Originally posted by DoctorScribblesIt says whosoever believeth. If you believe the WORD. In whatever time that you believe the THE WORD. No matter who much you chose to try to complicate THE WORD OF GOD, it is still simple to understand.
I don't know what it says without knowing the verb's aspect.
Does the verse indicate that whoever believes, in the sense of whoever has believed at least one time, will be saved? (Like, "whosoever buys a movie ticket gets to stay in the theater"; one doesn't have to continually rebuy throughout the movie.)
Or does it indicate that a per ...[text shortened]... thing else?
How can you accept something as true if you don't even know what it is claiming?
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesIt seems to me that the meaning of the text must be that the "believeth" must be at the time of the decision whether to grant the particular reward i.e. "eternal life". After all, when I was five I "believeth" in the Easter Bunny and received a reward i.e. candy for Easter. Now if I said I "believeth" in the Easter Bunny it would be considered inappropriate and it is highly doubtful I would receive the reward of candy. I believe John 3:16 is analogous.
I don't know what it says without knowing the verb's aspect.
Does the verse indicate that whoever believes, in the sense of whoever has believed at least one time, will be saved? (Like, "whosoever buys a movie ticket gets to stay in the theater"; one doesn't have to continually rebuy throughout the movie.)
Or does it indicate that a per ...[text shortened]... hing else?
How can you deem something to be true if you don't even know what it is claiming?
EDIT: Perhaps the Tooth Fairy would be a closer analogy; I believe simple belief in the Tooth Fairy was sufficient to receive the quarter - there were no standards of behavior that had to be met (this would be the RBHILL interpretation of Scripture).
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesNo.
So, you are saying that belief at any time is sufficient, correct? One could believe today, but not ten years from now, and still be saved, correct?
If someone gets saved, they must stay saved.
If someone gets saved, then they turn back to the life of sin. They still have the chance to repent and accept that Salvation that they rejected.(turned away from)
Originally posted by blindfaith101I listed this possibility: "Or does it indicate that a person who believes intermittently throughout life, but happens to believe at the time of death, will be saved?"
No.
If someone gets saved, they must stay saved.
If someone gets saved, then they turn back to the life of sin. They still have the chance to repent and accept that Salvation that they rejected.(turned away from)
It sounds like you and no1 agree that that is the correct interpretation.
That is, an on-again off-again Christian needs to get lucky about when he dies. If he gets lucky and dies during an "on" phase, it's up to the suite; if he dies in an "off" phase, down to the street. Does either case sit well with you and your notion of Christ?
Of course, it would seem that the "believeth" must be more than a belief in the mere existence of Jesus. You must "believeth" in his teachings. If I say that I "believeth" in the Sicilian Defence I am imparting that I "believeth" in the merits of the Sicilian Defence itself, not merely that it exists.
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesThe message of the parable of the bridesmaids in Matthew 25 seems to be that since you don't know when you're going to die, you better start acting according to the commands of Matthew 25:31-46 to show that you truly "believeth" in Jesus.
I listed this possibility: "Or does it indicate that a person who believes intermittently throughout life, but happens to believe at the time of death, will be saved?"
It sounds like you and no1 agree that that is the correct interpretation.
That is, an on-again off-again Christian needs to get lucky about when he dies.
Originally posted by no1marauderPreviously, Greek scholars here have indicated that the verb's meaning is closer to trust than belief.
Of course, it would seem that the "believeth" must be more than a belief in the mere existence of Jesus. You must "believeth" in his teachings. If I say that I "believeth" in the Sicilian Defence I am imparting that I "believeth" in the merits of the Sicilian Defence itself, not merely that it exists.
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesYou are right. There are many Christians playing Russian Roulete with their Salvation.
I listed this possibility: "Or does it indicate that a person who believes intermittently throughout life, but happens to believe at the time of death, will be saved?"
It sounds like you and no1 agree that that is the correct interpretation.
That is, an on-again off-again Christian needs to get lucky about when he dies. If he gets lucky an ...[text shortened]... "off" phase, down to the street. Does either case sit well with you and your notion of Christ?
Originally posted by no1marauderIt eliminates the "believeth in the existence of" interepretion of "believeth."
I'm not sure the word "trust" has any more of a single precise meaning on its own than "belief".
Additionally, trust entails a lack of knowledge, while belief does not. That is, one can only trust in realms of uncertainty. The verse allows doubt. One doesn't have to insist on "knowing" everything about Christ to receive his salvation; one is allowed to doubt one's faith and still receive eternal life.
Originally posted by DoctorScribblesIt seems to me belief does entail a lack of knowledge; we "believeth" something if we're not sure - if we are sure we "know". Thus, the word "belief" also entails doubt, at least in common usage.
It eliminates the "believeth in the existence of" interepretion of "believeth."
Additionally, trust entails a lack of knowledge, while belief does not. That is, one can only trust in realms of uncertainty. The verse allows doubt. One doesn't have to insist on "knowing" everything about Christ to receive his salvation; one is allowed to doubt one's faith and still receive eternal life.