Basic facts on faith.

[Bible_Locket]

This is not a local congregation of saints, and no one here has authority over the souls of others under their care.

I go by the Bible and God's definition of church. In which case,this Christians chatting community qualifies.

the church is, ekklesia—the "called-out" assembly of people who place their faith in Jesus Christ.

1 Corinthians 12:27

Not a church.

That's your opinion. That's not how God describes it.

You have made my points for me in your response.

I've corrected your errors yet again in my response.

Grace and peace.

And to you and yours as well.

 

[Watchman22]

Maybe I'm taking to big a bite at the apple.

Here is the Vines complete definition of pisteuo. Pisteuo is the application of the word faith. Please read all of it.


"The main elements in "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, Romans 4:20-Romans 4:21. See ASSURANCE, BELIEF, FAITHFULNESS, FIDELITY."

Is this acceptable in the midst of todays called out ones?

I'd like to expand the question, does "anyone" accept the Vines definition of faith and faithing ?

Fun fact: this definition is 86 years old.

 

[Delvianna]

I'd like to expand the question, does "anyone" accept the Vines definition of faith and faithing ?

Fun fact: this definition is 86 years old.

The problem that I have with pure definitions, is that people take context that is implied in the verses/chapter and then try and apply it to the definition. I'm not saying what was said is inaccurate (I agree with the fundamental basis), all I'm saying is to list it as a "Definition" should be inaccurate.

Faith- by definition is belief + trust

Now, any context that adds to that, will be given by the verses/chapter depending. I do agree that there are instances where there is added context.

Example:
James 2:17–22 — James says faith without works is dead and that Abraham's faith was "working together with his works." If works were simply part of the lexical definition of faith, James's argument would become almost circular. Instead, genuine faith produces corresponding action.

But that shouldn't be added to a definition.

 

[Watchman22]

The problem that I have with pure definitions, is that people take context that

is implied in the verses/chapter and then try and apply it to the definition. I'm not saying what was said is inaccurate (I agree with the fundamental basis), all I'm saying is to list it as a "Definition" should be inaccurate.

Faith- by definition is belief + trust

Now, any context that adds to that, will be given by the verses/chapter depending. I do agree that there are instances where there is added context.

Example:
James 2:17–22 — James says faith without works is dead and that Abraham's faith was "working together with his works." If works were simply part of the lexical definition of faith, James's argument would become almost circular. Instead, genuine faith produces corresponding action.

But that shouldn't be added to a definition.

Would you agree with the Vines definition i posted in #83?

 

[Delvianna]

Would you agree with the Vines definition i posted in #83?

My response to you was in response to 83.

 

[Watchman22]

My response to you was in response to 83.

So you don't accept the Vines definition.?

 

[Delvianna]

So you don't accept the Vines definition.?

Again, I agree with the points of what was said, I don't agree with the added context and how its inserted as part of the "definition".

 

[Watchman22]

Again, I agree with the points of what was said, I don't agree with the added context and how its inserted as part of the "definition".

Thanks for all the support.

 

[Watchman22]

Again, I agree with the points of what was said, I don't agree with the added context and how its inserted as part of the "definition".

Delvianna, I feel bad disagreeing with you. Do you know you given me more love in the past 2 hours, than I've gotten in the last 6 months.

The reason for that is the understanding of faith the noun, and what i call faithing the verb has gotten off track. And im attempting to right the ship.

You stated that faith is belief and trust. But belief was only mentioned for what faith isn't . Trust wasn't mentioned at all. There is belief and trust, but they are supporting roles to the foundational definition of a personal surrender to Him and a life inspired by such surrender.

Belief and trust taken as the whole is error. I feel I owe you a truthful response. If your interested I can give you more info. I have a thread called rediscovering pisteuo that has alot of good information. I think it's floating around the 3rd of 4th page.

 

[Delvianna]

Delvianna, I feel bad disagreeing with you. Do you know you given me more love in the past 2 hours, than I've gotten in the last 6 months.

The reason for that is the understanding of faith the noun, and what i call faithing the verb has gotten off track. And im attempting to right the ship.

You stated that faith is belief and trust. But belief was only mentioned for what faith isn't . Trust wasn't mentioned at all. There is belief and trust, but they are supporting roles to the foundational definition of a personal surrender to Him and a life inspired by such surrender.

Belief and trust taken as the whole is error. I feel I owe you a truthful response. If your interested I can give you more info. I have a thread called rediscovering pisteuo that has alot of good information. I think it's floating around the 3rd of 4th page.

Don't feel bad, it's okay if you disagree with me, I won't be offended.

I understand where you're coming from, I truly do but I think you're going a bit overboard. Linguistics has finite definitions to words but context can temporarily add meaning to those words but that doesn't change the fundamental definition. It is my understanding that the definition of faith at it's core is belief, with a subcontext of trust applied. But any other context added to that is gained by the surrounding words rather than saying it is part of the definition itself. Again, I go back to my point of James 2:17-22 because otherwise, James would be redundant in mentioning works if works was already implied via the definition of faith. Do you at least see what I mean in my argument? I just want to make sure you're understanding my point, even if you don't agree.

 

[Watchman22]

Don't feel bad, it's okay if you disagree with me, I won't be offended.

I understand where you're coming from, I truly do but I think you're going a bit overboard. Linguistics has finite definitions to words but context can temporarily add meaning to those words but that doesn't change the fundamental definition. It is my understanding that the definition of faith at it's core is belief, with a subcontext of trust applied. But any other context added to that is gained by the surrounding words rather than saying it is part of the definition itself. Again, I go back to my point of James 2:17-22 because otherwise, James would be redundant in mentioning works if works was already implied via the definition of faith. Do you at least see what I mean in my argument? I just want to make sure you're understanding my point, even if you don't agree.

Of course context is everything.

You know im only standing on the precisely given definition of the Vines. We would have to go through some scriptures to look at that more closely.

But first would you be willing to look at some info regarding faith, pistis and pisteuo? It's called rediscovering pisteuo, I'll bump it to the first page for you. Take your time checking it out . Let me know what you think.

 

[Delvianna]

Of course context is everything.

You know im only standing on the precisely given definition of the Vines. We would have to go through some scriptures to look at that more closely.

But first would you be willing to look at some info regarding faith, pistis and pisteuo? It's called rediscovering pisteuo, I'll bump it to the first page for you. Take your time checking it out . Let me know what you think.

Sure! Just let me know, and I'll give it a look when I can.

 

[Roger316]

I simply asked if you accept the Strongs and Vines definitions of pisteuo. Post 3.

I gave you my answer.

 

[Watchman22]

I gave you my answer.

That would be a no, you don't accept the Vines definition of faith and faithing?

 

[Roger316]

That would be a no, you don't accept the Vines definition of faith and faithing?

Honestly, I didn't see them. Why is this important?

 

[Watchman22]

Honestly, I didn't see them. Why is this important?

Im attempting to find a place of agreement. Then we can use what we agree on to look at the right path.

If the place of agreement is the Vines definition of pisteuo, "a personal surrender to Him and a life inspired by such surrender,
"We can move on. If you understand the faith response is believing in what Christ said and did, we won't be able to move forward.

Gods word comes into the picture, later after He, His Spirit, and His word are ours to claim. At the start, those things are not ours yet.

 

[PennEd]

Ephesians 2
For by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast.

This is one of the “ballgame “ verses in Scripture.

Meaning, if you get this one wrong, it’s going to completely mess up your doctrine and belief system.

BOTH the grace AND the faith are gifts from God. That’s precisely what the text says.

The question has been asked umpteen different ways and times over the years, and no one has been able to adequately answer.

If faith isn’t a gift from God, where does it come from?

Yes, we know faith comes by hearing, but the verse actually solidifies that the faith comes from God.

The “comes by” means drawn out from the inside . So it in effect means, it is ACTIVATED by the hearing of the Word.

Or. As the King James says in Ephesians, we are “quickened” by Him upon the hearing of the Word.

 

[Watchman22]

This is one of the “ballgame “ verses in Scripture.

Meaning, if you get this one wrong, it’s going to completely mess up your doctrine and belief system.

BOTH the grace AND the faith are gifts from God. That’s precisely what the text says.

The question has been asked umpteen different ways and times over the years, and no one has been able to adequately answer.

If faith isn’t a gift from God, where does it come from?

Yes, we know faith comes by hearing, but the verse actually solidifies that the faith comes from God.

The “comes by” means drawn out from the inside . So it in effect means, it is ACTIVATED by the hearing of the Word.

Or. As the King James says in Ephesians, we are “quickened” by Him upon the hearing of the Word.

So your not saying God gives us the ability to faithe ( a personal surrender to Him and a life inspired by such surrender), He personally surrendering our lives for us ?

 

[Delvianna]

So your not saying God gives us the ability to faithe ( a personal surrender to Him and a life inspired by such surrender), He personally surrendering our lives for us ?

And this a perfect example of why context is so important. Because although faith is a gift, that isn't the end all, be all for the word.

Otherwise, why have verses like: Mark 1:15 — “Repent, and believe in the gospel.” If faith was a gift that didn't require our involvement?

Or: Acts 16:31 — “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved.”

Or that Faith somehow is "activated" by hearing the word because Romans argues against this:

Romans 10:16 — “But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, ‘Lord, who has believed our report?’”

The argument from @PennEd sounds like Calvinism.

 

[Watchman22]

And this a perfect example of why context is so important. Because although faith is a gift, that isn't the end all, be all for the word.

Otherwise, why have verses like: Mark 1:15 — “Repent, and believe in the gospel.” If faith was a gift that didn't require our involvement?

Or: Acts 16:31 — “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved.”

Or that Faith somehow is "activated" by hearing the word because Romans argues against this:

Romans 10:16 — “But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Isaiah says, ‘Lord, who has believed our report?’”

The argument from @PennEd sounds like Calvinism.

Devianna, an observation.

You seem to be comfortable with the word i call a mistranslation, believe. But, instead of saying any work or effort associated with believing is "works salvation " like most others standing on believing. You recognize there is more to believing than just mental assent. Hence, ,when you say faith is belief and trust, i think it may be in alignment with how I understand faith as one, a personal surrender to Him, and two a life inspired by such surrender.

Faith and faithing takes decisions, choices, work and effort. Not any kind of work that can be added to Christs finished work on Calvary, grace. Faith takes 90 % courage, 5% endurance, and 5 % everything else.

Am I reading you right?