John 3:16 and Salvation

DPT you are kind of hung up on Joey Faust aren't you.

Anyway the Bible talks about the kingdom in several placements, but why would you want me to waste my time to show you something that you know is not true?

But just for kicks and giggles you can see the septenary arrangement of Scripture set for in Genesis chapter 1 and into chapter 2. God is at work again six days (six thousand years as per II Peter 3:8) and He will rest again on the seventh day (the seventh 1,000-year period - which is the coming kingdom of Christ).

That's just a very simple look at it. Now are you going to let Scripture be Scripture or are you going to continue to believe in your false doctrine?

 

J.J.

Please show me a verse in the Bible saying lingdom is a thousand years.

Creation in six days of Genesis 1 & 2 have do nothing with millennial. I heard often premills' logical or theory saying one day equals a thousand years, 6 days equal six thousand years. That is unbiblical. I believe six days of creation was literal exactly 6 days not six thousands or million years according evoluntionism.

2 Peter 3:8 or 9 have do nothing with millennial. Premills are misunderstand or misinterpreting what Apostle Peter was talking about.

Apostle Peter's point was talk about scoffers saying Lord could come anytime in their lifetime. Many centuries ago, they were expecting Lord might come in their lifetime. But, many years passed, all of them died. For many centuries passed, scoffers always saying, the rumour of second coming is a old story, never happen, amnd they make fun on Christians and pastors, also prophets(O.T. prophets include Noah), think they are telling fanasty story.

A thousand years in our sight seem it is TOOOOOOOO Long time. But, in the Lord's sight, a thousand years is TOOOOOOOO short time like as one day!

Understand?

Day of the Lord shall come like as THIEF, it is the picture that His coming shall not be delay or slow, but speedily and quickly such as Rev. 22:20 is my favorite verse.

Same picture as the flood came and took them away so quick.

See?

In Christ
Rev. 22:20 -Amen!

 

I thought you were going to present us with an argument why the kingdom is not 1000 years as is clearly stated in the book of Revelation. Anyone can say 'no you don't get it.'

 

Nicodemus thought as all the Jews did that salvation was due them because they were Jews and descendents of Abraham. They were looking for the Messiah to liberate them from their physical bondage. They were looking for the Kingdom of God to begin.

The Jews were not looking for the "Suffering Servant"(Isaiah 53) but a victorious King. Little did they understand what suffering must be had to obtain victory.

Jesus tells this Pharisee "You must be born again to see the kingdom of God". The kingdom of God is more literally translated the "Rule of God". The nature of Gods rule is both present and future. I believe some good intentioned folks tend to emphisize one or the other and never see it in a balanced way. Jesus said to see both the present kingdom and the future kingdom you must be born again.

The phrase "Born Again" is becoming more and more taboo, but is a correct and biblical term as it is used by Jesus himself. This taboo term is intended by Christ to communicate that one must have a relationship with God to see the both present rule and future rule of God.

When we get to v. 16 we see that Jesus clarifys to Nicodemus just what it is to be born again. We must believe in him. This is not speaking to those who are already saved as some would have you to believe. It is speaking to a lost pharisee who until that moment did not beleive in him. While Nicodemus believed Jesus was sent by God he did not have the appropriate understanding of just what it was that Christ came to do for him.

Believeing in him, on him, in his name are all phrases that communicate belief that Christ is the Son of God, came to die on the cross, paid our sin debt when we could not. This entire passage is about salvation clearly.

 

Just how do you justify this contradiction with Acts 16:31, then?

 

so that's how you would witness to someone. that's what you would say to someone eh?

would you explain what sin is?

in fact. i'll start a diff. thread on that. right now is fireworks for Canada Day. i love fireworks.

 

How do you figure it's taboo? I hear people using it and misusing it all the time.

Although it technically doesn't appear in John 3:3, except by some mens' interpretation. The translation is "born from above". "Born again" doesn't appeear here.

 

I don't believe a sermon on sin is necessary. The person who led me to the Lord poiinted out the fact that I was a sinner. I didn't need to be convinced. I knew that fact already. As a Catholic, why do you think I would be going to confession every week?

 

well straightandnarrow... go to the first page here - and read my posts #7 and #10 - explains it rather nice. not as clear for its a long topic. which im going to start sunday hopefully.

 

The greek word in John 3:3 is Strongs number 509 Anothen- from above; by analogy from the first; by implication anew:- from above, again, from the begining (very first),the top.

In v. 4 Nicodemus asks How can a man enter into his mothers womb a second time and be born?

Nicodemus disagrees with you.

 

I just showed you and you dismissed it right off the bat. Why do you want me to waste any more of my time to show you something you are not going to be believe anyway?"

First of all the six days (literal 24-hour days) were days of restoration, not creation. Now there was some creation that went on, but it had a restorative purpose.

And those that believe that way would be incorrect as well. The six days are a literal 24-hour day. And the seventh day as well.

No it doesn't have anything to do with the millenium per se, but what it does give you is the way God sees time as it relates to this planet. A 1,000 years is just one day to God.

That is a secondary application that you can draw from that verse, but it is not the primary use of that verse. If there is no direct correlation between a day and a thousand years then specific time stamps in the OT and especially in the Gospel of John lose all meaning.

Again the same question could be asked of you, but by your post again you show that you clearly don't, nor do you want to.

Absolutely. Some Christians are going to be caught unaware when He calls the church home, because they weren't watching and waiting.

Bottom line is Scripture is arranged in a septenary arrangement whether one wants to believe it or not is on them. But if one would believe it the Scriptures would make much more sense.

God is at work for six days (six thousand years) to restore a ruined creation just as He did in the beginning, so He is doing now in restoring mankind. Just as He rested a day in the beginning, so He will rest a day (a thousand years) in the future.

Do you think that this is just mere coincidence that all this lines up? I think not. God's Scriptures are ABSOLUTELY AMAZING!!!

 

Rev. Mitchell you treat Nicodemus like most of the rest of Christendom as he was an unsaved person. However Nicodemus had already experienced the grace of God through faith and was therefore a spiritually saved individual.

Nicodemus was questioning this idea of the kingdom. The kingdom message and the eternal salvation message are two distinct messages, and we must keep them separate if we are to understand Scripture.

 

Yea I have heard you say the Jews were already saved. Id like to see your scriptual reference for that. As for the kingdom issue I side with all of Christendom as you put it. The kingdom of God is both present and future and encompasses all of the fellowship with God in its present form and future.

 

Rev. Mitchell they were saved the same way any OT person was saved by grace through faith.

Once again what is grace? It is God doing for man what He requires of man and then giving him credit as if he did it himself.

What is faith? It is believing what God has said about a matter.

So what did God do on their behalf? He allowed the death and shed blood of animals to cover their sins because it pointed to the death and shed blood of the Lamb of God that was coming (at least in a physical sense).

They believed what God had said about the matter and therefore they were made alive spiritually.

The NT is the gospel accounts and through a good chunk of Acts is dealing with spiritually alive (saved) individuals.

Again the kingdom message is not the same message as eternal salvation.

The kingdom is present in that Christ is gathering together a group of faithful believers that will rule and reign with Him when the kingdom rule does become a reality. Christ is not acting as King yet even though He is the Annointed One.

 

John 3:16 as a witnessing tool

I remember hearing a story many years ago. Truth or fiction, I caanot say:

It seems an illiterate man became a Christian, and wanted to teach a Sunday School class. He was told by the pastor that he had to "round up" his own students, but that he could then teach them. A couple of weeks later, he started teaching a class full of the meanest, most disgusting boys you could imagine.

Over the next few weeks, these boys began to accept Jesus as their Savior and to become what we might call upstanding young men! The pastor, curious to see what the illiterate man was doing to teach these boys, went to the class one Sunday morning. The man, who could still not read his own Bible, was quoting John 3:16, over and over again. As he cried and quoted the verse, the boys began to listen to the greatest, shortest gospel ever written. The pastor, too, began to cry for joy.

Oh, that all of our teachers had such a heart for Jesus!

:tear: :tongue3: :tear: :tongue3:

Bill

 

That doesnt give me scriptual reference for the idea that Nicodemus was saved. His conversation with Jesus leads me to believe other wise. Some Jews Im sure were saved but not automatically based on their descendentsy from Abraham as the pharisees taught.

 

If you are looking for a Scripture that says Nicodemus was a saved man you aren't going to find one. God expects us to reason and understand context without having to have everything spelled out to us.

Nicodemus was saved by grace through faith, as I am sure he was a participant in the animal sacrifices at least in believing in what God said about them.

Jesus was talking about the kingdom, which is a spiritual message that spiritually dead (unsaved) people couldn't even comprehend. It would have been foolish to even explain it to them without their spiritual birth having already taken place. And this was something that Jesus expected Nicodemus to have already recognized. How could Jesus have had that expectation if Nicodemus was spiritually dead? He couldn't. He would have been expecting something that was an impossibility.

How could it lead you to believe otherwise? The only reference that we have of any kind of death and shed blood was the story of the lifting up of the serpent in the wilderness, which was "after" the nation had experienced salvation from Egypt (which is the picture of eternal salvation).

There is nothing in the context that gives the picture of Jesus discussing eternal salvation. It's just not there.