The Value of Evangelism in Reformed Theology

[OzSpen]

Oz, is your point that if a person cannot parse Greek verbs, they have a lesser understanding of scripture? Or that the degree of one's ability to read Greek or Hebrew makes their understanding of the scripture more reliable? My own experience is that the level of education a person has attained has very little correlation to their ability to reason well. Also, I have known and read too many highly educated sophisticates to automatically give them credibility. (When I was young and naive, I used to be more enamored with and esteemed those with PhD's and such. Now, not so much.)

If you think the Greek of 1 John 5:1 enhances the plain language of the verse in English, then write about it. But for you to enter what in my world is a type of contest I can't name without getting blocked, you come off looking pretty full of yourself.

So, what's the point you're trying to make about 1 John 5:1?

Not at all Hospes. The meaning of 'believe' in 1 John 5:1 is critical in understanding what it means. That is based on the tense of the verb.

 

[OzSpen]

Oz, this looks like a rabbit trail to me. It looks to me like you're avoiding the issue at hand. So, by this question are you suggesting that the English translators aren't as good as you at translating the text? Or that we can't possibly understand the intent of the text in English? Like I asked, what's your point? Get straight to it. Otherwise, it appears as if you're just flexing your muscles. I'm here to see if you have a valid argument for your case, not to have some arm wrestle with you.
TD

Sarcasm doesn't work with me.

 

[tdidymas]

Sarcasm doesn't work with me.

It wasn't sarcasm. I see right through your strategy. So by your response I gather you're done?
TD

 

[Hospes]

Not at all Hospes. The meaning of 'believe' in 1 John 5:1 is critical in understanding what it means. That is based on the tense of the verb.

Here's the morphology of the word "believes" in 1 John 5:1 - verb, present tense, active voice. As far as I can tell, this means that the subject, "everyone", is currently carrying out the verb, "believes". Vine's definition for the word used for "believes" is

1. pisteuo (πιστεύω, 4100), “to believe,” also “to be persuaded of,” and hence, “to place confidence in, to trust,” signifies, in this sense of the word, reliance upon, not mere credence.​

Assuming I see this correctly, how does it enhance the English translation?

BTW, I know virtually nothing of Greek, Biblical or otherwise. I do know how to use resources to help me muddle along in it.

 

[OzSpen]

It wasn't sarcasm. I see right through your strategy. So by your response I gather you're done?
TD

I'm not done at all. You're the one who refuses to translate Πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων at the beginning of 1 John 5:1.

 

[OzSpen]

Here's the morphology of the word "believes" in 1 John 5:1 - verb, present tense, active voice. As far as I can tell, this means that the subject, "everyone", is currently carrying out the verb, "believes". Vine's definition for the word used for "believes" is

1. pisteuo (πιστεύω, 4100), “to believe,” also “to be persuaded of,” and hence, “to place confidence in, to trust,” signifies, in this sense of the word, reliance upon, not mere credence.​

Assuming I see this correctly, how does it enhance the English translation?

BTW, I know virtually nothing of Greek, Biblical or otherwise. I do know how to use resources to help me muddle along in it.

Hospes,

You are correct that ὁ πιστεύων is present tense, active voice. However, it's a nominative, singular, present participle. Since it is present tense, that means the translation is that of repeated or continuing action.

Applied to 1 Jn 5:1 (TGNT), this refers to 'each who continues to believe' that Jesus is the Christ is born of God.

This is continuous believing.

Oz

 

[tdidymas]

I'm not done at all. You're the one who refuses to translate Πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων at the beginning of 1 John 5:1.

I see right through your strategy: you are trying to derail the conversation by trying to draw me into splitting hairs over Greek words, and thus getting bogged down in detail. I'm not buying what you're selling here. You are implying that you can translate that verse better than the available English translations. What you are also implying is that the English translation does not offer the intended meaning. The fact that you were gloating over my perceived inability to translate it proves beyond any doubt that you were, and still are, trying to intimidate me over your academic prowess. If you weren't doing exactly what I'm saying here, you would have clearly stated your point a long time ago.

But like I said before, I don't care about your credentials, or what your academic ability is. If you cannot properly interpret what you are reading, then your academic knowledge isn't doing you any good. The fact is, you haven't answered the question I posed, and you're still avoiding it. One of the critical rules of hermeneutics is context, which means that definitions of words are taken from the context in which those words are used. So, my question still stands: do you believe that Paul's usage of the words faith and believe in Rom. 3 and 5, and in 1 Cor. 10, is exactly the same as James' usage of those words in Jam. 2?

But in regard to 1 John 5:1, you believe that saving faith comes chronologically prior to spiritual rebirth, don't you? I'm certain you believe this because of your past responses. But the text says "everyone who believes... is born of God." You simply cannot make believing prior to being born in this sentence. Since everyone who believes is born of God, no one who is not born of God believes. It says "everyone..." so you cannot have some believing outside of the state of regeneration. It doesn't say "some who believe" or "may be born of God" or any such thing. It says "everyone who believes... is born..." with no exceptions.

It is also a statement of identification, not process. "Everyone who..." is the identifier of the ones born of God. It also says "is born..." which is essentially the same as has already been born of God, since those people are already believing in Christ. This makes being born of God the logical precedent of believing. It is also proof that believing in Christ is a result or outcome of being born of God. Believing is the evidence that one is regenerated. "Everyone believing..." with no exceptions. Therefore, the translations rendering it "has been born of God" are valid in their meaning, and true to the original intent.
TD

 

[JLB]

Here's the morphology of the word "believes" in 1 John 5:1 - verb, present tense, active voice. As far as I can tell, this means that the subject, "everyone", is currently carrying out the verb, "believes". Vine's definition for the word used for "believes" is

1. pisteuo (πιστεύω, 4100), “to believe,” also “to be persuaded of,” and hence, “to place confidence in, to trust,” signifies, in this sense of the word, reliance upon, not mere credence.​

Assuming I see this correctly, how does it enhance the English translation?

BTW, I know virtually nothing of Greek, Biblical or otherwise. I do know how to use resources to help me muddle along in it.

Please consider that the biblical word “believe” carries the idea of obey. To believe the Gospel is to obey the Gospel.

To believe on the Lord Jesus Christ is to obey Him.


I will post a verse that uses believe and obey interchangeably depending on the version.


He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.” John 3:36 NKJV


He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.” John 3:36 NASB


again, unbelief is also considered disobedience —


Since therefore it remains that some must enter it, and those to whom it was first preached did not enter because of disobedience, Hebrews 4:6 NKJV


Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief: Hebrews 4:6 KJV




JLB

 

[stovebolts]

Since everyone is born in sin and are by nature haters of God's will, there has to be some distinction between those who do finally obey God and those who don't

What do you mean, "born in sin"

 

[Hospes]

Hospes,

You are correct that ὁ πιστεύων is present tense, active voice. However, it's a nominative, singular, present participle. Since it is present tense, that means the translation is that of repeated or continuing action.

Applied to 1 Jn 5:1 (TGNT), this refers to 'each who continues to believe' that Jesus is the Christ is born of God.

This is continuous believing.

Oz

It seems to me if you add "continues", you have gone beyond the text in that you are adding a future element to the word that is not in the text. But let's not argue that point. As a Calvinist, I agree with the either statement, "he who believes" or "he who continues to believe". In either case, are you thinking they show an inconsistency with Reformed theology? I am thinking you are getting some conclusion I am not seeing. Help me out.

 

[Hospes]

Please consider that the biblical word “believe” carries the idea of obey. To believe the Gospel is to obey the Gospel.

To believe on the Lord Jesus Christ is to obey Him.


I will post a verse that uses believe and obey interchangeably depending on the version.


He who believes in the Son has everlasting life; and he who does not believe the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.” John 3:36 NKJV


He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him.” John 3:36 NASB


again, unbelief is also considered disobedience —


Since therefore it remains that some must enter it, and those to whom it was first preached did not enter because of disobedience, Hebrews 4:6 NKJV


Seeing therefore it remaineth that some must enter therein, and they to whom it was first preached entered not in because of unbelief: Hebrews 4:6 KJV




JLB

There are a few words in Greek translated "obey", so it gets a bit confusing. Let me explain how I see the word "obedience" in the Bible when it refers to the type of obedience a servant does to his master. (Note, I am not talking about the type that is interchangeable with "believe")

Let me use an analogy:

A person who is alive has a warm body, approximately 98.6 degF internal temperature. A body at room temperature is dead. You can artificially warm a dead body to 98.6 deg, but it's still dead.​

​

A person alive in Christ walks in obedience. Not perfectly, but demonstrates a life strongly disposed toward following the commands of his Master. A person not alive in Christ can, through good environment and discipline, artificially develop a degree of obedience, but they remain "not alive".​

​

As a Calvinist, I think that part of the fruit of being redeemed (born again) is belief in - and valuing of - Christ and a progressive obedience to Jesus commands. But this fruit is akin to body temperature; they are a necessary indicator that a person is alive in Christ, but they are not what causes the person to be alive in Christ.

Just to be clear, the "belief" I use in the first sentence of the previous paragraph is the belief written of in John 3:16 and 1 John 5:1.

Let me know if you understand my view. Not necessarily you agree with it, just that you understand it. Even better, let me know if you find it unreasonable and, if so, how.

 

[tdidymas]

What do you mean, "born in sin"

That the sinful nature is inherent in human nature since the fall, according to Rom. 5 and Ps. 51, which supports the total spiritual depravity idea in Rom. 3, and that the sin nature is inherited.
TD

 

[stovebolts]

That the sinful nature is inherent in human nature since the fall, according to Rom. 5 and Ps. 51, which supports the total spiritual depravity idea in Rom. 3, and that the sin nature is inherited.
TD

Ohh, ok.
Sorry, I don't look at it that way. I don't believe scripture says what your trying to make it say. psalm 51 was written by David in a very dark part of his life because he had an innocent man killed. Davids lust for the man's wife caused him to have sex with her resulting in a pregnancy.

When David writes about his conception, he is associating the conception of his child with Bathsheba with that of his mother. It was purely sexual desire. We know this for many reasons starting with Davids rejection from his family. He and his mother were looked down on which goes back to Ruth.

So, before you dismiss what I've said, I hope that you would do your due diligence in study.

Have you considered what David wrote about how God created him?

Psalms 139 NIV

13 For you created my inmost being;(Q)
you knit me together(R) in my mother’s womb.(S)
14 I praise you(T) because I am fearfully and wonderfully made;
your works are wonderful,(U)
I know that full well.

 

[OzSpen]

I see right through your strategy: you are trying to derail the conversation by trying to draw me into splitting hairs over Greek words, and thus getting bogged down in detail. I'm not buying what you're selling here. You are implying that you can translate that verse better than the available English translations. What you are also implying is that the English translation does not offer the intended meaning. The fact that you were gloating over my perceived inability to translate it proves beyond any doubt that you were, and still are, trying to intimidate me over your academic prowess. If you weren't doing exactly what I'm saying here, you would have clearly stated your point a long time ago.

But like I said before, I don't care about your credentials, or what your academic ability is. If you cannot properly interpret what you are reading, then your academic knowledge isn't doing you any good. The fact is, you haven't answered the question I posed, and you're still avoiding it. One of the critical rules of hermeneutics is context, which means that definitions of words are taken from the context in which those words are used. So, my question still stands: do you believe that Paul's usage of the words faith and believe in Rom. 3 and 5, and in 1 Cor. 10, is exactly the same as James' usage of those words in Jam. 2?

But in regard to 1 John 5:1, you believe that saving faith comes chronologically prior to spiritual rebirth, don't you? I'm certain you believe this because of your past responses. But the text says "everyone who believes... is born of God." You simply cannot make believing prior to being born in this sentence. Since everyone who believes is born of God, no one who is not born of God believes. It says "everyone..." so you cannot have some believing outside of the state of regeneration. It doesn't say "some who believe" or "may be born of God" or any such thing. It says "everyone who believes... is born..." with no exceptions.

It is also a statement of identification, not process. "Everyone who..." is the identifier of the ones born of God. It also says "is born..." which is essentially the same as has already been born of God, since those people are already believing in Christ. This makes being born of God the logical precedent of believing. It is also proof that believing in Christ is a result or outcome of being born of God. Believing is the evidence that one is regenerated. "Everyone believing..." with no exceptions. Therefore, the translations rendering it "has been born of God" are valid in their meaning, and true to the original intent.
TD

TD,

No derailing here, mate! First John 5:1 supports the biblical view that those who continue to believe (trust in) Jesus as Saviour will inherit eternal life. Of course, this continuous believing means continuing obedience to Christ's commands - including rewards received according to Matt 25:31-46.

Oz

 

[OzSpen]

It seems to me if you add "continues", you have gone beyond the text in that you are adding a future element to the word that is not in the text. But let's not argue that point. As a Calvinist, I agree with the either statement, "he who believes" or "he who continues to believe". In either case, are you thinking they show an inconsistency with Reformed theology? I am thinking you are getting some conclusion I am not seeing. Help me out.

Hospes,

I have not added to, gone beyond the text. I have engaged in exegesis of the text, which is exposition of the text. It's the biblical requirement of sound interpretation (hermeneutics).

To be honest, you have said several times you are a Calvinist and supporter of Reformed theology. Seems to me any exegesis contrary to your Calvinistic position is automatically annulled.

I also am Reformed in my theology, a Reformed Arminian. I find you are using 'Reformed' in a much too narrow view when there are Reformed Calvinists and Reformed Arminians.

Oz

 

[tdidymas]

Ohh, ok.
Sorry, I don't look at it that way. I don't believe scripture says what your trying to make it say. psalm 51 was written by David in a very dark part of his life because he had an innocent man killed. Davids lust for the man's wife caused him to have sex with her resulting in a pregnancy.

When David writes about his conception, he is associating the conception of his child with Bathsheba with that of his mother. It was purely sexual desire. We know this for many reasons starting with Davids rejection from his family. He and his mother were looked down on which goes back to Ruth.

So, before you dismiss what I've said, I hope that you would do your due diligence in study.

Have you considered what David wrote about how God created him?

Psalms 139 NIV

13 For you created my inmost being;(Q)
you knit me together(R) in my mother’s womb.(S)
14 I praise you(T) because I am fearfully and wonderfully made;
your works are wonderful,(U)
I know that full well.

I don't see Ps. 139 supporting the creationist idea. Rom. 5 and 7 support the idea of inherited sin. When children are too young to know anything, they already start sinning. Children have to be taught to do right. They don't have to be taught to do wrong, because they do that by nature. This is proof that we are all born with a sinful nature. Eph. 2 says we were by nature children of wrath (prior to conversion). It's not that we merely deserved the wrath of God due to a sinful act, but it says "by nature." Rom. 3 declares that none are righteous - none, and that includes those too young to know anything.
TD

 

[tdidymas]

TD,

No derailing here, mate! First John 5:1 supports the biblical view that those who continue to believe (trust in) Jesus as Saviour will inherit eternal life. Of course, this continuous believing means continuing obedience to Christ's commands - including rewards received according to Matt 25:31-46.

Oz

No one will ever obey Christ unless they first believe in Him. It doesn't matter whether it says "believe," "believing," or "continue to believe." It's all the same spiritual condition. Do you think that believing is a decision you made? And then to "continue to believe" is just more decisions you make? And these decisions you make by yourself, wherein God doesn't intervene but says "you're on your own"?

And besides this, why do you avoid my questions, since you started this conversations at that point?
TD

 

[Hospes]

I have not added to, gone beyond the text. I have engaged in exegesis of the text, which is exposition of the text.

My point was I think you did a bit of isogesis, which is introducing one's own opinion into the interpretation of the original text.

Seems to me any exegesis contrary to your Calvinistic position is automatically annulled.

Have no clear idea what this sentence means. Did I annul something? I meant only to offer a reasonable Biblical understanding of how belief and obedience "works" in a Christains life.

I also am Reformed in my theology, a Reformed Arminian. I find you are using 'Reformed' in a much too narrow view when there are Reformed Calvinists and Reformed Arminians.

Interesting and gracious article. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. I'll be glad to use whatever labels you find suitable if we agree on definitions. Should I refer to myself as a Reformed Calvinist and you refer to yourself as a Reformed Arminian?

I can tell you I use the words Calvinist and Reformed simply as shorthand for where my beliefs largely lay. I do not try to adopt a Calvinistic position and then see what's contrary to it. It's more that I find myself, in the development of my theology, to be largely in line with Reformed/Calvinist theology. I did not pursue Calvinism, I found myself in it.

Did you understand what I was explaining about belief and obedience? Again, I am not looking for your agreement, just an understanding of my perspective.

 

[JLB]

As a Calvinist, I think that part of the fruit of being redeemed (born again) is belief in - and valuing of - Christ and a progressive obedience to Jesus commands. But this fruit is akin to body temperature; they are a necessary indicator that a person is alive in Christ, but they are not what causes the person to be alive in Christ.

What is it that you see in the scriptures that causes a person to become alive in Christ?


JLB

 

[JLB]

My point was I think you did a bit of isogesis, which is introducing one's own opinion into the interpretation of the original text.

Have no clear idea what this sentence means. Did I annul something? I meant only to offer a reasonable Biblical understanding of how belief and obedience "works" in a Christains life.

Interesting and gracious article. Thanks for bringing it to my attention. I'll be glad to use whatever labels you find suitable if we agree on definitions. Should I refer to myself as a Reformed Calvinist and you refer to yourself as a Reformed Arminian?

I can tell you I use the words Calvinist and Reformed simply as shorthand for where my beliefs largely lay. I do not try to adopt a Calvinistic position and then see what's contrary to it. It's more that I find myself, in the development of my theology, to be largely in line with Reformed/Calvinist theology. I did not pursue Calvinism, I found myself in it.

Did you understand what I was explaining about belief and obedience? Again, I am not looking for your agreement, just an understanding of my perspective.

Did you see the scriptures I quoted that are used interchagably with believe and obey?