"Before Abraham Was, I AM"

[GodsGrace]

@GodsGrace

Strong's G3980,​

Strong's G5083,​

Strong's G4160​

3 words for obey in Greek.

Stop using Strong's to try to understand the bible.
It's like trying to learn a language by using a dictionary.

Not looking them up.
You could actually post them if you like.

 

[GodsGrace]

Latin, of some period.

In post 1092 you said this:

FIDE means FAITH.

Not in Latin it does.


Anyway,
'night.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Let me see.
[Jhn 3:19 KJV] 19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
[2Ti 4:10 KJV] 10 For Demas hath forsaken me, having loved this present world, and is departed unto Thessalonica; Crescens to Galatia, Titus unto Dalmatia.
Evil and unconditional; perhaps, but RCers still prove they know nany (i.e. not any) Greek with this one.
[1Jo 2:15 NKJV] 15 Do not love the world or the things in the world. If anyone loves the world, the love of the Father is not in him.

ALL 3 of these examples cold be seen as having an unconditional love for something.
They ALL talk about loving the things of this world – to the detriment of losing one’s soul.

Why did his followers have agape? Why are there different agapai like considerations?

Agape isn’t necessarily a saving love. It CAN be if it is directed towards God.
Satan’s followers can have an agape for the things of this world.

Again, his trust was accomplished by what he did. It has few meanings, but there are plenty who abuse the word like you.

No – it’s just that I employ the FULL meaning of the word – and NOT just the narrow meaning that suits me., like YOU do . . .

 

[BreadOfLife]

Strong's G3980,

Strong's G5083,​

Strong's G4160​

3 words for obey in Greek.

And, according to Strong's, the word for "trust" is empistosýni - but YOU keep insisting it's pistis . . .

 

[MonoBiblical]

This is why we have a problem in our Christian religion.
We don't all go to the same school.

Look it up Mono.
I can't take the time to do this for you.

Here...this is from Gemini......good explanation and Christian theology:


In New Testament Greek, the word apeitheō (ἀπειθέω) bridges disbelief and disobedience, meaning to disbelieve wilfully, refuse to be persuaded, or disobey. It implies that true unbelief is active resistance or refusal to comply, merging intellectual rejection with a lack of submission.

Key Details on Apeitheō (Strong's G544)

• Definition: To disobey, be disobedient, refuse to believe, or not comply.
• Literal Meaning: "Refuse to be persuaded" (from a- not, and peithō to persuade).
• Connotation: It suggests a perverse, willful refusal to believe, which manifests as disobedience.
• Usage: Often used in the context of resisting the Gospel or God's will.

Why "Disbelieve" Means "Disobey"
In this biblical context, faith is not just mental assent but active trust and compliance. Therefore, not believing is viewed as an act of rebellion or disobedience. The term covers both the refusal of belief and the resulting refusal to conform.
For example, in John 3:36, some translations say "does not believe," while others say "disobeys," both stemming from apeithōn.

Doesn't without trustability imply disobedience even in English?

 

[MonoBiblical]

ALL 3 of these examples cold be seen as having an unconditional love for something.
They ALL talk about loving the things of this world – to the detriment of losing one’s soul.

Sorry, but loving the world is not unconditional love, nor is consider thy neighbor as thyself.

Agape isn’t necessarily a saving love. It CAN be if it is directed towards God.
Satan’s followers can have an agape for the things of this world.

Yes, they can consider it conditionally.

And, according to Strong's, the word for "trust" is empistosýni - but YOU keep insisting it's pistis . . .

Because Strong is often wrong, but I did not see empistosýni in Strong's either. I suspect it is a Modern Greek word, not Hellenic.

No – it’s just that I employ the FULL meaning of the word – and NOT just the narrow meaning that suits me., like YOU do . . .

No - it just that you abuse the word fide, and faith an English word has taken on its abusive meaning.

Hence, Rome has acquired mistrust at best.

 

[MonoBiblical]

In post 1092 you said this:


Not in Latin it does.


Anyway,
'night.

Forgive me for speaking too loosely there.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Sorry, but loving the world is not unconditional love,

Tell that to all the people in Hell . . .

nor is consider thy neighbor as thyself.

No, you’re supposed to love your neighbor unconditionally.

Matt. 22:39
‘Love your neighbor as yourself’".

Because Strong is often wrong,

Except for when YOU quote it, of course . . .

but I did not see empistosýni in Strong's either. I suspect it is a Modern Greek word, not Hellenic.

Actually, it’s an ancient Greek word, which would predate the NT.

No - it just that you abuse the word fide, and faith an English word has taken on its abusive meaning.

No – I just understand that many words have multiple but similar meanings. There are even words that have completely different meanings yet have the same spelling.
In English, we call them homonyms . . .

Hence, Rome has acquired mistrust at best.

Showing once again that your laughable arguments aren’t based in logic or knowledge – just anti-Catholic bias . . .

 

[GodsGrace]

Doesn't without trustability imply disobedience even in English?

Let's see.
If I trust someone,,,I would tend to pay attention to what they say.
I would tend to obey them.
Yes. Agreed.

You're discussing the word TRUST.
Trust is an ASPECT of BELIEVE.

If you believe someone,,,you will trust them.
If you believe someone you will obey them.

OK.

But in Greek we discuss the world BELIEVE...
of which TRUST is an aspect.

You know, I really dislike discussing words...
it can get complicated and not much is ever learned from it.

Is this of any help??
From Gemini:

To say "believe" in Koine Greek, the primary verb is πιστεύω (pronounced pist-yoo'-o), which means to have faith, trust, or entrust. It signifies deep commitment, reliance, and trust, rather than just intellectual assent.

 

[MonoBiblical]

Tell that to all the people in Hell . . .

No, you’re supposed to love your neighbor unconditionally.

Matt. 22:39
‘Love your neighbor as yourself’".

Except for when YOU quote it, of course . . .

Actually, it’s an ancient Greek word, which would predate the NT.

No – I just understand that many words have multiple but similar meanings. There are even words that have completely different meanings yet have the same spelling.
In English, we call them homonyms . . .

Showing once again that your laughable arguments aren’t based in logic or knowledge – just anti-Catholic bias . . .

While I consider theek, I don't love or like you much, because that would just be stupid.

 

[MonoBiblical]

Actually, it’s an ancient Greek word, which would predate the NT.

Find another lapdog, because that was not relevant to the NT, and thou knew it.

 

[MonoBiblical]

No.
Mono...you don't understand.

I asked you a question, I wasn't protecting Bread...
he doesn't need my protection.

Here it is again:

Did Jesus tell you to love your neighbor??

Since I didn't live when he did, I say God rather Jesus told us to consider our peers. I don't perceive how to consider one anyother as he considered his followers, since we were never alive back then. The suggestion/commandment of the Messiah was for the early church. Other suggestions that he gives are more applicable today.

 

[GodsGrace]

Since I didn't live when he did, I say God rather Jesus told us to consider our peers. I don't perceive how to consider one anyother as he considered his followers, since we were never alive back then. The suggestion/commandment of the Messiah was for the early church. Other suggestions that he gives are more applicable today.

Looks like I'm going to have to answer my question for you.

I asked you if it's not true that Jesus told us to love our neighbor.
YES.
it is true. (do you need the actual verse?? Matthew 22)


Here's the problem with SOLA FIDE....

IF anything is added to sola fide....
it means that sola fide is not sufficient.

If Jesus added LOVE to faith...
it means FAITH ALONE is not sufficient for salvation.

That FAITH must be put into action.

Jesus said that the wise man will ACT on His words.

Matthew 7:24-25
24 “Therefore, everyone who hears these words of Mine, and ]acts on them, will be like a wise man who built his house on the rock.
25 And the rain fell and the [u]floods came, and the winds blew and slammed against that house; and yet it did not fall, for it had been founded on the rock


Also, you made the following statement:

"The suggestion/commandment of the Messiah was for the early church. Other suggestions that he gives are more applicable today."


Mono,
God does not make SUGGESTIONS.
God gives COMMANDS.

 

[BreadOfLife]

While I consider theek, I don't love or like you much, because that would just be stupid.

You can tell that rto Jesus when He is judging you - because He doesn’t say stupid things . . .

Matt. 22:39
"Love your neighbor as yourself".

Find another lapdog, because that was not relevant to the NT, and thou knew it.

Now, now . . .

 

[MonoBiblical]

You can tell that rto Jesus when He is judging you - because He doesn’t say stupid things . . .

Matt. 22:39
"Love your neighbor as yourself".

Now, now . . .

Consider thy neighbor, not love thy neighbor.

 

[BreadOfLife]

Consider thy neighbor, not love thy neighbor.

WRONG.

Matt. 22:39
ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν.
“LOVE (agapeo) your neighbor as yourself.”

 

[MonoBiblical]

WRONG.

Matt. 22:39
ἀγαπήσεις τὸν πλησίον σου ὡς σεαυτόν.
“LOVE (agapeo) your neighbor as yourself.”

Exactly, consider i.e. agapeo (grk inflection approximate) yourself. Won't cha be my neighbor?

 

[BreadOfLife]

Exactly, consider i.e. agapeo (grk inflection approximate) yourself. Won't cha be my neighbor?

WRONG again.

No - it is the verb for of agape. which is defined as a "selfless and sacrificial love".
Matt. 22:39 uses this verb (agapao / ἀγαπήσεις), referring to a committed, volitional love rather than just affection

 

[MonoBiblical]

WRONG again.

No - it is the verb for of agape. which is defined as a "selfless and sacrificial love".
Matt. 22:39 uses this verb (agapao / ἀγαπήσεις), referring to a committed, volitional love rather than just affection

Selfless and sacrificial love it is not. You have to consider doing something for someone for it to be legit. It isn't love, it is what people love. Consider they opponents. Loving them is already impossible.

Consideration is not just affection, and fits perfectly with the word consideration not love. You can love feces, but you can't consider it.

You are proving to me that RC priests don't know anything about the verb ἀγαπήσεις. GOOD JOB

 

[BreadOfLife]

Selfless and sacrificial love it is not. You have to consider doing something for someone for it to be legit. It isn't love, it is what people love. Consider they opponents. Loving them is already impossible.

It's impossible for people like YOU who have no faith.
Jesus commands us to love our enemies.

Matt. 5:43-45
“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you, LOVE YOUR ENEMIES and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven.

What are YOU going to tell Him on Judgement Day??
"Sorry, but you gave us a stupid command"?

Good luck with that . . .
.

Consideration is not just affection, and fits perfectly with the word consideration not love. You can love feces, but you can't consider it.

You are proving to me that RC priests don't know anything about the verb ἀγαπήσεις. GOOD JOB

That doesn't matter because Agape is defined aas "love." - not "consideration".
You"ve proven yet again that the average Catholic priest know more than YOU . . .