We are not going to be judged by our religion or what we claim to believe; but rather on our acts of love toward God and our fellow man. Thus Christ said:
No, James – they really aren’t different words. My son asked nearly the same question a week ago, and something he brought up made me see why people are confused by that passage – above. His relationship to me gave me an insight in how to answer your question.
I do not disagree with this but at the same time, it does not clear up the problem of two words being used more or less interchangeably in the NT text.
No, James – they really aren’t different words. My son asked nearly the same question a week ago, and something he brought up made me see why people are confused by that passage – above. His relationship to me gave me an insight in how to answer your question.
Consider three statements in English:
*]I believe you.
*]I believe in Spirits.
*]I believe in you.
The same word has three different grammatically cued meanings.
The first example implies the subject matter of “do I question something you communicate to me?”, The statement doesn’t mean I think you yourself are trustworthy, or that you can “do” anything, or that you are my “hero” – but it means that at very least, I have a reason to accept something you are saying as true.
It would be silly to think the first example is talking about whether or not I believe you exist – Your existence is already indicated by my use of the word “you”.
The second example, however, uses the third person – There it can mean the existence of Spirits (which is questioned by atheists) is the reason for the statement. Grammatically cued, existence is even the primary connotation assumed when “belief” is spoken of in the third person. But belief can also mean that I find Spirits to be heroes, or friends… the meaning is ambiguous and needs context to clarify it.
The third statement is something I would say to my son, or to a person I wish to encourage by stating an af-filiation or solidarity with them. Notice the usage of the second person. You are able, you are strong, you are a hero. That is the cue to the stronger meaning of the word “believe”. This one clearly isn’t about existence for the same reason the first example isn’t about existence – it’s about “you”.
It is this third example which Jesus desires of us – to believe in him; not as an intellectual exercise in the third person; but you [and I] must say to Jesus “I believe in you”; We choose his side, he’s our “hero”, our “leader” in a battle.
However, it is difficult to convey this idea clearly If I don’t work around the second example I gave; The idea becomes confused if I were to say “You must believe in Jesus”. For I have now put Jesus in the third person… the grammar cue is lost … and he might not exist for one of us…
The distinction is subtle, and although I am not sure all three usages are identical to the Greek; I am sure that two of them were confusable – and hence the passage you cite is attempting to clarify.
The Greek certainly uses tenses with “faith” that don’t seem to translate smoothly into English. I myself have been struggling with this translation issue, and learning about it for some years. I hope my opinion is maturing; although I have not exhaustively studied it yet.
I think there are many places where translators would do well to add extra [bracketed] words to emphasize the contextual meaning.
He Faithed, vs. He believed, vs He believed [choosing sides and a leader],
This is something which shows up enough in inter-faith dialog confusion that a careful study would be useful; and consistent expression [literal translation] would be most helpful.
The passage in James shows that the Holy Spirit saw fit to bring the distinction to our attention at least once…
Demons do part of example 1) part of example 2) but they don’t do #3.
Consider every statement in scripture about the demons:
Let the accusations stand on the word of two or three witnesses; two, where they agree without ambiguity – three when the two do not agree.
Where two or three are gathered in my name there I am in their midst.
That is the rule and the tribunal of Faith.
I hope this helps;
–Andrew.
Perhaps you are right but then in John 3:16 - a VERY important verse in most Christian Traditions, the term “faith” could easily be used, and yet in English it is rendered “believe”
This seems to be the consensus both here and on another (non-Catholic) site where I posted the same question.
Maybe an analogy will help. A man may understand and believe that smoking is bad for him and cause cancer, yet still choose to smoke and consequently get cancer. Believing that Jesus Christ is truly the Messiah yet not doing what Jesus teaches is an example of how that belief is of no avail. Thus Jesus say "Why do you call me ‘Lord!, Lord!’ and not do what I tell you? So I think the key is for you to meditate on these words of Christ:
Very good analogy, with a scripture to explain.
I don’t know much about the greek words for faith and belief and how they are used in the New Testament, but I think your post is important. Faith is exactly as you say. Faith is trust.I do not disagree with this but at the same time, it does not clear up the problem of two words being used more or less interchangeably in the NT text.
Yes - I’ve considered some of this…but even this does not necessarily clear it up entirely. Consider…I can believe “in banks” (that they exist) and yet not “trust banks” (have faith in them)…
Peace
James
That’s usage #2 vs. usage #3.I do not disagree with this but at the same time, it does not clear up the problem of two words being used more or less interchangeably in the NT text.
Yes - I’ve considered some of this…but even this does not necessarily clear it up entirely. Consider…I can believe “in banks” (that they exist) and yet not “trust banks” (have faith in them)…
Peace
James