what is "faith"?

Originally posted by Rajk999
I guess James was clueless when he said that faith WITHOUT WORKS is dead. Maybe there should have been an Epiphinehas epistle, explaining [b]'non-meritorious faith'.

You can always tell false doctrines. The proponents have to make up new words in order to explain their new found 'truth' and it helps to fool the weak minded into believing that they ar ...[text shortened]... meritorious . ... cant remember them all ... Jawywill use them a lot. I will make a list...[/b]

===============================
I guess James was clueless when he said that faith WITHOUT WORKS is dead. Maybe there should have been an Epiphinehas epistle, explaining 'non-meritorious faith'.
========================================

James was not clueless. But James was a transitional figure who was somewhat still enfluenced by his backround in Judaism. He represented an important historical link between the Old Testament and the New. He was revered for his personal piety.

James was not as clear about God's New Testament economy as Paul was. But he was by no means clueless.

James' boast that there were thousands in the church in Jerusalem who were zealous for the law exposes that he was still much under the enfluence of the Old Covenant. He was not as clear about God's turn to a new way, as Paul was.

Probably that is why we have only one book by James in the NT and 13 by Paul.

I appreciate James. But his revelation was not up to the level of Paul's.


=========================================
You can always tell false doctrines. The proponents have to make up new words in order to explain their new found 'truth' and it helps to fool the weak minded into believing that they are truly inspired!!
==========================================

I think I answered this already. New words can be indicative of new culture. Culture calls for the invention of new words and expressions often.

A new culture arises from new experiences. New words are not necessarily an indication of false doctrines. They can be an indication that the users have entered into a new experience of life which calls for new phrases to discrive hitherto ununderstood matters.

Xerox - is a new word reflecting a new culture. Megabit - is a new word representing a new culture. The experiences of these people is different from the experiences of people 100 years ago. That is due to technology.

Trinity - was a new word. It was new not because of technology but because the users were in a new personal experience.

==========================================
Words like triune, non-meritorious . ... cant remember them all ... Jawywill use them a lot. I will make a list...
========================================

I used triune. I did not use nonmeritorious.

Someone used Solo Scripture or something similar to that. I did not disqualify them simply because of using a new phrase. I only sought to understand what it was they were saying.

My theological vocabulary is not that sophisticated. I do not automatically disqualify someone because he uses a word or phrase which sounds new to me.


The meaning is more important. Whether it is new or old is secondary.

Originally posted by convect
What do you mean when you say the word, "faith"? What is faith to you, and what role does it play in your life?

It's only fair that I answer first, so here goes: I regard "faith" as "belief in something whether or not I know it to be true." It starts from that nugget, and then the belief becomes encompassing, and I "know" (i.e., I feel like I know, and ...[text shortened]... to convert us, and, please, atheists, let's not try to convert them, either.

Faith is a gift, that's my best description. Oh, by the way. If you are looking for a deeper understanding of these things, try Thomas Aquinas. That guy was smart!
😏

Originally posted by bill718
Faith is a gift, that's my best description. Oh, by the way. If you are looking for a deeper understanding of these things, try Thomas Aquinas. That guy was smart!
😏

Aquinas was very smart indeed, he copy/ pasted Aristotle perfectly in order to create a "philosophical basis" for his theology.

However today most of Aristotle's philosophical and scientific principles are weel dismissed: his astronomy was refuted by Copernicus' theory; his thesis regarding the so called "invariable nature of the species" is superseded by the theory of the evolution; his Logic is superseded by Russel, Whithead etc; and his Physics are over big time due to Galileo and then Neuton and Lavoisier for starters;

Yeah but they shouldn't be replaced.

Originally posted by daniel58
Yeah but they shouldn't be replaced.

Who should'nt be repalced?
the 'quote and reply' button!!!!!!!!

Not who what, Aristotle's philosophical and scientific principles.

Originally posted by daniel58
Not who what, Aristotle's philosophical and scientific principles.

i didn't know who or what because i didn't know who you were responding to.