Why so difficult?

Does anyone want to try to make this distinction from Scripture? Cars and feet and all that are fine, but they are not Scripture. I would be very interested to see someone take the Scriptures and make this distinction with respect to salvation. </font>[/QUOTE]No, trust is used in reference to God. But trust can also be used in reference to other tangible things as well. Like a car or a chair. Faith is exclusive in that it should only be used in reference to the unseen. That is what makes it faith. If we could see God that faith would turn to trust. The disciples were in a unique situation because they could see Jesus. We can't.

 

Skandelon and Helen,

The words faith and trust might be two different English words and two different signs for the deaf. But Scripture only uses one word for them--pisteuo. Any theology that differentiates between faith and trust must tell us why God called them the same thing.

Belief/trust is teh noun form--pistis. To believe/to trust is the verb form--pisteuo. There are numerous forms including apisteuw and many of the noun forms are participles I believe.

In other words, I continue to suggest that such a distinction cannot be made from Scripture.

With respect to Helen's comments about trust being hanging on a rope and faith being a mental aspect, both ideas can be found in the pistis/pisteuo word group. But Scripture does not have a word that distinction true saving faith from mental assent. Any such distinction is purely contextual, not lexical.

 

Helen,

I am deaf. Yes, you are correct. I didn't realize that you told them, that you are an interpreter to deaf people.

Deaf's sign in 'trust' with two hands going to squeeze like as hold the rope. 'Faith' with two hands, one hand starts from foreheand, one hand goes down, as another hand meets another hand together.

Faith is believing without see things. We have to believe what the Bible saying without see the fact things. Trust is as to be being confidence with faith or believing.

For example, when you sit on the chair. You have to faith in this chair could hold you, not let you fall down. Trust, you have to be act by sit on the chair with faith same time. Trust that the four legs of the chair would not let you fall down.


By the way, I am not Calvinist. I have been reading hundreds or thousands of posts debate between Calvinism and Arminianism. Oh boy it is endless debate.

Actually they are debating base on salvation doctrine. I realize salvation doctrine is so very important. Also, propbably it is the one of the hottest debate than any kinds of the issues on the Bible doctrine.

I do believe in freewill with our own choice.

God gave freewill to Adam and Eve. GOd told Adam, not to eat the tree - knowledge and evil. Adam's responsiblity was to obey God's command.

God does not force Adam and Eve like as robot, that they cannot enter area around the tree - knowledge and evil.

God ALLOWED Eve came toward tree - knowledge and evil.

Because God tested on Adam, to see if Adam obey God or not. God does not make Adam into robot. God created Adam to have freewill with decision.

Adam ate it, and he disobey God.

SO... God punished Adam and Eve, sent them out of the Eden of Garden. And the result of their death is because of sin.


Sin is disobey.

Romans 5:12 tells us, Adam sinned and he died, so, the death passed to all people of the world because of sin.

That why God sent His Son Jesus Christ to earth to died on the cross for the whole WORLD - John 3:16; Romans 5:8; and 1 John 2:2 too.

THe Bible clearly show us, that God gave love offering Jesus Christ to us while we are sinner, that Christ died for us.

God gave us two choices is to believe on Christ, or not believe on Christ. That is the proof that we do have freewill decision to choice.

I do not believe God make us as robot. We are not God's robot.

We do NOT make sin.

We ALREADY received sin within our physical/spiritual at our natural birth (inside our mother's womb). Because Adam sinned. Sin got within Adam's physical/spiritual after the moment he ate the fruit. SO... Adam and Eve sex, bare children received sinned and died, not because of they MAKE sin. Because they RECEIVED sin come from Adam.

Hell is because of God created a place FOR Satan and fallen angels. It is not for the people. BUT, any person who go to hell, because they already received sin come from Adam. All of us are go to hell because of sin. God does not send person to hell because of elect or robot. God sents a person to hell, because of reject Christ is person's choice with freewill decision.

God does not pick person which heaven or hell in His own decision. God sends person either in heaven or hell, because person's choice is to believe on Christ or reject Christ.

I do believe in our own freewill choice. Every perosn do have freewill. All Calvinists DO have freewill, they won't admit it. Yes, I know all Calvinists DO have own freewill decision. Even, all Arminianists DO have freewill decisions also.

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 - Amen!

 

And that is true faith. That is my point.
I could do all those things concerning my car and have faith or that it will start but any car owner knows that that faith will sometimes fail. But faith in Christ never fails and it is that faith that is Gods gift to His elect.

 

If this is true how can Christ rebuke men for their lack of faith? That would be like a parent rebuking a child for not knowing how to read when the parent never taught them. Why would Christ do that? Wouldn't he need to rebuke himself for not giving them faith?

 

I agree with you. The real problem is 2 things:

1. If I decide to get saved, when I die and meet the Lord our Saviour, God would tell me that He choose me to hell.

2. If I am reluctant to get saved, when I die, God choose me for Heaven.

How to refute the Calvinism is to read the story of Mark 10:17-22. Did a rich man have his own freewill?

 

The Calvinist said that the world refers to the elect only. John Calvin referred the world to all mankind.

 

The Calvinist said that the world refers to the elect only. John Calvin referred the world to all mankind. </font>[/QUOTE]I refer to scripture. It says the world, and that's what the context is in that verse. It does NOT refer to only the elect in that verse, it referrs to all of humankind.

 

The Calvinist said that the world refers to the elect only. John Calvin referred the world to all mankind. </font>[/QUOTE]The Calvinist, like all good students of Scripture, realize that a word has meaning only in its context. We have shown places where "world" clearly does not mean everyone without exception. A blanket statement about what a word means skips over one of the fundamental rules of hermeneutics: Words have meaning only in context.

 

I agree. So what from the context of "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" indicates that the "world" in this verse is not about everyone?

Also, I notice that when Luke says Caesar Augustus decreed that all the "world" should be taxed, he used the word "oikoumene" which carries a different connotation than John 3:16's "kosmos" - I don't now if that's relevant here, but I thought it was worth mentioning.