pnattmbtc Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 So far you have suggested two different definitions of faith. One is a heart-response, the other is the ability to respond to a stimulus. Now, Scriptures say that God gave faith to every man (Rom 12:3). Using your definitions, we can substitute into Rom 12:3 either "heart-response" or "ability to respond" for the word "faith". Hence, God gave faith to every man = God gave heart-response to everyman = God gave the ability to respond to every man. And if one has no heart-response nor the ability to respond, it is because God has not yet given him any. So how can he be held accountable for not responding to the stimulus when God has not given him the heart-response nor the ability to respond? You're trying to make an assertion which is based on taking a verse out of context. You are misquoting the text. It does not say what you are claiming it says. It does not say, "God gave faith to every man" I have been quoting what Paul actually wrote. Why don't you do the same, instead of making an assertion based on a verse you are misquoting and taking out of context? Also, I quoted from Clarke's commentary which discusses the meaning of the word "pistis" taken in context. You could respond to that too. In this case "faith" would have a different meaning (words are like that; they can have different meanings, depending on the context). 8thdaypriest 1 Quote Christ exalted the character of God, attributing to him the praise, and giving to him the credit, of the whole purpose of his own mission on earth,--to set men right through the revelation of God.
pnattmbtc Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 (edited) A couple of more points. One is, assuming that faith is an action of the mind, like hope or love, then if we say something like "God gives faith to everyone" or "God gives hope to everyone" or "God gives love to everyone", what this means is that anyone has the ability to love, or hope, or "faith" (pretending that "faith" can be used as a very, like the other words hope and love, and like the Greek). So our disagreement here is more semantics than anything else. Where the real disagreement lies is with the idea that a person can be reconciled, or justified by faith, apart from his will. This is something Calvinists assert (although the framework is quite different than yours). Armenians have always, in contrast to Calvinists, asserted the importance of the will in being reconciled or justified by faith. Edited October 14, 2015 by pnattmbtc 8thdaypriest 1 Quote Christ exalted the character of God, attributing to him the praise, and giving to him the credit, of the whole purpose of his own mission on earth,--to set men right through the revelation of God.
JoeMo Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 A. The giving of faith to man by God or B. Man's exercising that faith given him? God can only offer faith to people. He can't really give it unless it is accepted by the recipient. Gifts don't have to be accepted. When faced with a choice of believing or not be lieving, the recipient is faced with either accepting or rejecting the gift. 8thdaypriest 1 Quote
Samie Posted October 14, 2015 Author Posted October 14, 2015 You're trying to make an assertion which is based on taking a verse out of context. You are misquoting the text. It does not say what you are claiming it says. It does not say, "God gave faith to every man" I have been quoting what Paul actually wrote. Why don't you do the same, instead of making an assertion based on a verse you are misquoting and taking out of context? Also, I quoted from Clarke's commentary which discusses the meaning of the word "pistis" taken in context. You could respond to that too. In this case "faith" would have a different meaning (words are like that; they can have different meanings, depending on the context). Misquoting? You know I didn't. The Greek meri,zw which is translated into "dealt" in Rom 12:3 is the same word translated into "gave" in Heb 7:2. KJV Romans 12:3 For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith. KJV Hebrews 7:2 To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace; Again, Using your definitions, we can substitute into Rom 12:3 either "heart-response" or "ability to respond" for the word "faith". Hence, God gave faith to every man = God gave heart-response to everyman = God gave the ability to respond to every man. And if one has no heart-response nor the ability to respond, it is because God has not yet given him any. So how can he be held accountable for not responding to the stimulus when God has not given him the heart-response nor the ability to respond? Quote
pnattmbtc Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 Misquoting? You know I didn't. The Greek meri,zw which is translated into "dealt" in Rom 12:3 is the same word translated into "gave" in Heb 7:2. KJV Romans 12:3 For I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith. KJV Hebrews 7:2 To whom also Abraham gave a tenth part of all; first being by interpretation King of righteousness, and after that also King of Salem, which is, King of peace; Again, Using your definitions, we can substitute into Rom 12:3 either "heart-response" or "ability to respond" for the word "faith". Hence, God gave faith to every man = God gave heart-response to everyman = God gave the ability to respond to every man. And if one has no heart-response nor the ability to respond, it is because God has not yet given him any. So how can he be held accountable for not responding to the stimulus when God has not given him the heart-response nor the ability to respond? I'll repost a previous post, as it answers your question: Faith is the response to a stimulus, the stimulus being the love of God revealed at the cross. The goodness of God leads us to repentance. A person can choose to resist (which is the evil of unbelief), or to respond, which is the blessing of faith. God has given each one (with reasoning powers) the ability to respond. Thank you for quoting the verse. You did misquote the verse, because you wrote that God gave faith to every man, when it actually says that God gave a measure of faith to the believers that Paul was addressing. That's one point. Another point is that the word "faith" means different things, and, as Clarke's Commentary points out, it may mean "faith" as in "religion", for example: a system of religious belief: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/faith Finally, another point I made is that if faith is an act of the mind, such as hope or love, then to say that God has given each one faith, or hope, or love, means God has given each one the ability to do these things. And, even more finally, this is semantics. The real heart of our difference involves the use of the will in being justified by faith or reconciled. Quote Christ exalted the character of God, attributing to him the praise, and giving to him the credit, of the whole purpose of his own mission on earth,--to set men right through the revelation of God.
Samie Posted October 14, 2015 Author Posted October 14, 2015 I'm just watching. I do think one thing is left out of the discussion. All humans have the God-given ability to respond to the love of God, with belief. OK. But they must HEAR about God and His love, BEFORE they can exercise their God-given ability to respond. If they never HEAR about Him, then they cannot KNOW that HE loves them. There's an element of necessary information. I agree. As you said the "ability to respond" is God-given. God gave all humans the "ability to respond". "ability" is the capability or the power to do things. And Scriptures tell us that we can do all things through Christ (Phil 4:13) Who is the power of God (1 Cor 1:24). The fact that one has the "ability to respond" means he is NOT separate from Christ because Christ said apart from Him man is powerless; he can do NOTHING (John15:4, 5). The fact that one has the ability to respond is proof enough he is not separate from Christ. Quote
Samie Posted October 14, 2015 Author Posted October 14, 2015 . . . You did misquote the verse, because you wrote that God gave faith to every man, when it actually says that God gave a measure of faith to the believers that Paul was addressing. . . . Are you saying "God gave faith" does not mean the same as "God gave a measure of faith"? Now, if they simply mean the same, why make an issue out of it? Quote
Samie Posted October 14, 2015 Author Posted October 14, 2015 I'll repost a previous post, as it answers your question: Thank you for quoting the verse. You did misquote the verse, because you wrote that God gave faith to every man, when it actually says that God gave a measure of faith to the believers that Paul was addressing. That's one point. Another point is that the word "faith" means different things, and, as Clarke's Commentary points out, it may mean "faith" as in "religion", for example: Finally, another point I made is that if faith is an act of the mind, such as hope or love, then to say that God has given each one faith, or hope, or love, means God has given each one the ability to do these things. And, even more finally, this is semantics. The real heart of our difference involves the use of the will in being justified by faith or reconciled. That still does not address my question. Again, and for the 3rd time, Using your definitions, we can substitute into Rom 12:3 either "heart-response" or "ability to respond" for the word "faith". Hence, God gave faith to every man = God gave heart-response to everyman = God gave the ability to respond to every man. And if one has no heart-response nor the ability to respond, it is because God has not yet given him any. So how can he be held accountable for not responding to the stimulus when God has not given him the heart-response nor the ability to respond? Quote
pnattmbtc Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 I agree. As you said the "ability to respond" is God-given. God gave all humans the "ability to respond". "ability" is the capability or the power to do things. And Scriptures tell us that we can do all things through Christ (Phil 4:13) Who is the power of God (1 Cor 1:24). The fact that one has the "ability to respond" means he is NOT separate from Christ because Christ said apart from Him man is powerless; he can do NOTHING (John15:4, 5). The fact that one has the ability to respond is proof enough he is not separate from Christ. I know this was written for 8thday, but I'll respond anyway. From my perspective, this is close to the right idea. The right idea is that without the grace of God, it would not be possible to believe, and this grace is available at infinite cost, being the purchase of Christ's blood. However, what you're talking about, being attached to Christ, is a different thing, as it implies things which involve the participation of the person involved. The believer has to repent and confess his sins to be forgiven (1 John 1:9), believe in the name of Christ, and receive him to become a child of God (John 1:12), etc. And John 15, which is the only place I'm aware of which speaks of being "attached" to Christ, is addressed to believers, which is clear simply by looking at the context: 15 I am the true vine, and my Father is the husbandman. 2 Every branch in me that beareth not fruit he taketh away: and every branch that beareth fruit, he purgeth it, that it may bring forth more fruit. 3 Now ye are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you. 4 Abide in me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine; no more can ye, except ye abide in me. 5 I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without me ye can do nothing. 6 If a man abide not in me, he is cast forth as a branch, and is withered; and men gather them, and cast them into the fire, and they are burned. 7 If ye abide in me, and my words abide in you, ye shall ask what ye will, and it shall be done unto you. 8 Herein is my Father glorified, that ye bear much fruit; so shall ye be my disciples. 9 As the Father hath loved me, so have I loved you: continue ye in my love. 10 If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my love; even as I have kept my Father's commandments, and abide in his love. 11 These things have I spoken unto you, that my joy might remain in you, and that your joy might be full. 12 This is my commandment, That ye love one another, as I have loved you. 13 Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. 14 Ye are my friends, if ye do whatsoever I command you. 15 Henceforth I call you not servants; for the servant knoweth not what his lord doeth: but I have called you friends; for all things that I have heard of my Father I have made known unto you. 16 Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the Father in my name, he may give it you. So, to conclude, you can have your faith and eat it to by emphasizing that it is by the grace of God that we can believe, and this grace is of infinite cost (so all the credit and glory belongs to God), but without having to "correct" inspired writers. Quote Christ exalted the character of God, attributing to him the praise, and giving to him the credit, of the whole purpose of his own mission on earth,--to set men right through the revelation of God.
pnattmbtc Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 (edited) . . . You did misquote the verse, because you wrote that God gave faith to every man, when it actually says that God gave a measure of faithto the believers that Paul was addressing. . . . Samie: Are you saying "God gave faith" does not mean the same as "God gave a measure of faith"? Now, if they simply mean the same, why make an issue out of it? Assuming that Clarke is correct, and "faith" means "a system of religious belief," then it seems like a moot point. Edited October 14, 2015 by pnattmbtc Quote Christ exalted the character of God, attributing to him the praise, and giving to him the credit, of the whole purpose of his own mission on earth,--to set men right through the revelation of God.
pnattmbtc Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 I'll repost a previous post, as it answers your question: Thank you for quoting the verse. You did misquote the verse, because you wrote that God gave faith to every man, when it actually says that God gave a measure of faith to the believers that Paul was addressing. That's one point. Another point is that the word "faith" means different things, and, as Clarke's Commentary points out, it may mean "faith" as in "religion", for example: Finally, another point I made is that if faith is an act of the mind, such as hope or love, then to say that God has given each one faith, or hope, or love, means God has given each one the ability to do these things. And, even more finally, this is semantics. The real heart of our difference involves the use of the will in being justified by faith or reconciled. That still does not address my question. I have been addressing your question. I quoted from Clarke. This is addressing it. What does "faith" mean in context must be considered. You're not addressing what I have written, however. Again, and for the 3rd time, Using your definitions, we can substitute into Rom 12:3 either "heart-response" or "ability to respond" for the word "faith". Hence, God gave faith to every man = God gave heart-response to everyman = God gave the ability to respond to every man. Please respond to my post, paying attention to the definition of "faith" as "a system of religious belief". And if one has no heart-response nor the ability to respond, it is because God has not yet given him any. So how can he be held accountable for not responding to the stimulus when God has not given him the heart-response nor the ability to respond? Why are you asking this? I just reposted the following: Faith is the response to a stimulus, the stimulus being the love of God revealed at the cross. The goodness of God leads us to repentance. A person can choose to resist (which is the evil of unbelief), or to respond, which is the blessing of faith. God has given each one (with reasoning powers) the ability to respond. Why do you keep asking me something I've answered? I put the key part in bold, to make it easier to see. Quote Christ exalted the character of God, attributing to him the praise, and giving to him the credit, of the whole purpose of his own mission on earth,--to set men right through the revelation of God.
Samie Posted October 14, 2015 Author Posted October 14, 2015 I have been addressing your question. I quoted from Clarke. This is addressing it. What does "faith" mean in context must be considered. You're not addressing what I have written, however. Please respond to my post, paying attention to the definition of "faith" as "a system of religious belief". Why are you asking this? I just reposted the following: Why do you keep asking me something I've answered? I put the key part in bold, to make it easier to see. The bolded part is: God has given each one (with reasoning powers) the ability to respond. By "each one" or "every man"as used in Rom 12:3, do you agree with me that it refers to not just the believers? If you don't, then you still have not addressed my question. Again, and for the 4th time, Using your definitions, we can substitute into Rom 12:3 either "heart-response" or "ability to respond" for the word "faith". Hence, God gave faith to every man = God gave heart-response to everyman = God gave the ability to respond to every man. And if one has no heart-response nor the ability to respond, it is because God has not yet given him any. So how can he be held accountable for not responding to the stimulus when God has not given him the heart-response nor the ability to respond? Quote
pnattmbtc Posted October 14, 2015 Posted October 14, 2015 (edited) The bolded part is: God has given each one (with reasoning powers) the ability to respond. By "each one" or "every man" as used in Rom 12:3, do you agree with me that it refers to not just the believers? The context is believers. Paul says for each one (i.e. each believer that he is addressing) to not think of himself more highly than he ought. If you don't, then you still have not addressed my question. Again, and for the 4th time, Using your definitions, we can substitute into Rom 12:3 either "heart-response" or "ability to respond" for the word "faith". Hence, God gave faith to every man = God gave heart-response to everyman = God gave the ability to respond to every man. And if one has no heart-response nor the ability to respond, it is because God has not yet given him any. So how can he be held accountable for not responding to the stimulus when God has not given him the heart-response nor the ability to respond? Please read my response which addressed your question and respond to that. I spoke about the definition of Clarke's commentary, the definition of faith, etc. Please respond to my other posts too. Any post where I'm asking you to respond, please respond to that. Edited October 14, 2015 by pnattmbtc Quote Christ exalted the character of God, attributing to him the praise, and giving to him the credit, of the whole purpose of his own mission on earth,--to set men right through the revelation of God.
Samie Posted October 14, 2015 Author Posted October 14, 2015 The context is believers. Paul says for each one (i.e. each believer that he is addressing) to not think of himself more highly than he ought. Please read my response which addressed your question and respond to that. I spoke about the definition of Clarke's commentary, the definition of faith, etc. Please respond to my other posts too. Any post where I'm asking you to respond, please respond to that. Again, do you agree with me that "each one" or "every man" as used in Rom 12:3 refers to not just the believers? Please answer this directly so I will exactly know where you're coming from. If you don't agree, then you still have not addressed my question: Again, and for the 5th time, Using your definitions, we can substitute into Rom 12:3 either "heart-response" or "ability to respond" for the word "faith". Hence, God gave faith to every man = God gave heart-response to everyman = God gave the ability to respond to every man. And if one has no heart-response nor the ability to respond, it is because God has not yet given him any. So how can he be held accountable for not responding to the stimulus when God has not given him the heart-response nor the ability to respond? Quote
pnattmbtc Posted October 15, 2015 Posted October 15, 2015 (edited) Again, do you agree with me that "each one" or "every man" as used in Rom 12:3 refers to not just the believers? Please answer this directly so I will exactly know where you're coming from. The context is believers. Paul is addressing believers. This is a direct response. If you don't agree, then you still have not addressed my question: Again, and for the 5th time, Using your definitions, we can substitute into Rom 12:3 either "heart-response" or "ability to respond" for the word "faith". Hence, God gave faith to every man = God gave heart-response to everyman = God gave the ability to respond to every man. And if one has no heart-response nor the ability to respond, it is because God has not yet given him any. So how can he be held accountable for not responding to the stimulus when God has not given him the heart-response nor the ability to respond? I responded to this in my post, the one dealing with Clarke's Commentary, and the definition of faith. Please respond to that post. Please respond to my other posts too. Note that a "heart response" as a definition of faith is *one* definition for faith, not the only one to be used everywhere. Again, please respond to the post I referred to. Edited October 15, 2015 by pnattmbtc Quote Christ exalted the character of God, attributing to him the praise, and giving to him the credit, of the whole purpose of his own mission on earth,--to set men right through the revelation of God.
Samie Posted October 15, 2015 Author Posted October 15, 2015 Again, do you agree with me that "each one" or "every man" as used in Rom 12:3 refers to not just the believers? Please answer this directly so I will exactly know where you're coming from. If you don't agree, then you still have not addressed my question: The context is believers. Paul is addressing believers. This is a direct response. I am not asking about the context. I am asking whether you agree or not. And you don't answer directly. Is there anything you are afraid of, brother? Again, and for the 5th time, Using your definitions, we can substitute into Rom 12:3 either "heart-response" or "ability to respond" for the word "faith". Hence, God gave faith to every man = God gave heart-response to everyman = God gave the ability to respond to every man. And if one has no heart-response nor the ability to respond, it is because God has not yet given him any. So how can he be held accountable for not responding to the stimulus when God has not given him the heart-response nor the ability to respond? I responded to this in my post, the one dealing with Clarke's Commentary, and the definition of faith. Please respond to that post. Please respond to my other posts too. Note that a "heart response" as a definition of faith is *one* definition for faith, not the only one to be used everywhere. Again, please respond to the post I referred to. There's nothing in that post that answered my question (bolded below for you to clearly see): Again, and for the 6th time, Using your definitions, we can substitute into Rom 12:3 either "heart-response" or "ability to respond" for the word "faith". Hence, God gave faith to every man = God gave heart-response to everyman = God gave the ability to respond to every man. And if one has no heart-response nor the ability to respond, it is because God has not yet given him any. So how can he be held accountable for not responding to the stimulus when God has not given him the heart-response nor the ability to respond? I'm giving you one more chance to answer, brother. Quote
Samie Posted October 15, 2015 Author Posted October 15, 2015 Will get back to the forum after my appointment today. See you . . . Quote
pnattmbtc Posted October 15, 2015 Posted October 15, 2015 I am not asking about the context. I am asking whether you agree or not. And you don't answer directly. Is there anything you are afraid of, brother? Samie, from my perspective, I am answering your question. As a suggestion, and not just for me, but for others you are dealing with too, if you're not getting a response you like, try asking a different question. There's obviously some communication problem happening here. For this to be cleared up, something has to be done differently. I don't know what it is about my response you are not understanding. Paul, in Romans 12, is addressing believers. He's not making a general statement which applies to everyone, he's not talking about how one is justified by faith. The passage does not appear to have anything whatsoever to do with what you are talking about. Hopefully this is clear There's nothing in that post that answered my question (bolded below for you to clearly see): Again, and for the 6th time, Using your definitions, we can substitute into Rom 12:3 either "heart-response" or "ability to respond" for the word "faith". Hence, God gave faith to every man = God gave heart-response to everyman = God gave the ability to respond to every man. And if one has no heart-response nor the ability to respond, it is because God has not yet given him any. So how can he be held accountable for not responding to the stimulus when God has not given him the heart-response nor the ability to respond? I'm giving you one more chance to answer, brother. I'm not agreeing with your assumptions. The post I'm referring to is explaining why. It should be obvious to you that there's a communication difficulty here. Try asking a different question. Also, at least as often as you've been repeating this question, I've been asking you to respond to my posts. I wrote posts that I'd like you to respond to. Please respond to those posts, which is only fair. Maybe this will help. I don't believe that Romans 12:3 has anything whatsoever to do with your OP. I don't think it's legitimate for you to try to make any argument regarding your OP using Romans 12:3. It's not talking about the same subject, and it's not addressing everyone. Quote Christ exalted the character of God, attributing to him the praise, and giving to him the credit, of the whole purpose of his own mission on earth,--to set men right through the revelation of God.
pnattmbtc Posted October 15, 2015 Posted October 15, 2015 Something else I don't get is you are asking this: So how can he be held accountable for not responding to the stimulus when God has not given him the heart-response nor the ability to respond? and I posted at least three times that God has given the ability to everyone (with reasoning powers) to respond, I don't see how you can possibly not understand that this answers this question. Rather than just repeating yourself, please explain what you aren't understanding, or ask some clarifying question, because until you do, I have no idea what you're not getting. Quote Christ exalted the character of God, attributing to him the praise, and giving to him the credit, of the whole purpose of his own mission on earth,--to set men right through the revelation of God.
Samie Posted October 15, 2015 Author Posted October 15, 2015 Something else I don't get is you are asking this: and I posted at least three times that God has given the ability to everyone (with reasoning powers) to respond, I don't see how you can possibly not understand that this answers this question. Rather than just repeating yourself, please explain what you aren't understanding, or ask some clarifying question, because until you do, I have no idea what you're not getting. Thanks, brother. According to you: 1. Faith = the ability to respond. 2. God has given the ability to respond to everyone. That leads to the inevitable conclusion that God has given faith to everyone. Therefore, as per Rom 12:3, despite your persistent denial, God gave faith to everyone, which obviously includes believers and non-believers alike. As you said the "ability to respond" is God-given. God gave all humans the "ability to respond". "ability" is the capability or the power to do things. And Scriptures tell us that we can do all things through Christ (Phil 4:13) Who is the power of God (1 Cor 1:24). The fact that one has the "ability to respond" means he is NOT separate from Christ because Christ said apart from Him man is powerless; he can do NOTHING (John15:4, 5). The fact that one has the ability to respond is proof enough he is not separate from Christ. Quote
pnattmbtc Posted October 15, 2015 Posted October 15, 2015 Something else I don't get is you are asking this: and I posted at least three times that God has given the ability to everyone (with reasoning powers) to respond, I don't see how you can possibly not understand that this answers this question. Rather than just repeating yourself, please explain what you aren't understanding, or ask some clarifying question, because until you do, I have no idea what you're not getting. Thanks, brother. According to you: 1. Faith = the ability to respond. As I wrote, this is *a* definition for "faith", or "pistis", but not the only one. For example, in Galatians 5:22, it's translated "faithfulness". Here, in Romans 12:3 a suggested meaning is "a system of religious belief". 2. God has given the ability to respond to everyone. Yes. That leads to the inevitable conclusion that God has given faith to everyone. As I wrote above, faith, hope, and love are examples of mental activities that people have the possibility of exercising. Therefore, as per Rom 12:3, No! NOT Romans 12:3. As I've explained, you're taking this out of context; it has nothing to do with what you're talking about. despite your persistent denial, God gave faith to everyone, which obviously includes believers and non-believers alike. There's no "therefore" here. 1.You are using the wrong definition of faith. 2.The subject isn't salvific faith. 3.Only believers are addressed. 4.Paul is saying that each one shouldn't think too highly of himself. 5.Even if the definition of faith as "heart-response" is used, for God to give such for every person would mean that each has the ability to respond, which I've been asserting. The love of Christ draws us, leads us to repentance, and we may respond with appreciation/gratitude/thankfulness, giving ourselves to Christ; this is faith (but not the "faith" that Romans 12:3 is talking about). You made the analogy of "faith" as being like "feet" in an earlier post, but this is an altogether wrong way to be thinking about faith. Consider the story of Luke 7, of the woman who sold all she had for a bottle of perfume to anoint Christ, and washed His feet with her tears. Jesus said to her, "Go in peace, your faith has saved you." This is an example of what faith is. Faith is what this woman had, and it is not something which can be unilaterally conferred upon someone, like feet, but is a response of a melted heart to the love of God. Quote Christ exalted the character of God, attributing to him the praise, and giving to him the credit, of the whole purpose of his own mission on earth,--to set men right through the revelation of God.
Samie Posted October 15, 2015 Author Posted October 15, 2015 Hi Pnatt; I understand your persistence, but by your own words, you have been proven wrong. You gave two definitions of faith and I simply used them. Even a first grader will see that you have been proven wrong, my brother. You said: 1. Faith = the ability to respond. 2. God has given the ability to respond to everyone. That leads to the inevitable conclusion that God has given faith to everyone. Even if we don't use Rom 12:3. "Everyone" obviously includes believers and non-believers alike. And again: 22 hours ago, Samie said: As you said the "ability to respond" is God-given. God gave all humans the "ability to respond". "ability" is the capability or the power to do things. And Scriptures tell us that we can do all things through Christ (Phil 4:13) Who is the power of God (1 Cor 1:24). The fact that one has the "ability to respond" means he is NOT separate from Christ because Christ said apart from Him man is powerless; he can do NOTHING (John15:4, 5). The fact that one has the ability to respond is proof enough he is not separate from Christ. And in all of the earlier 4 other threads, I had been pointing this out. This is what God has done for all of us - Adam & Eve and all their descendants, in what I call the First Dimension of the Gospel or the Past Tense of Salvation. Quote
pnattmbtc Posted October 15, 2015 Posted October 15, 2015 Hi Pnatt; I understand your persistence, but by your own words, you have been proven wrong. You gave two definitions of faith and I simply used them. Even a first grader will see that you have been proven wrong, my brother. You said: 1. Faith = the ability to respond. 2. God has given the ability to respond to everyone. That leads to the inevitable conclusion that God has given faith to everyone. Even if we don't use Rom 12:3. "Everyone" obviously includes believers and non-believers alike. And again: And in all of the earlier 4 other threads, I had been pointing this out. This is what God has done for all of us - Adam & Eve and all their descendants, in what I call the First Dimension of the Gospel or the Past Tense of Salvation. There are many definitions of faith. For example: 1.confidence or trust in a person or thing:faith in another's ability.2.belief that is not based on proof:He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact.3.belief in God or in the doctrines or teachings of religion:the firm faith of the Pilgrims.4.belief in anything, as a code of ethics, standards of merit, etc.:to be of the same faith with someone concerning honesty.5.a system of religious belief:the Christian faith; the Jewish faith.6.the obligation of loyalty or fidelity to a person, promise, engagement, etc.:Failure to appear would be breaking faith.7.the observance of this obligation; fidelity to one's promise, oath, allegiance, etc.:He was the only one who proved his faith during our recent troubles. This is from an on-line dictionary. If you look at a more robust dictionary, there would be more. And if you consider the original was "pistis" from the Greek, it's even worse, as now there are words like "faithfulness" and "fidelity" to consider as possibilities. When we consider the definition of words, we need to consider the context. There is not a one to one correspondence of words and ideas.so we always need to consider what the idea that a given author is trying to convey. You can't just look at a word without regards to context, and especially not in regards to the intent of the author. If you take Romans 12:3 out of the context, and you want to assert that God has given faith to everyone before they believe, that seems OK to me, although we have to consider what this means, since "faith" is an act of the mind. A person doesn't really "have" faith in a Biblical sense until he uses it, right? To "have" faith is to receive Christ as one's personal Savior, at which point one receives the Holy Spirit, who would then testify that the believer is a child of God (e.g. Galatians 3:2, Romans 8). I'm not sure what it is you are disagreeing with here, as this particular thread seems more about semantics than anything else. Where I see a substantive different in your point of view and Seventh-day Adventism is in the role of the will. Adventists, unlike Calvinists for example, have always taught that the role of the will is crucial in salvation. For example: What you need to understand is the true force of the will. This is the governing power in the nature of man, the power of decision, or of choice. Everything depends on the right action of the will. The power of choice God has given to men; it is theirs to exercise. You cannot change your heart, you cannot of yourself give to God its affections; but you can choose to serve Him. You can give Him your will; He will then work in you to will and to do according to His good pleasure. Thus your whole nature will be brought under the control of the Spirit of Christ; your affections will be centered upon Him, your thoughts will be in harmony with Him. Steps to Christ 47 Quote Christ exalted the character of God, attributing to him the praise, and giving to him the credit, of the whole purpose of his own mission on earth,--to set men right through the revelation of God.
Samie Posted October 15, 2015 Author Posted October 15, 2015 There are many definitions of faith. For example: This is from an on-line dictionary. If you look at a more robust dictionary, there would be more. And if you consider the original was "pistis" from the Greek, it's even worse, as now there are words like "faithfulness" and "fidelity" to consider as possibilities. When we consider the definition of words, we need to consider the context. There is not a one to one correspondence of words and ideas.so we always need to consider what the idea that a given author is trying to convey. You can't just look at a word without regards to context, and especially not in regards to the intent of the author. If you take Romans 12:3 out of the context, and you want to assert that God has given faith to everyone before they believe, that seems OK to me, although we have to consider what this means, since "faith" is an act of the mind. A person doesn't really "have" faith in a Biblical sense until he uses it, right? To "have" faith is to receive Christ as one's personal Savior, at which point one receives the Holy Spirit, who would then testify that the believer is a child of God (e.g. Galatians 3:2, Romans 8). I'm not sure what it is you are disagreeing with here, as this particular thread seems more about semantics than anything else. Where I see a substantive different in your point of view and Seventh-day Adventism is in the role of the will. Adventists, unlike Calvinists for example, have always taught that the role of the will is crucial in salvation. For example: I never disagreed with the use of the will. It is applied in what I call the 2nd Dimension of the Gospel or the Present Tense of Salvation where we are to overcome evil with good. But in the 1st Dimension of the Gospel or the Past Tense of Salvation, all is God's work FOR man. In the 2nd Dimension, God works IN man, and man responds. In the 1st Dimension, he was given the ability to respond (you defined faith as the ability to respond); in the 2nd Dimension, he uses this ability to respond. He either responds positively or negatively, depending on how he uses his will. Quote
pnattmbtc Posted October 15, 2015 Posted October 15, 2015 I never disagreed with the use of the will. It is applied in what I call the 2nd Dimension of the Gospel or the Present Tense of Salvation where we are to overcome evil with good. But in the 1st Dimension of the Gospel or the Past Tense of Salvation, all is God's work FOR man. In the 2nd Dimension, God works IN man, and man responds. In the 1st Dimension, he was given the ability to respond (you defined faith as the ability to respond); in the 2nd Dimension, he uses this ability to respond. He either responds positively or negatively, depending on how he uses his will. I agree with the concept of what you are calling the 1st Dimension, and the 2nd Dimension but where I see an issue is where to put what. That is, what does in the 1st Dimension? I think we can agree that the work of Christ goes there, so what Christ accomplished in His life, death and resurrection goes there. In the 2nd Dimension goes our participation. The Bible teaches the following: 1.If we believe in Christ with our heart, we will be justified (this is Romans 10:10) 2.If we believe on the name of Christ, which is to receive Him (this is using the language of John), we will become sons of God (John 1:12). 3.If we confess our sins, God is faithful and just to forgive us our sins (1 John 1:9). 4.The Holy Spirit is received by faith when we believe in Christ. The Holy Spirit, when we receive Christ, testifies that we are children of God. From what I've read of what you've written in the past, you seem to be putting only overcoming evil with good in what you call the 2nd Dimension, but these items 1 through 4 also belong there. When I spoke of the importance of the will, I spoke of in terms of being justified by faith. Adventists have always taught, in contrast with Calvinists for example, that to be justified by faith involves an act of the will. This is an area where you are disagreeing with Adventism, because you say, as I understand you, that everyone has been justified by faith by what Christ did. Quote Christ exalted the character of God, attributing to him the praise, and giving to him the credit, of the whole purpose of his own mission on earth,--to set men right through the revelation of God.
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.