Ok can the word pis'-tis which is translated faith 239/244 in the KJV be understood as "conviction of a moral or Godly truth"? I belive it can..(I seen something similar in Thayers and Strongs) but i have no greek knowledge. If it is so then I have just had more than a lightbulb, but a spotlight turned on James Chapter 2 where he talks so much about works and faith. Because if faith in that scripture can mean conviction of a truth then it makes perfect sense what he is talking about. "if you are convicted of something but not responsive to it (works) this is it nothing. and just because you are convicted of sin that doesnt mean that you are saved" I would like to hear some input. Ive just been thinking alot about the book of James and this is a conclusion I have come up with. Thanks guys!*edit* Are pure works not this: that we respond to the conviction of God? *edit*
Greek Help in James
matt13:3-9
matt13:3-9I guess I don't understand :-? How is that a response to my question?
James 4:17 to him that knows to do good and doeth it not, it is sin.
OK.. I guess I just dont understand.. I was asking if the word faith could be interpreted conviction of a moral or religious truth in that scripture. If you are trying to help then please explain..I really hope I'm not coming off rude but I have no idea what you are trying to say.. :-(
Please forgive me. I posted here what I intended to post in another forumn. Oops, sorry about that. I don't have alot of time and this week is way to busy, leaving in a few hrs for Minn., back tues. So alot of what I posted this week has been just pop in and get off and get prepared for Minn.(St. Paul). So bro. your not off base or rude, I just posted somethig here I intended to post in another place. Just pray for me. God Bless Bro. Daryl
Ok no problem.. 8-) I just thought maybe I couldnt see what you were trying to say.
The word 'believe' and 'faith' are used 19 times in James.Jam_1:3; Jam_1:6; Jam_2:1; Jam_2:5; Jam_2:14; Jam_2:17; Jam_2:18; Jam_2:19; Jam_2:20; Jam_2:22; Jam_2:23; Jam_2:24; Jam_2:26; Jam_5:15;The demons 'believe' in the unity of God, but it has no impact upon their lives. They can only 'believe' what God reveals of Himself and He has clearly revealed to them His unity. They are in awe of the Triune God but they only tremble.I'm not sure I follow what you are trying to do with 'faith' in James, but it is the same word used throughout the NT.
Well... I was just looking at what thayers and strongs said about the word faith. Strongs says this:pis'-tisFrom G3982; persuasion, that is, credence; moral conviction (of religious truth, or the truthfulness of God or a religious teacher), especially reliance upon Christ for salvation; abstractly constancy in such profession; by extension the system of religious (Gospel) truth itself: - assurance, belief, believe, faith, fidelity.Thayer says this:pistisThayer Definition:1) conviction of the truth of anything, belief; in the NT of a conviction or belief respecting man’s relationship to God and divine things, generally with the included idea of trust and holy fervour born of faith and joined with it...And the thought came to mind that conviction doesn't mean anything if you do not respond to it. And it just seemed to go together that conviction without works (a response or change of action) is dead. I wasnt trying to limit faith to just a conviction. I was just asking if that was a valid way to interpret the verse. Or in other words could the word conviction take the place of the word faith in those few verses in James and you get the same meaning out of it.
Thayer Definition:1) conviction of the truth of anything, belief; in the NT of a conviction or belief respecting man’s relationship to God and divine things, generally with the included idea of trust and holy fervour born of faith and joined with it...'Thayer's Dictionary' can be a valuable tool but remember that he was a unitarian and almost certainly had no living faith in Christ. As a consequence his definitions will tend towards rationalistic explanations rather than a genuine spiritual dynamic.We sometimes need to look carefully at words like faith which encompass whole worlds of thought. I love God, my wife, my children, ice-cream, Staffordshire Bull Terriers... I believe in God, the Atkins Diet, Port Vale Football Club, the Democratic Party, We need to know the person and the context to appreciate what that person means by 'believe' or 'love' at that time.BTW: Not all the above are true!! It was just an illustration. :-?
PORT VALE FOOTBALL CLUB AND ATKINS...? :-)
PORT VALE FOOTBALL CLUB AND ATKINS...? So what wrong with Port Vale Football Club? How long have you got...?Still, its biblical! 1 Thess 5:14 (KJV) clearly instructs us to support Port Vale! :-D
VERY GOOD I'M LAUGHING STILL :lol: Brother,have you struggled long with this affliction?pete Elks suffers in a simular way with the rare Derby countyoususmaybe NCW can help?
I think we ought to let our friends across the ocean into this little local joke. Port Vale Football Club is one of the worst football clubs in the UK, but their ground was a 10 minute walk from where I was born and raised. There is an old joke about Port Vale that runs like this.dring, dring (telephone.)"Yes, Port Vale Football Club. How can I help you?"; Club OfficialCaller: "What time is kick off tonight?"Club Official: "What time can you get here?"
Thanks Philo... this is what I was looking for..either a correction or affirmation.. but what about Strongs, it says close to the same thing? I didnt know much about Thayer.. thanks..
Does someone need to know Greek to truly understand the Bible??? If that is true, then every church in the world should begin offering Greek lessons to all. Crazy, but this is what we gather from preachers who constantly get their kick off of saying, "in the ORIGINAL Greek it REALLY says..." If you really can't understand the Bible correctly without knowing Greek, then the preacher stands in between the people and God. We have Roman Catholicism back again.The truth of the matter is that every time we "go to the Greek," we are RE-TRANSLATING the Bible. Let me ask you a question. Do you feel qualified to translate the Bible? The men who translated the KJV were eminent scholars who really knew Jesus Christ and had the fear of God that if they were to gravely err in their translation that their name would be blotted out of the book of Life.New scholars believe the Bible should be translated like any other book. Check me out. They pick and choose and guess what they think is right because they entertain a corrupt textual stream.For more info click here:http://www.bbconfire.com/articles/drdavidbrown/greatuncials.aspYou don't have to know Greek to understand the Bible, it has been accurately translated for you by a committee of many men who took the whole counsel of a whole country: England. Any man could send in suggestions to the committee. Private interpretation?? Nope. Not with the KJV.Blessings,TR
So in other words your saying its a waste of time to want to look at the greek? and the KJV is infallible? Private interpretation?? Nope.Thats why I started this thread.
Of course it is not a waste of time to look at the Greek. It is just not necessary to understand the Bible and it's message. Greek words like "diakonos" were taken right across into English as "deacon." Here a simple knowledge of the Greek could help. But the Bible has a built in dictionary. If you look at the first, second, or third mention of the word in the Bible it will define itself. Take the word "cockatrice." Do you know what a cockatrice is? Go look at the first mentions of this word. You will find it is a fiery, flying, serpent. And that is just what a cockatrice is. God defined it in the Bible. This works throughout scripture.The German Luther Bible is God's word in German, the Reina-Valera Spanish is God's word in Spanish, and so on. English is not the only pure vernacular translation. If translations can't be pure, we all need to learn Greek and Hebrew. How can you dispute this?Can you really hold up your Bible and say it is infallable? I hope you can. Can you say, "Every promise in the book is mine, every promise, every verse, every line?"
You don't have to know Greek to understand the Bible, it has been accurately translated for you by a committee of many men who took the whole counsel of a whole country: England. Any man could send in suggestions to the committee. Private interpretation?? Nope. Not with the KJV.I'm no scholar of greek or the scriptures as brethren like Philologos, Eric or Robert and some others, but would it not have been wiser to consult the Holy spirit on this? If they did and that's the answer they got then it's all good. In scripture you mentioned at the end there, doesn't the private interpretation refer more to someone reading the scripture and coming up with using his mind with an interpretation? The verse also says that the men wrote as they were moved by the spirit so the words were given to them by the Spirit and therefore require the spirit to interpret. is this a correct assessment?
Can you really hold up your Bible and say it is infallable? I hope you can. Can you say, "Every promise in the book is mine, every promise, every verse, every line?"I can, even though I have a good news and n.i.v. I simply leave the interpretation part to the Holy Spirit and let Him teach me. What of those people for example in my country of Zimbabwe that read the shona bible or ndebele one which is translated from English versions which may or may not be textus receptus(?) Some words in English simply have no equal in shona or ndebele and can't really be translated accurately, while some other words in the shona and ndebele are actually better fitting in terms of context than the english. What of those people? Does not having the textus receptus diminish how God can use them or teach them through scripture? I don't think so, I could be wrong also.
The verse also says that the men wrote as they were moved by the spirit so the words were given to them by the Spirit and therefore require the spirit to interpret. is this a correct assessment? I don't think it is quite right. But I appreciate your humility.Here's the danger: The word of God is infallable. I am not. The danger is in thinking that we can hear God INFALLABLY. While we can hear from God apart from scripture, we may miss it from time to time. (And miss it big!) This is why we need the anchor of the written Scripture. When my heart condemns me, I have only to read the precious promises of Scripture and faith comes through the Word. It sounds spiritual to say we don't need an accurate Bible, just the Holy Spirit. But if we will see how this practically plays out, we realize that it is not the Holy Spirit that fails, but our very FALLABLE senses. Think about it, how many guys are there out there who say, "I just really feel that God is telling me it is OK to live with my girlfriend as long as we keep going to church." Now that seems far fetched, but how do we know? Who are we to question whether he is hearing from God or not? By the Word? Of course. But if we take the standard of the Word out of the way, we make the gospel relative to what we think, feel, and THINK WE HEAR. This is a dangerous, precipitous slope. I would spare you.Blessings,TR
Here's the danger: The word of God is infallable. I am not. The danger is in thinking that we can hear God INFALLABLY. While we can hear from God apart from scripture, we may miss it from time to time. (And miss it big!) This is why we need the anchor of the written Scripture. When my heart condemns me, I have only to read the precious promises of Scripture and faith comes through the Word.But even in the interpretation of that scripture that you may read at a time when your heart condemns you, the Holy spirit must still minister to you in order for prefection right? It sounds spiritual to say we don't need an accurate Bible, just the Holy Spirit. But if we will see how this practically plays out, we realize that it is not the Holy Spirit that fails, but our very FALLABLE senses.Our senses do fail us even in the translation of the bible hence all the different versions right? so if we can't get over that hurdle are we not dead in the water? If even the very scholars and learned ones who translate the bible for the rest of us laymen (who have no idea what textus receptus means or what the antioch texts mean) (still don't know what those are exactly nor do I know the difference) can't agree on what the perfect translation is, then what hope is there for us if we need this perfect text and don't have it? The people to which the epistles were written were not the most learned of men, probably didn't have in their posession a copy of the holy writs of the day and yet they simply believed God would minister these things to them and He did. I'm sure as the epistles were read out to the people some strained to hear and maybe misheard some things but God filled them in as He ministered to each one in His time. The pharisees had a perfect text or understanding (using loosly here) or both but yet Christ said that they made it harder for people to enter heaven because of all that. they had the prefect text and got so wrapt up in it they didn't let God lead them and look what Christ said. There is also a danger in searching for the perfect text or interpretation because then there is a danger of then neglecting the spirit of God when it comes to interpreting it perfectly.I've learned lately not to rely on my senses because God said to me they will not always tell me if I'm on the right track but to trust in Him that HE has me on the right track for His purpose. He said to learn to trust Him in spirit. That's a rather hard thing to explain but really it's a thing that just comes with walking in the spirit. How do I know I'm in the spirit? I can no more explain that than explaining how I know I'm in love. You just know. SInce I can't be perfect, He is perfection for me. Think about it, how many guys are there out there who say, "I just really feel that God is telling me it is OK to live with my girlfriend as long as we keep going to church." Now that seems far fetched, but how do we know? Who are we to question whether he is hearing from God or not? By the Word? Of course. But if we take the standard of the Word out of the way, we make the gospel relative to what we think, feel, and THINK WE HEAR.Oh I know people can say such things but God is watching and will do what He will to those who use His name falsly for their own benefit. I must ask though, what is the definition of a marriage? Doesn't the bible say that a man should leave his father's house etc. I'm not sure there is another place which says that when a man leaves his house he must do this and that for the marriage to be valid. Help me out on that. See if we test the person's stance that God said this to me by our own interpretation of the word (our minds that is) then we have no leg to stand on, our minds are not perfect nor can they fathom or make sense of the spiritual aspect of the word of GOd. We ourselves in such a test would also need the holy spirit's ministry would we not?
The truth of the matter is that every time we "go to the Greek," we are RE-TRANSLATING the Bible. Let me ask you a question. Do you feel qualified to translate the Bible? The men who translated the KJV were eminent scholars who really knew Jesus Christ and had the fear of God that if they were to gravely err in their translation that their name would be blotted out of the book of Life.I hear this constantly. The truth is they were a mixed bunch who persecuted the outer extremes of 'Christendom' such as the Catholics or the Anabaptists. Some of them were kingdom builders who would have done well in corporate business. The secret behind the KJV is that the NT is 83% Tyndale! They KJV tranlators interfered with his translation and improved it in very few places.It, was incidentally, due to the persecutions of some of the KJV bible translators that a bunch of folk left here and landed at Plymouth Rock. They did not bring the KJV bible with them but the Geneva Bible. King James also activily persecuted the Geneva Bible and earlier version to make a clear path for his KJV.Some of them were godly men. All of them were brilliant scholars. Mostly they were a group of men that King James knew he could control to produce a version which would support his views of kingship and episcopal government.And I still use it as my preferred version! :-D