Bye !
Rediscovering Faith , faithing , and the Salvation process .
- Thread starter Faither
- Start date
Bye !
Fact 9
The definition of pisteuo from the Strongs expanded edition . This edition cross references from the standard dictionarys such as That's , and Brown-Driver-Briggs .
Strongs :
" Pisteuo means not just to believe, but also to be persuaded of , and hence , to place confidence in , to trust , and signifies , in this sense of the word , reliance upon , not mere credence , hence it is translated , " commit unto , commit to ones trust , be committed unto ."
The definition of pisteuo from the Vines .
" A personal surrender to Him and a life inspired by such surrender "
The definition of the word " believe " .
" 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 it's proof ."
Any disagreements ?
The definition of pisteuo from the Strongs expanded edition . This edition cross references from the standard dictionarys such as That's , and Brown-Driver-Briggs .
Strongs :
" Pisteuo means not just to believe, but also to be persuaded of , and hence , to place confidence in , to trust , and signifies , in this sense of the word , reliance upon , not mere credence , hence it is translated , " commit unto , commit to ones trust , be committed unto ."
The definition of pisteuo from the Vines .
" A personal surrender to Him and a life inspired by such surrender "
The definition of the word " believe " .
" 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 it's proof ."
Any disagreements ?
glorydaz
Well-known member
I agree with Clete. This is getting nowhere.
I'm setting the stage for how true NT Faith and faithing are applied . This understanding took over 33 years to put together , I hold this information to be of more value than anything I possess .
I need to make sure I explain how NT Pisteuo is meant to be fulfilled , before I can show how it's fulfilled .
If you have a question or disagreement about one of the facts I'm presenting , speak up , but don't waste your time saying the facts don't exist, or you can't find them , because they do .
I need to make sure I explain how NT Pisteuo is meant to be fulfilled , before I can show how it's fulfilled .
If you have a question or disagreement about one of the facts I'm presenting , speak up , but don't waste your time saying the facts don't exist, or you can't find them , because they do .
Faither basically keeps posting the same things over and over again. He's a 'one-trick-pony' in my opinion. He needs to post about other things, besides, the same old: "Words in the Bible are MISTRANSLATED."
Faither, you need to get off the 'obsession' you have about words being mistranslated in the Bible. Such as, faith and believe.
Faither, Nobody is falling for your 'shtick' Most of us KNOW what faith and believe means, we don't need to be lectured by you.
Last edited:
Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
There is really nothing new under the sun (Ecc. 1:9).
As soon as someone comes along with a claim that everyone got it wrong and "I have it right", the discerning should be very suspect and think carefully before jumping on this person's bandwagon.
Yes, sometimes "counting theological noses" may lead us into the weeds. But this is actually a rarity, not the norm. In advance of a claim about "counting noses" along these lines, in hopes of dismissing my assertion above, you will only compound your error. This is why words like "orthodoxy" and "heterodoxy" exist and are proper classifications of theological views. Unfortunately not a few are overcome by the temptation of being in the minority. It tickles our "itching ears" and appeals to our human notions of being Captains of Our Own Destiny.
The plain facts are that the entire premise of your frequent assertions is that the translations have it all wrong. This, despite a few thousand years of examination, critique, and argumentation by those that have come before us, including the church militant. Apparently those saints who have preceded us were not as endued with the illumination of Holy Spirit as you are now. This is manifest chronological snobbery. Your fifteen minutes are up.
AMR
I started this thread because one person had shown a small amount of interest in the facts I talked about . That person has since lost interest , and I don't see anyone with any desire to know Christ better . So unless one person comes forward with a true desire , and position themselves to know Him better , I'll stop here .
He has actually made something of an argument that you have consistently ignored.
And what I'm not interested in is spending 6 weeks getting to the punch line.
I think you're a troll and I won't let you waste my time. If you want to present your position then do so in a single post and, if it warrants a response, I'll respond to it directly and as substantively as anyone you will ever interact with on this website. But, once again, I will not allow you to waste my time. If you want to be a troll, then continue on the course your on and I'll put you on ignore and not lose a wink of sleep over it.
Clete
Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Huh?
Implying you are misinformed and practicing chronological snobbery is not name-calling at all.
AMR
I second that. He is a Troll.
The BEST idea you've had yet. All you do is fuss around with one or two Greek words and try to MAKE posters believe that certain words in the Bible were mistranslated. Why not get a life beyond those two words?
I presented 9 facts . Facts that if you could would have replied with a valid disagreement . You couldn't , so you resort to misrepresentation and name-calling . Claim it AMR .
None of the facts I presented are my opinions , but easily verifiable words and thier correct definitions . Your only argument is the Strongs is a commentary and is not reliable ? If that's true your correct assumption should be that Strongs is misinformed , not me .
What facts did you conclude I was misinformed and a chronological snob ?
Last edited:
The facts you present, if in fact they are accurate, do not add up to what it seems like you're getting at. But then again, no one really knows what you're getting at because you won't tell anyone!
nikolai_42
Well-known member
It seems to me that you're making a distinction where one isn't necessary.
{From https://faithalone.org/magazine/y1991/91june1.html }
If the distinction is necessary, then John is missing a whole chunk of the gospel (not once do you find pisteuo in his gospel and only once in his epistles -- I John 5:4). Either faith is an important aspect (that John overlooks) or the one (our "faith") can easily and rightly imply the other ("believe") and vice versa.
Clete , my task here is to try and show , by facts not my opinion what Faith and faithing are . Then
show how faithing is applied .I have a detailed presentation to share . But it won't be done in one post , and I'm not going to share something this valuable to people who don't want it , or at least hear it out .
This is extremely easy to do , but very difficult to explain . Each fact I'm presenting is an important piece of the understanding , so it's a necessary part of where this was going .
I still haven't heard from anyone who is still interested . So are we done ?
Last edited:
Hopefully, you're done and willing to move on to something else that's just as vague.
Which one of the facts seem vague to you ? I even numbered them for you .