Believe
20 Aug '15 19:472 editsI think the word “believe” causes some confusion, both for Christians and non-Christians responding to its use by Christians.
When the KJV translation was done, I think it still meant “to hold dear”, and was not a bad (albeit perhaps somewhat poetic) translation of pisteo. And it would have been perfectly coherent to say something like: “I believe X, but I’m not totally convinced that it’s true.” Other English translations (such as the NRSV) have generally kept the KJV rendering.
—That is why I like Young’s Literal Translation of Hebrews 11:1, for example: “And faith is of things hoped for a confidence, of matters not seen a conviction.” Faith, then, is a matter of hope and an attitude of active confidence (trust), not a matter of knowledge or certainty, no matter how strong the conviction.
From John Ayto, Dictionary of Word Origins:
“Believing and loving are closely allied. . . . [reference to Late Old English and prehistoric West and Germanic words] . . . This meant ‘hold dear, love’ and hence ‘trust in, believe’, and it was formed on a base, *laub-, which also produced, by various routes, English love, lief ‘dear’, leave ‘permission’ and the second element of furlough.” (Italics in original.)
It still can have that meaning—i.e., to “hold dear”—(especially in this context), but the conventional modern meaning has become “to regard or think something as true (factual)”, or “to hold an opinion”. And I do think that has affected some modern theological views, wherein the word “believe” carries that kind of epistemological understanding. (Unfortunately, this notion carries over into conventional dictionary definitions of “faith” as well.)
Now, normally, one places their confidence (faith) in what they “believe” (think) to be true—but I think that hope is also sufficient to activate faith.
When the KJV translation was done, I think it still meant “to hold dear”, and was not a bad (albeit perhaps somewhat poetic) translation of pisteo. And it would have been perfectly coherent to say something like: “I believe X, but I’m not totally convinced that it’s true.” Other English translations (such as the NRSV) have generally kept the KJV rendering.
—That is why I like Young’s Literal Translation of Hebrews 11:1, for example: “And faith is of things hoped for a confidence, of matters not seen a conviction.” Faith, then, is a matter of hope and an attitude of active confidence (trust), not a matter of knowledge or certainty, no matter how strong the conviction.
From John Ayto, Dictionary of Word Origins:
“Believing and loving are closely allied. . . . [reference to Late Old English and prehistoric West and Germanic words] . . . This meant ‘hold dear, love’ and hence ‘trust in, believe’, and it was formed on a base, *laub-, which also produced, by various routes, English love, lief ‘dear’, leave ‘permission’ and the second element of furlough.” (Italics in original.)
It still can have that meaning—i.e., to “hold dear”—(especially in this context), but the conventional modern meaning has become “to regard or think something as true (factual)”, or “to hold an opinion”. And I do think that has affected some modern theological views, wherein the word “believe” carries that kind of epistemological understanding. (Unfortunately, this notion carries over into conventional dictionary definitions of “faith” as well.)
Now, normally, one places their confidence (faith) in what they “believe” (think) to be true—but I think that hope is also sufficient to activate faith.
Back to Top