Christianity

For all things philosophical.

Moderators: AMod, iMod

Veritas Aequitas
Posts: 12357
Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2012 4:41 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Veritas Aequitas »

Immanuel Can wrote: Sun Sep 19, 2021 1:50 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Sun Sep 19, 2021 5:13 am In the contract [covenant] between a Christian and God /Jesus is the Christian is promised eternal life in heaven upon compliances with the necessary terms as stipulated within the Gospel.
You didn't read John 3:16. Or you tried to read it, but didn't understand it. However, it's not a 100% wrong way to characterize the situation, so let's go with your metaphor anyway.

Let's view John 3:16 as a "contract."

Terms of Contract

God's Contractual Duties, as specified in John 3:16

1. Love the world.
2. Give His unique Son to pay the price for man's sin.
3. Open up a universal way of salvation.
4. Provide eternal life.


Man's Contractual Duties

Believe God has done it.


Now, that's the contract as spelled out by John 3:16. Does it still actually look "contractual" to you?
You are being rhetorical and evasive in the above.

Here's John 3:16 [KJV]
For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

The main operative principles of a Contract are as follows;
  • 1. The offer and promise by God;
    "that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life."

    2. Acceptance of the offer;
    when one accept the above offer, i.e. surrender and believe in Jesus and God, John 3:16.
    (Note God is omnipresent and omniscience, so there cannot be any cheating nor disingenuous acceptance.)

    3. then, there is a contract [covenant, agreement, pact] in effect and both parties are obligated to fulfil their promises until the contract is mutually cancelled or void according to the terms.
The terms of the contract [covenant] are stipulated in the Gospels with the Acts and OT as appendixes to the main contract.

So, why is the above not a contract [covenant, agreement, pact, etc.] in principle?

In the present circumstances, it would be wiser for Christians to use and emphasize the term 'contract' [whilst not denying it is also a covenant], i.e.
all Christians by definition and substance had entered into a contract with God/Jesus and the overriding terms of the contract is a Christian 'must love all, even enemies'.
As such, Christianity is a pacifist religion.
Thus all Christians are contractually bound to the above overriding term.

This above point will shut out any claim that Christianity is a violent religion based on the obvious evidences [but non-sequitor] that SOME Christians [by name] are violent and did kill at present and in the past.
Try that defense when you are faced with such accusations.

The use of the term 'contract' and contractual bound is easily and immediately understood by the majority in comparison to the term 'covenant' which is rarely used by non-Christians [it won't click easily] and even Christians themselves.

Why I resort to the above argument is to leave Islam as the sore thumb as the only inherently evil and violent religion.
This will also shut out the Muslim-apologists who often invoked the 'what-about' fallacy when faced with the evils and violence inherent in their religions, with the 'what-about Christianity', i.e. the crusades, inquisition, imperialism, Myanmar & Congo Militarist Christians, Trump, etc.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by Immanuel Can »

Lacewing wrote: Sun Sep 19, 2021 6:31 pm You...
Heh. :D You just can't help yourself, can you?

You think ad homimems are worth something. Marvelous.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by Immanuel Can »

RCSaunders wrote: Sun Sep 19, 2021 7:52 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Sun Sep 19, 2021 6:22 pm
RCSaunders wrote: Sun Sep 19, 2021 6:14 pm
You do not equate, "belief," and, "faith," then?
https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Hebrew_Ro ... tion/Faith
The question is neither theological or etymological.
Actually, it's both.

Theologically, "What is a Christian/Biblical view of faith," and etymologically, "What do ordinary English speakers understand by these terms today?" The answers are different. But you don't always seem to listen to what I say, so I gave you an independent source to answer your question.

However, I realize you can't be automatically expected to know about the meaning of the Biblical Greek word pisteuo, and its variant meanings, of course. Biblical definitions are not part of the stock of common knowledge these days. But if you read the link, you now have some idea.
So which is it? Is all believing faith, or only believing what God said faith? In your view, not the words of some commentary.
The answer divides into two different questions. One is, "What does the Biblical account of faith entail," and the other is, "What does common usage make of the English words 'faith' and 'belief'?"

The answer to the first question is the second alternative you suggest. The answer to the second question is the first alternative you suggest.

Which do you want to discuss? Or is your question now answered?
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by Immanuel Can »

Veritas Aequitas wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 6:04 am
Immanuel Can wrote: Sun Sep 19, 2021 1:50 pm
Veritas Aequitas wrote: Sun Sep 19, 2021 5:13 am In the contract [covenant] between a Christian and God /Jesus is the Christian is promised eternal life in heaven upon compliances with the necessary terms as stipulated within the Gospel.
You didn't read John 3:16. Or you tried to read it, but didn't understand it. However, it's not a 100% wrong way to characterize the situation, so let's go with your metaphor anyway.

Let's view John 3:16 as a "contract."

Terms of Contract

God's Contractual Duties, as specified in John 3:16

1. Love the world.
2. Give His unique Son to pay the price for man's sin.
3. Open up a universal way of salvation.
4. Provide eternal life.


Man's Contractual Duties

Believe God has done it.


Now, that's the contract as spelled out by John 3:16. Does it still actually look "contractual" to you?
You are being rhetorical and evasive in the above.
Far from it. Point out anything I left out, and I'll add it in.
...in effect and both parties are obligated to fulfil their promises until the contract is mutually cancelled or void according to the terms.
Which term, specified in John 3:16, did I not include? What "terms of contract," other than belief in what God has done, does mankind have, according to the verse?
So, why is the above not a contract [covenant, agreement, pact, etc.] in principle?
Well, you're now using four different terms: covenants, agreements, pacts and contracts. Which one are you insisting John 3:16 is? As I recall, you were saying, "contract."

Well, as I also said, "contract" isn't a 100% wrong term to use there, it's just rather misleading. Contracts are ordinarily bilateral. But I'm asking you what you regard as the missing terms of the human side of the alleged "contract." You haven't said.
all Christians by definition and substance had entered into a contract with God/Jesus and the overriding terms of the contract is a Christian 'must love all, even enemies'.
John 3:16 makes no mention of this. In fact, it's completely absent from the alleged "contract," as you call it.

I'm afraid you're rather badly mistaken. Loving others, and loving enemies, are Christian duties of gratitude, not of contract. They are performed out of love for God, not because some contract specifies the are: for Jesus said, "If you love me, you will keep my commandments." (John 14:15) But the Christian does not love until after God does: "We love because He first loved us." (1 John 4:19) So, as in John 3:16, the initial love is God's love for the sinner; the sinner's response to salvation is love for God and others. But it's not contractual but relational, because the good that Christians do comes after salvation, not contemporaneous with it.

We have the same in Ephesians 2:8-10, " For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For we are His workmanship, created in Christ Jesus for good works, which God prepared beforehand so that we would walk in them."
The use of the term 'contract' and contractual bound is easily and immediately understood by the majority in comparison to the term 'covenant' which is rarely used by non-Christians [it won't click easily] and even Christians themselves.
But, as I have shown, the term "contract" is badly misleading sometimes. It's not a quid-pro-quo, not a bilateral 'deal,' and most definitely not an achievement of the works of men, even in part.
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 4704
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Christianity

Post by RCSaunders »

Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 2:06 pm
RCSaunders wrote: Sun Sep 19, 2021 7:52 pm
The question is neither theological or etymological.
Actually, it's both.

Theologically, "What is a Christian/Biblical view of faith," and etymologically, "What do ordinary English speakers understand by these terms today?" The answers are different. But you don't always seem to listen to what I say, so I gave you an independent source to answer your question.

However, I realize you can't be automatically expected to know about the meaning of the Biblical Greek word pisteuo, and its variant meanings, of course. Biblical definitions are not part of the stock of common knowledge these days. But if you read the link, you now have some idea.
You have a terrible memory. We've had many discussions in which I've referenced both Greek and Hebrew (and some Aramaic) Bible terms (with which I'm quite familiar) having read and studied the New Testament in Koine Greek.

I've studied all the major theologians from the early church fathers to the Luther, Calvin, Wesley, and later theolgians and commentators as well. I do not need lessons on theology or Biblical language from you.

So your little song and dance are not going to work. The only questions are:
What do YOU" mean by the word faith, and what do YOU mean by the word belief. Do they mean the same thing or different things.

This may help you answer the question:

It is your contention that faith is, "believing what God has said,"
--If faith and belief mean the same thing, the definition would be meaningless, because it becomes, "faith is faith in what God has said," but,
--Only if faith and belief have different meanings and faith a just one kind of belief (belief in what God has said) can your definition of faith mean anything.

If you get by this and can answer it honestly (which you have so far evaded), then you might answer the question, "what exactly does it mean to believe something?"
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by Immanuel Can »

RCSaunders wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 4:08 pm I do not need lessons on theology or Biblical language from you.
Okay. But it makes your question a very odd one, then. You say you already know the answer.
The only questions are:
What do YOU" mean by the word faith[/i][/b], and what do YOU mean by the word belief. Do they mean the same thing or different things.
Well, you asked for a simple definition, and I gave you one. You don't like it, though (as you must know) it conforms to the Bible, and thus to the context of John 3:16, which was the topic of discussion.

So in answer to your question, in respect to the word "believe" in John 3:16, you will find that the Biblical text does not use it in regard to the relations between human beings, as in "I have faith/belief in the weatherman." In John 3:16, it refers to believing God.

Now, how I use the word when I'm in the pub talking to chums, that's a very different question. Like everybody else, I tend to be loose and imprecise in my casual usage, not just of that word but of many others, depending on the formality or informality of the social context. So does everybody. So not much rests on that.

I might say, casually, "I believe it will rain tomorrow." I do not mean, "I believe God has revealed to me it will rain tomorrow." So far as I know, God has said nothing about tomorrow's weather...and certainly not to me. But if you ask me what pisteuo implies in John 3:16, my answer will be precise...and different.

This isn't hard, RC. You seem to be fishing for something...but I can't tell what it is. I'm answering frankly and according to the facts, not in anticipation or dread of where you think you're going....wherever that might be.
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 4704
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Christianity

Post by RCSaunders »

Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 4:20 pm
RCSaunders wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 4:08 pm I do not need lessons on theology or Biblical language from you.
Okay. But it makes your question a very odd one, then. You say you already know the answer.
The only questions are:
What do YOU" mean by the word faith[/i][/b], and what do YOU mean by the word belief. Do they mean the same thing or different things.
Well, you asked for a simple definition, and I gave you one. You don't like it, though (as you must know) it conforms to the Bible, and thus to the context of John 3:16, which was the topic of discussion.

So in answer to your question, in respect to the word "believe" in John 3:16, you will find that the Biblical text does not use it in regard to the relations between human beings, as in "I have faith/belief in the weatherman." In John 3:16, it refers to believing God.

Now, how I use the word when I'm in the pub talking to chums, that's a very different question. Like everybody else, I tend to be loose and imprecise in my casual usage, not just of that word but of many others, depending on the formality or informality of the social context. So does everybody. So not much rests on that.

I might say, casually, "I believe it will rain tomorrow." I do not mean, "I believe God has revealed to me it will rain tomorrow." So far as I know, God has said nothing about tomorrow's weather...and certainly not to me. But if you ask me what pisteuo implies in John 3:16, my answer will be precise...and different.

This isn't hard, RC. You seem to be fishing for something...
I was. Honesty. I guess I'm not going to get it.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by Immanuel Can »

RCSaunders wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 4:36 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 4:20 pm You seem to be fishing for something...
I was. Honesty. I guess I'm not going to get it.
I've told you honestly what I know. You've got it. You don't like it.

It seems you want me to give YOUR answer, but haven't even told me what YOUR answer might be. :shock:

Maybe you should just be frank: what is the bee in your bonnet, RC?
User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 6604
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Lacewing »

Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 1:58 pm
Lacewing wrote: Sun Sep 19, 2021 6:31 pm You...
Heh. :D You just can't help yourself, can you?

You think ad homimems are worth something. Marvelous.
My full sentence above, which you've distorted (as you continually do) for your purposes, was: "You continually demonstrate otherwise." How is that an ad hominem?

Calling you out on your distortions is the right thing to do.

Apparently, you can't help thinking that your self-absorbed nonsense is worth something and that you are most marvelous for it. Don't blame other people for pointing out your obvious absurdity.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by Immanuel Can »

Lacewing wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 5:30 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 1:58 pm
Lacewing wrote: Sun Sep 19, 2021 6:31 pm You...
Heh. :D You just can't help yourself, can you?

You think ad homimems are worth something. Marvelous.
Apparently, you...
Round and round we go. :D

Deal with arguments, if you have something to say. If you just want to insult speakers, then you have nothing to say. And if you don't know the difference between ad hominem and on point, you can look it up. But it's pretty much that.
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 4704
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Christianity

Post by RCSaunders »

Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 5:07 pm
RCSaunders wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 4:36 pm
Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 4:20 pm You seem to be fishing for something...
I was. Honesty. I guess I'm not going to get it.
I've told you honestly what I know. You've got it. You don't like it.

It seems you want me to give YOUR answer, but haven't even told me what YOUR answer might be. :shock:

Maybe you should just be frank: what is the bee in your bonnet, RC?
There's nothing to like or dislike. I asked you if, in your view, do belief and faith mean the same thing or something different.

I do not see an answer to that question in anything your wrote. Either you do believe they mean the same thing or you don't, or perhaps you don't know which you mean, or perhaps you switch up when it's convenient. But whatever you mean you sure go to great lengths of circumlocution to evade saying which.

I don't expect an answer and you certainly don't have to explain yourself to me. Your not answering, however, explains a great deal.
uwot
Posts: 6093
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Meanwhile...

Post by uwot »

...in the irony void between Mr Can's ears:
Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 7:05 pmHeh. :D You just can't help yourself, can you?

You think ad homimems are worth something. Marvelous.
User avatar
Immanuel Can
Posts: 22257
Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2013 4:42 pm

Re: Christianity

Post by Immanuel Can »

RCSaunders wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 8:23 pm I asked you if, in your view, do belief and faith mean the same thing or something different.
I tried to answer that. I'll try again.

In English, they are synonyms, and most people know little difference between them. If anything, "faith" seems to get used for more religious or credal concerns, and "belief" for more routine ones; but it's not a distinction that most people consistently recognize or observe in practice. And in normal life, I tend to use language the same way others do...casually. But I'm pretty sure you know all that, so I can't imagine why you asked.

In theology, of course, things are different. But you don't seem to be participating in the discussion of John 3:16, even though that's where you jumped in and raised the question, so I'll say no more about that.

That's the answer. I can't make it simpler for you.

But I have a feeling your'e still looking for something different: I have no idea what it is.
User avatar
Lacewing
Posts: 6604
Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2015 2:25 am

Re: Christianity

Post by Lacewing »

Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 7:05 pm Deal with arguments,
Stop lying and misrepresenting and distorting. Your so-called arguments are garbage otherwise.
User avatar
RCSaunders
Posts: 4704
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2018 9:42 pm
Contact:

Re: Christianity

Post by RCSaunders »

Immanuel Can wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 8:30 pm
RCSaunders wrote: Mon Sep 20, 2021 8:23 pm I asked you if, in your view, do belief and faith mean the same thing or something different.
I tried to answer that. I'll try again.

In English, they are synonyms, and most people know little difference between them. If anything, "faith" seems to get used for more religious or credal concerns, and "belief" for more routine ones; but it's not a distinction that most people consistently recognize or observe in practice. And in normal life, I tend to use language the same way others do...casually. ...

In theology, of course, things are different. ...
So in every day language you freely interchange, "faith," and, "belief," and believe most other people do as well. Faith only has a meaning such as you described, "belief in what God says," within the context of theology (or perhaps religion in general.)

That's the understanding I get from your explanation. If that is not correct, please make any refinements you like. I'm not testing you. I just want to know what you mean.

I agree, by the way, that many people, perhaps most, make no careful distinction between faith and belief, which I think is a mistake, but not the reason for my question.

But I do have one more, which I asked before, but put aside until you made it clear how you used those words.

What does the word, "believe," mean, to you? I'm not interested in how most people use it, or some, "official," definition, only what you mean when you use the word.
Post Reply