How Does the Bible Define “Believe”?

[Lou Martuneac]

John 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.

To better understand how the word “believe” from Romans 10:9 cannot support the Lordship gospel, an initial look at John 3:36 is necessary.

The active word in this verse is“believe”. If a man will believe on the Son (of God), he will have eternal life. John MacArthur cites this verse in a footnote on p. 39 of The Gospel According to Jesus. The meaning of the verse, however, is distorted to favor the Lordship Salvation view. He cites the verse as follows: “He who does not obey the Son shall not see life. . . .” (The Gospel According to Jesus, p. 33.)

John MacArthur chooses John 3:36 to support the Lordship gospel by citing the second usage of the word “believeth” (from the KJV) as “obey,” but he does not cite the first half of John 3:36, which is the key to the context. The first usage of the word “believeth” in John 3:36 is identical to the word “believe” in the Romans 10:9 passage. While the word “believeth not” απειθων, (apeithon) is a different word than the first usage of the word “believeth,” and can mean “obey” in some cases, the context of John 3:36(a) demands unbelief, not disobedience. The correct meaning of “believeth not” (απειθων) is to refuse or withhold belief. Or, we could say that disobedience in itself is unbelief. Taking the whole context into consideration, the second part of the verse cannot be referring to a person’s actions, but rather to his unbelief.

In reference to John 3:36, Spiros T. Zodhiates defines Apeitheia thus:

“from the negative a (1), without, and peitho (3982), to persuade. Not to believe, to disbelieve implying disobedience; also to disobey as through unbelief.” (The Hebrew Greek Key Study Bible, p. 1,691.)

Obey is a legitimate translation of believe, but to render it thus in this verse does not clearly convey what sort of obedience is required.
(The above is excerpted from In Defense of the Gospel, pp. 165-166).

Lordship Salvation, as defined by Brother John MacArthur, fails the test of Scripture. LS conditions the gift of eternal salvation on a lost man's commitment to behavior. This is works and frustrates grace.

"I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain," (Gal. 2:21).

LM

 

[Havensdad]

I thought the name of this thread was about the biblical definition of Belief, not "another distortion of Macarthur's views"...:laugh:

What DOES the Bible say about belief?

Heb 11:8 By faith Abraham obeyed when he was called to go out to a place that he was to receive as an inheritance. And he went out, not knowing where he was going.

Faith equals obedience.

Jas 2:14 What good is it, my brothers, if someone says he has faith but does not have works? Can that faith save him?
(Greek construction: Nope, it cannot save Him. True faith is evidenced by works)

What does the Bible call those who SAY they have faith, but their actions do not back it up?

Mat 15:7 You hypocrites! Well did Isaiah prophesy of you, when he said:
Mat 15:8 "'This people honors me with their lips, but their heart is far from me

What is the faith of the "unfaithful" servant, who says He has faith, but the in truth He does not, as evidenced by His lack of works?

Mat 24:48 But if that wicked servant says to himself, 'My master is delayed,'
Mat 24:49 and begins to beat his fellow servants and eats and drinks with drunkards,
Mat 24:50 the master of that servant will come on a day when he does not expect him and at an hour he does not know
Mat 24:51 and will cut him in pieces and put him with the hypocrites. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.

J. Mac again, is spot on.

 

[pinoybaptist]

Dr. Martuneac should challenge Dr. MacArthur to an open, public discussion on what he perceives Dr. MacArthur's heresies, lies, untruths, and deceptions to be.
Because when all is said and done, I think that is what all this is about.
It is not about truth, it is about who is the better scholar.

I would hardly call someone I publicly accuse before brethren of being heretical and deliberately misleading "brother". That is hypocritical.

Addendum:

Oh, yeah, that'll be one big entertainment event for the mockers of Christianity and for the mockers of Christ. One big bread and circus of supposed preachers of the same Christ calling each other 'in error' and challenging each other.

 

[Lou Martuneac]

FWIW:

Three times I sent word to Dr. MacArthur that I woud like to discuss his LS teaching prior to and followng the release of my book. I was informed that he does not, he will not discuss his LS teaching outside of the print forum.

Ultimately, the best forum in which to air this kind of doctrinal dispute is through careful, biblically reasoned dialogue, preferably in written form. (The Gospel According to the Apostles, p. 14-15.)

I wanted to discuss his views in private and/or on line in threads under his on line articles. To reiterate: I was informed by MacArthur's staff that he will not particpate in any discussions about his on line LS articles.


LM

 

[Lou Martuneac]

As I noted above

John MacArthur chooses John 3:36 to support the Lordship gospel by citing the second usage of the word “believeth” (from the KJV) as “obey,” but he does not cite the first half of John 3:36, which is the key to the context. The first usage of the word “believeth” in John 3:36 is identical to the word “believe” in the Romans 10:9 passage. While the word “believeth not” απειθων, (apeithon) is a different word than the first usage of the word “believeth,” and can mean “obey” in some cases, the context of John 3:36(a) demands unbelief, not disobedience. The correct meaning of “believeth not” (απειθων) is to refuse or withhold belief. Or, we could say that disobedience in itself is unbelief. Taking the whole context into consideration, the second part of the verse cannot be referring to a person’s actions, but rather to his unbelief.

This is an example of how LS becomes a message based on behavior/obedience.


LM

 

[pinoybaptist]

FWIW:

Three times I sent word to Dr. MacArthur that I woud like to discuss his LS teaching prior to and followng the release of my book. I was informed that he does not, he will not discuss his LS teaching outside of the print forum.



I wanted to discuss his views in private and/or on line in threads under his on line articles. To reiterate: I was informed by MacArthur's staff that he will not particpate in any discussions about his on line LS articles.


LM

Then that should put an end to the matter, among brethren.
Now, I would like to know, please, do you consider Dr. MacArthur an unregenerate, hell-bound, blaspheming, heretic ?
If the answer is yes, then by all means go on with your "criticisms".
If not, then please know that when you publish your book if it has not been published, in criticism of Dr. MacArthur's doctrine, you, just like him, will gain a following among your readers, just like Calvin has a following among his readers, and just like Arminius has among his readers, and in future generations, if the Lord tarries his coming, then you and Dr. MacArthur, just like Calvin and Arminius, will be sources of conflict among those who name the name of Christ.

And for what, may I ask ?

In your case, do you hope to earn more "stars" for your crown ?
I think Dr. MacArthur has taken the gracious way out of your challenge, to decline it, to set as a policy not to take on challenges.
Gracious, I say, because right now, you may think you know everything, but if the challenge is accepted and you lose, then you not only lose face, but you lose reputation.

I am a Martial Arts enthusiast, have always been since I was a teenager, and so when I first learned the art, I was raring to put it to the test, and one day got the chance, when I was in a rough part of town with my sensei, and a gang attempted to mug us.

I expected he will show those idiots their mistake, but instead he tapped my shoulder and told me to run with him, away from the fight. I was sorely disappointed, but he told me we ran for the muggers' sake. We break boards and bricks with bare hands, all they can do is bloat their tummy with alcohol. I saw the point.

There is another Calvinist with a doctorate degree, who teaches that people should no longer stay in churches because churches have become apostates and the Holy Spirit is no longer saving people in those churches, and he speaks as if he has the sole authority on Bible interpretation, why is no one challenging him ? I've read some books challenging his doctrines but that's about all.

He has his own interpretation of the days of the latter rain. Why not challenge him ? Maybe he'll put up his dukes. Personally, I think therein lies the danger that the Bible says about not being too many teachers.

 

[Lou Martuneac]

Pinoy:

You continue a pattern of questioning motives. I'll leave the consequences of that with the Lord. (Matt. 7:1-2)

FYI, I did not "challange" Dr. MacArthur I asked for a chance to dialogue, which was refused through his staff. I do happen to know two preachers (NOT Hodges/Wilkin types) who did sit down with JM years ago. They came away convinced that JM had slipped into error and lost his balance on the biblical plan of salvation. There is a second example of a meeting like that with JM with the same result: Sorrow that he had gone into teaching a false gospel.

Why is this necessary to biblically deal with LS and the men who advoacte it? Because the Bible commands that we "mark" and "avoid" the teachers of "contrary" doctrine that is the cause of "divisions" and "offences" in the body of Christ (Rom. 16:17-18).

LS is a false gospel that corrupts the "simplicty that is in Christ," (2 Cor. 11:3). God forbid that any unsuspecting Christians be caught up in these egregious doctrinal errors.


LM

PS: You are not speaking to one who is unfamiliar with Martial Arts.