and are therefore not chosen or saved, while some do NOT resist God’s calling but rather believe the Gospel, realizing its wisdom and power to save, at which point they become chosen/elect.
1Cor. 1:26, “Brothers, think of what you were when you were called… Not many were influential.” They were natural men in the lower social class, but yet they believed or cooperated with God’s calling.
1Cor. 1:27-28, “God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise… the lowly… and the despised”. God’s saving of despised natural men was intended to humble all natural men, so that “no one may boast before him” (1Cor. 1:29).
1Cor. 2:1-2, “When I came to you, brothers… I proclaimed to you… Jesus Christ and him crucified.” Paul reiterated that God saved some natural men via them accepting Paul’s preaching of the Gospel. When they believe, they receive God's HS per Rom. 5:5.
1Cor. 2:10, “God has revealed it to us by his Spirit.” God’s HS enables natural men to seek, find (Matt. 7:7-9), believe the Gospel and receive the HS/be saved (or not).
Thus, 1 Corinthians 2:14 means, “The man without the Spirit [who resists/refuses to cooperate with God's grace/Gospel and thus does not receive the HS] does not accept the things that come from the Spirit of God [the "all truth" of John 16:13 and "everything" of Matt. 28:20], for they are foolishness to him, and he cannot understand them, because they are spiritually discerned.”
Here is John 14:1, believe is used twice in this passage.
Let not your hearts be troubled. Believe in God; believe also in me” (John 14:1).
Here is how John 14:1 should read remembering that the English language can't translate pisteuo with just a single word.
JJn14:1, "Let not your hearts be troubled. Personally surrender your lives to the Father; Personally surrender your lives to me (Jesus) also. "
Vines Greek definition of pisteuo.
faith" in its relation to the invisible God, as distinct from "faith" in man, are especially brought out in the use of this noun and the corresponding verb, pisteuo; they are (1) a firm conviction, producing a full acknowledgement of God's revelation or truth, e.g., 2 Thessalonians 2:11,12; (2) a personal surrender to Him, John 1:12; (3) a conduct inspired by such surrender, 2 Corinthians 5:7 . Prominence is given to one or other of these elements according to the context. All this stands in contrast to belief in its purely natural exercise, which consists of an opinion held in good "faith" without necessary reference to its proof. The object of Abraham's "faith" was not God's promise (that was the occasion of its exercise); his "faith" rested on God Himself, Romans 4:17,20,21 .
Notes to highlght in this Vines definition.
1) the first definition "a firm conviction" is followed up by something very important to note. It states, "a firm conviction, producing a full acknowledgement of God's revelation of truth. " that's a huge insight on the gravity of what the writers were communicating.
2) where it states prominence is given to one or the other of these "3" elements or definitions. Not believe, trust, obedience, very important to note that.
3) where it states, all this stands in contrast to belief in its purely natural exercise, which consists of an opinion held in good "faith" without necessary reference to its proof. The object of Abraham's "faith" was not God's promise (that was the occasion of its exercise); his "faith" rested on God Himself, Romans 4:17,20,21 . The Strongs also gives a disclaimer in its definition of pisteuo. It states, pisteuo means not just to BELIEVE.
Over.
Yeah, I came on CC about the same time I joined Chess.com, and I kinda alternate between here and their and other sites. Love chess.
Okay, I thought that you might have a question or comment rather than just reading this thread.
Have fun with chess!
My 1984 NIV has "trust", and John 1:12 has "...received him... believed in his name...". I also just posted in the Systematic Bible Study thread John 4:26, where Jesus said that he is Messiah. Thus, it seems safe to understand John 14:1 as meaning: "Trust/Believe in both God as Savior and me as Messiah/God's means of providing salvation" (cf. John 3:16), just as Abraham trusted/believed that God would provide the sacrifice (Gen. 22:8).
Belief/faith always refers to a subject or object/content at least implicitly, and considering other relevant verses
provides the context for reasonably discerning what content is meant.
This is how John 14:1 should be understood. IMU
The mistranslation:
"Let not your hearts be troubled. Believe in God; believe also in me” (John 14:1).
The better translation: John 14:1
"Pardon your seat of moral and spiritual life to not be agitated.: You are personally surrendering your lives to the supreme deity, personally surrender your lives to me (Jesus) also."
Your discernment GWH.
I went through each word in the passage to get the best understanding from it.
Ya were taking a step back.
Remember those 3 definitions in the Vines?
It has to be one of those 3. At least for Jn.14:1, which is what we're looking at now.
If they wanted to communicate trust, they would have used the Greek word for trust, not pisteuo.
The Greek language doesn't have a word in its language for believe, believer, or believing .
The words believe, believer, and believing are only play apart of pisteuo, because it's a verb. A verb is an act, BASED UPON A BELIEF, sustained by confidence. But that belief is not pisteuo or faithing as the whole.
So are you still good with those 3 elements given the the Vines? 1) a firm conviction. 2) a personal surrender to Him. 3) a conduct inspired by such surrender.?
Did you change your mind about Jn. 3:16?
I have no quarrel with your better translation of John 14:1, "... You are personally surrendering your lives to the supreme deity, personally surrender your lives to me (Jesus) also", although I do not understand why you switch from an imperative to a present progressive in the
first phrase.
However, you said you liked (agreed with?) my saying that we should look for synonyms that have nuances helping to complete the definition of words, using love/agape as an example of a nuance needed for a complete understanding of faith/pisteuo, so in order to get completely what is communicated, we should choose both-and=all definitions provided by Vines and those he overlooked, arriving at the following translation of John 3:16: "God so loved the world, that He gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever [personally surrenders their lives to him with firm conviction manifested by loving conduct inspired by him and trusts him for salvation] should not perish but have everlasting life."
Thus, my impression is that YOU changed your mind about liking what I shared, and I am surprised that you seem content with limiting our understanding to what is in Vines "It has to be one of those 3", so please explain why you disllke the understanding of John 14:1 that I shared which uses verbs:
"My 1984 NIV has "trust", and John 1:12 has "...received him... believed in his name...". I also just posted in the Systematic Bible Study thread John 4:26, where Jesus said that he is Messiah. Thus, it seems safe to understand John 14:1 as meaning: "Trust/Believe in both God as Savior and me as Messiah/God's means of providing salvation" (cf. John 3:16), just as Abraham trusted/believed that God would provide the sacrifice (Gen. 22:8).
Belief/faith always refers to a subject or object/content at least implicitly, and considering other relevant verses
provides the context for reasonably discerning what content is meant."
Thanks, over...
I was trying to isolate the best definition for pisteuo. I thought the best way to do that is to just take the Vines as the truth, as in those three definitions. I'm not interested in adding or subtracting based on what the English dictates.
Something seems to have changed on your end. I was willing to do the work to get you c aught up. But I'm sensing some dragging involved. So I think I'm good to stop here.
God bless GWH.
Again, I thought we were coming up with the most complete definition of pisteuo, starting from Vines and building on it
with relevant teaching from GW. Instead of dragging, you seem to think I am rushing ahead, and you surprise me by not
discussing and explaining why--stopping instead of dragging. Happy trails!
Having completed a systematic study of Scriptures related to the TULIP dogma, here it is again with Scriptures indicating the opposite in parentheses:
T – total depravity, meaning souls are unable to exercise sufficient MFW to seek salvation. (Matt. 7:7, Rom. 1:20, 2:5, 3:22-28)
U – unconditional election, meaning that souls need not satisfy a divine requirement such as faith or repentance, but God chooses to save some while damning the rest to hell. (Matt. 4:17, 7:21, John 3:16, Eph. 2:8-10, Gal. 5:6, 1John 3:23)
L – limited atonement, meaning that Christ died to pay the penalty of sin only for elect souls. (Rom. 3:22-26, 5:18, 2Cor. 5:14-19, Heb. 2:14-17, 1John 2:2)
I – irresistible grace, meaning that elect souls cannot resist or refuse God’s will for them to be saved. (Matt. 13:14-15, 23:37, 1Tim. 2:3-4, Tit. 2:11, 2Pet. 3:9)
P – perseverance of the saints, meaning that the elect cannot repudiate their salvation and commit apostasy, because God perseveres in keeping them saved. (Rom. 11:22, 1Cor. 15:2, Gal. 5:4, Col. 1:22-23, 2Thes. 1:4-5, 2Tim. 2:12, Heb. 3:6&14, 10:35-36, Jam. 1:12, 2Pet. 1:10-11, 2:20, 1John 2:24-25 and Rev. 2:10)
The viewpoint opposed to TULIP may be termed Moral Free Will (MFW) and described as follows:
M – God’s requirement for salvation (GRFS) is a Moral condition called faith, which is manifested as seeking God’s righteousness or salvation, which in turn presumes sufficient human volition even for sinners to make them morally accountable.
F – God enables all morally accountable souls sufficient Freedom to satisfy GRFS—or not, because His grace is not irresistible, which means sinners are accountable and justly condemned when they do not repent and accept Christ’s atonement for their sins
W – Faith is almost synonymous with Will, but volition focuses on faith as cooperation with God (or not), and cooperating with God by accepting His grace is NOT meritorious or working to earn heaven or salvation by obeying moral laws.
The T in TULIP is Totally wrong,
the U in TULIP is Unscriptural,
the L in TULIP is a Lie,
the I in TULIP Ignores much Scripture,
and the P in TULIP denies the Permissive will of God
that allows MFW and thus the Possibility of apostasy
and makes humans accountable for all sins.
This study ends by quoting two Scripture pearls that disprove TULIP without reading Romans 1-11:
“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” (John 3:16)
“God our Savior wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth.” (1Tim. 2:3b-4)
“For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.” (John 3:16)
“God our Savior wants all people to be saved and to come to a knowledge of the truth.” (1Tim. 2:3b-4)
If this is about how to interpret the Scripture, there're primarily three ways - legalistic, reading the bible as a law book or at least an instruction manual; historic, reading the bible as a history book, everything written in it is real historical events, including the supernatural miracles and the prophecies, which are future events; inspirational, reading the bible as a self help book for inspiration and encouragement.
For the bible to be authoritative, you need the first view; to be trustworthy, you need the second view; to be effective, you need the third view. The third one is the hardest, 'cause this is where the word of God becomes personal to you.
Welcome to CC. I like the three ways of reading the Bible, although I would state them this way:
Some parts of the Bible mainly relate historical events (e.g. Genesis 1-2, Exodus 1-19, Numbers, 1Chronicles, Ezra),
and some parts reveal God's moral and Levitical will (e.g. Genesis 3-9, Exodus 20-23, Leviticus, Deuteronomy, the NT),
but all Scripture is inspired by God and therefore authoritative regarding spiritual and ultimate reality (2Tim. 3:15-17).
U
Undergrace1
Guest
I would say spiritual unity can only come through the Holy Spirit, he is the common link in John17:20-23