-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
John 3:16 interpetative translation
- Thread starter Van
- Start date
Phileo and agapao are not "basically synonymous." Agapao is used of God's love for the lost, and Phileo is used of God's love for the saved. In John 3:35 agapao love is presented as unconditionally trusting His Son, whereas in John 5:20 Phileo love is presented as a father teaching his child. Very different.
Non -responsive.
Is "agapao" conditional or unconditional.
Is the NT written in Koine Greek?
Do you claim "agapao" is not used to express human love?
Do you deny "agapao" and "phileo" have different aspects which are important to the message?
Do you think God's inspired choice of words was not intended to convey His nuanced message?
Johann!@#
Member
This is not edifying-here are examples I have given.
Mathew 5:46–Jesus says, “If you “agapao” those who “agapao” you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same?” You see, here the word “agapao” is used with reference to sinners in a profane way.
Same is true in the parallel passage of Luke 6:32. The idea of unselfish unconditional love does not hold here.
Luk 6:32 και ει αγαπατε τους αγαπωντας υμας ποια υμιν χαρις εστιν και γαρ οι αμαρτωλοι τους αγαπωντας αυτους αγαπωσιν
Luke 11:43–The term “agapao” is used in reference to the supreme seats in the synagogue with no meaning of “unconditional.”
John 3:19–Here it is recorded that men “agapao’d” the darkness rather than the light. Can this be an unconditional love?
John 12:43–Men “agapao’d” the approval of men rather than the approval of God. This is clearly not unselfish.
2 Tim. 4:10–Demas “agapao’d” the present age (referring to the worldly ungodly values). This cannot be the traditionally godly love.
1 John 2:15–The apostle tells us that we should not “agapao” the world. Here it is again a profane/worldly kind of love.
2 Peter 2:15–Even Balaam and the false prophets “agapao” the wages of unrighteousness. Here the word “agapao” is used with reference to false prophets.
The same interchangeability is also true of the word “phileo” throughout the New Testament. A few examples will suffice:
John 5:20–The Father “phileo” the Son. Here the intra-Trinitarian love between the members of the trinity is described as “phileo.”
John 16:27–The Father “phileo” the disciples who “phileo” God. God’s love here is a “phileo” love in both directions.
1 Corinthians 16:22– Anyone who does not “phileo” Jesus is acursed!
Revelation 3:19–The risen Christ loves His disciples with a “phileo” love.
The two words are also used interchangeably together also. Here a few examples:
As I mentioned above, Luke 11:43 says that the Pharisees would “agapao” the chief seats in the synagogue, while Matthew 23:6 says that they “phileo” those places of honor; moreover, the Pharisees “phileo’d” to be seen praying on street corners (Matthew 6:5). Therefore both words have been used with reference to these seats of power.
God loves Jesus with both kinds of love. In John 3:35 and 15:9, says that the Father loves Him, the word used is the verb “agapao”. Yet John 5:20 speaks of the Father’s “phileo” love for the Son.
In John 11:5 we are told that Jesus “agapao’d” Lazarus, yet a few verses later in the same chapter (11:36) we are told that He “phileo’d” Lazarus.
In John 17:23, the Father loves the disciples with “agapao” love; but in John 16:27, Jesus tells the disciples that the Father loves them with “phileo” love.
In John 20:2 it is written that John is the disciple whom Jesus phileo’d, and just a few verses later, in 21:20 John calls himself the disciple whom Jesus agapao’d.
Therefore, the word “phileo” can be seen in contexts which “agapao” would be expected to occur if the traditional definitions are correct. However, the use of “phileo” in these contexts renders such traditional views as unlikely at least and erroneous at best.
What is this debate about? "Basically synonymous" Why don't you look up the Scripture references and see for yourself?
We need to come out of our Western mindset and reread the Scriptures with an Eastern lens-not being facetious.
Shalom Achi
Johann.
Non-responsive
Is "agapao" conditional or unconditional. Pick a side
Is the NT written in Koine Greek? Answer the question.
Do you claim "agapao" is not used to express human love? A Yes or No is needed.
Do you deny "agapao" and "phileo" have different aspects which are important to the message? A yes or no is needed.
Do you think God's inspired choice of words was not intended to convey His nuanced message? A yes or no is needed.
I have rebutted all the false claims and supplied actual specific definitions for agapao and phileo.
Johann!@#
Member
I think it is a serious claim to say-"I have rebutted all the false claims and supplied actual specific definitions for agapao and phileo."
To be honest-you have rebutted nothing and I still hold my position-that Phileo and Agape is basically
synonymous.
ahavah, chesed, and rachamim. Do a basic search on these words, their etymologies etc. Also the Morphologies and Syntax.
I am well aware of the meaning of these words in Dictionaries and Lexicons yet gave you many Scripture references that UNBELIEVERS agapao-ed-how do you reconcile that?
What do you mean by "non-responsive?" I have given you crystal clear examples-from Scripture-not dictionaries-.
LOVE (agapē)
There are several words translated into English as "love" from Koinē Greek.
philia - devoted friendship
storgē- strong, loyal family love (cf. Rom. 12:10)
eros - sexual love
mania - obsessive love
lodos - playful love
pragma - long term love
agapē -
Agapē was a rarely used root in classical Greek. The NT
authors took this known but unused term and filled it with new meaning. It came to denote God's self-giving, no-strings-attached, covenant love. It is theologically parallel to the Hebrew hesed (see SPECIAL TOPIC: LOVINGKINDNESS).
The Septuagint (LXX) chose agapē to translate several Hebrew words for "love." The LXX was the Bible for the early church. This root becomes the one used for theological discussion. Paul highlights this term in his writings. It was the love of God and Christ which was the main theological assertion of all his theology. His beautiful discussion on "love" in 1 Corinthians 13 is a classic!
God's love for mankind is fully seen in His sending Jesus (cf. John 3:16; Rom. 5:8; 2 Cor. 5:21). This love is mandated in the Great Commission of the early church (cf. Matt. 28:18-20; Luke 24:46-47; Acts 1:8). The letter of 1 John fully developes this evangelistic mandate into the life of the local church (esp. 1 John 4).
Self-giving love becomes the marker of true, mature Christianity. The influence of the Fall (cf Genesis 3) is fully reversed in NT salvation.
LOVINGKINDNESS (hesed)
This term hesed (BDB 338 I, KB 336 II) has a wide semantic field.
Used in connection to human beings
kindness to fellow men (e.g., 1 Sam. 20:14; 2 Sam. 16:17; 2 Chr. 24:22; Job 6:14; Ps. 141:5; Pro. 19:22; 20:6)
kindness toward the poor and needy (e.g., Micah 6:8)
affection of Israel toward YHWH (cf. Jer. 2:2; Hos. 6:4,6)
the temporary beauty of a wild flower (cf. Isa. 40:6)
Used in connection to God
covenant loyalty and love
"in redemption from enemies and troubles" (e.g., Gen. 19:19; 39:21; Exod. 15:13; Ps. 31:16; 32:10; 33:18,22; 36:7,10; 42:8; 44:26; 66:20; 85:7; 90:14; 94:18; 107:8,15,21,31; 109:21-22; 143:8,12; Jer. 31:3; Ezra 7:28; 9:9)
"in preservation of life from death" (e.g., Job 10:12; Ps. 6:4-5; 86:13)
"in quickening of spiritual life" (e.g., Ps. 119:41,76,88,124,149,159)
"in redemption from sin" (cf. Ps. 25:7; 51:1; 130:7-8)
"in keeping the covenants" (e.g., Deut. 7:9,12; 2 Chr. 6:14; Neh. 1:5; 9:32; Dan. 9:4; Mic. 7:20)
describes a divine attribute (e.g., Exod. 34:6; Ps. 86:15; 103:8; Neh. 9:17; Joel 2:13; Jonah 4:2; Micah 7:20; see SPECIAL TOPIC: CHARACTERISTICS OF ISRAEL'S GOD, OT)
kindness of God
"abundant" (e.g., Num. 14:18; Neh. 9:17; Ps. 86:5; 103:8; 145:8; Joel 2:13; Jer. 4:2)
"great in extent" (e.g., Exod. 20:6; Deut. 5:10; 7:9)
"everlasting" (e.g., 1 Chr. 16:34,41; 2 Chr. 5:13; 7:3,6; 20:21; Ezra 3:11; Ps. 100:5; 106:1; 107:1; 118:1,2,3,4,29; 136:1-26; 138:8; Jer. 33:11)
like a stronghold (e.g., Ps. 59:17)
related to God's power (e.g., Ps. 62:11c-12a)
deeds of kindness (e.g., 2 Chr. 6:42; Ps. 89:2; Isa. 55:3; 63:7; Lam. 3:22)
This word is translated many ways in English translations. I think the best summary definition would be "God's no-strings-attached covenant loyalty." In this sense, it is parallel to the NT term "love" (agapaō). God is faithful and loving because of who He is!
Thus says one Baptist to another Baptist.
J.
Sir, you did not answer my questions. Therefore we have nothing to discuss.
"Phileo and agapao are not "basically synonymous." Agapao is used of God's love for the lost, and Phileo is used of God's love for the saved. In John 3:35 agapao love is presented as unconditionally trusting His Son, whereas in John 5:20 Phileo love is presented as a father teaching his child. Very different.
Here is how "agopeo" is used in John 3:19:
With an accusative of the thing ἀγαπάω denotes to take pleasure in the thing, prize it above other things, be unwilling to abandon it or do without it: δικαιοσύνην, Hebrews 1:9 (i. e. steadfastly to cleave to); τήν δόξαν, John 12:43; τήν πρωτοκαθεδρίαν, Luke 11:43; τό σκότος; and τό φῶς, John 3:19;
So the meaning in John 3:19 s not "God's kind of love or perfect, sacrificial, unconditional love.: Thus when Scripture tells us, believers, to love (agapao) one another, we must be motivated by humility, rather than the pride that motivates the lovers of darkness.
Returning to topic.
Baptists are split on the specifics of John 3:16. When I was young, and the "Bible" was the KJV, we memorized the verse this way: For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, so that whosoever believes in Him shall not perish but have everlasting life.
1) The first issue is that some thought the verse was saying how much God loved. Now scholars translate the verse to indicate the idea is how or in what manner God loved.
2) Next, the translation of Kosmos (G2889) as world is ambiguous. The Greek word refers to an interrelated system, such as a planet or a society. Contextually, in this verse "kosmos" refers to fallen humanity.
3) Next the idea of "give" certainly indicates to provide or make available for use. Looking a little deeper the idea is that the gift would provide a blessing (shall not perish).
4) "Only begotten" is a mistranslation of "monogenes" and should be translated "one of a kind," unique" or "uniquely divine." Jesus is not God's only Son, as Adam was also the son of God, and every born anew believer is also a child of God. However Jesus was one of a kind, uniquely divine, God incarnate.
5) "Whosoever believes" refers to an undetermined segment of fallen humanity, not a preselected segment.
6) In Him refers to those who spiritually enter into Christ's spiritual body, as the preposition translated "in" means "into." Since humanity is not able to change their spiritual location (going from the realm of darkness into the marvelous light of God's kingdom) "into" refers to God crediting the person's faith as "righteous faith" and on that basis transferring the person into Christ.
7) Once placed within Christ, the person is made (eternally) alive together with Christ.
When these observations are addressed, the resulting interpretive translation reads:
God loved humanity in this way, He gave is uniquely divine Son so that everyone believing into Him will not perish but have everlasting life.
Here is how "agopeo" is used in John 3:19:
With an accusative of the thing ἀγαπάω denotes to take pleasure in the thing, prize it above other things, be unwilling to abandon it or do without it: δικαιοσύνην, Hebrews 1:9 (i. e. steadfastly to cleave to); τήν δόξαν, John 12:43; τήν πρωτοκαθεδρίαν, Luke 11:43; τό σκότος; and τό φῶς, John 3:19;
So the meaning in John 3:19 s not "God's kind of love or perfect, sacrificial, unconditional love.: Thus when Scripture tells us, believers, to love (agapao) one another, we must be motivated by humility, rather than the pride that motivates the lovers of darkness.
Returning to topic.
Baptists are split on the specifics of John 3:16. When I was young, and the "Bible" was the KJV, we memorized the verse this way: For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, so that whosoever believes in Him shall not perish but have everlasting life.
1) The first issue is that some thought the verse was saying how much God loved. Now scholars translate the verse to indicate the idea is how or in what manner God loved.
2) Next, the translation of Kosmos (G2889) as world is ambiguous. The Greek word refers to an interrelated system, such as a planet or a society. Contextually, in this verse "kosmos" refers to fallen humanity.
3) Next the idea of "give" certainly indicates to provide or make available for use. Looking a little deeper the idea is that the gift would provide a blessing (shall not perish).
4) "Only begotten" is a mistranslation of "monogenes" and should be translated "one of a kind," unique" or "uniquely divine." Jesus is not God's only Son, as Adam was also the son of God, and every born anew believer is also a child of God. However Jesus was one of a kind, uniquely divine, God incarnate.
5) "Whosoever believes" refers to an undetermined segment of fallen humanity, not a preselected segment.
6) In Him refers to those who spiritually enter into Christ's spiritual body, as the preposition translated "in" means "into." Since humanity is not able to change their spiritual location (going from the realm of darkness into the marvelous light of God's kingdom) "into" refers to God crediting the person's faith as "righteous faith" and on that basis transferring the person into Christ.
7) Once placed within Christ, the person is made (eternally) alive together with Christ.
When these observations are addressed, the resulting interpretive translation reads:
God loved humanity in this way, He gave is uniquely divine Son so that everyone believing into Him will not perish but have everlasting life.
Last edited:
24 But he answered and said, I was not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Mt 15
For God so loved His arrangement that He gave His only begotten Son, so that every one who is believing in him shall not perish in the wrath soon to come but have everlasting life.
John 3:16 is a statement of fact, NOT an invitation.
Acts Of The Apostles 2:40
Acts Of The Apostles 3:23
Revelation 18:4
Luke 13:1-5
For God so loved His arrangement that He gave His only begotten Son, so that every one who is believing in him shall not perish in the wrath soon to come but have everlasting life.
John 3:16 is a statement of fact, NOT an invitation.
Acts Of The Apostles 2:40
Acts Of The Apostles 3:23
Revelation 18:4
Luke 13:1-5
Last edited:
1) I believe John 3:16 offers an invitation to receive the reconciliation provided by Christ Jesus.
2) God's love is said to be for humanity, as it is humanity that will perish without the gift of His Son.
3) Everyone who believes upon or on or toward or in His Son is not saved. Demons believe, so did the second and third soils of Matthew 13. Only those whose belief is credited as righteousness are saved.
4) Yes, without the gift of Christ, many of humanity are destined to perish in the lake of fire. However those few transferred into Christ will have everlasting life.
God loved humanity in this way, He gave is uniquely divine Son so that everyone believing into Him will not perish but have everlasting life.
How many times must this be explained????
Who determines "whoever calls on the name?" The person calling or God???? The answer, my friends is not blowing in the wind, it is God alone. Full stop!!!!!
Once again, a refusal to address the obvious.Did any say Jesus was sent "only" to the lost sheep of the house of Israel? Nope
Did anyone say every one believing does not refer to believing humanity? Nope
Did anyone say John 3:16 is not a statement of fact AND an invitation?????? :Nope
Did anyone say what Acts 2:40 has to do with the topic? Nope
Did anyone say what Acts 32:23 has to do with the topic? Nope
Did anyone says what Rev. 13:4 or Luke 13:1-5 has to do with the topic.
Anyone can cite the bible and imply it agrees it supports bogus views. Duh
God loved humanity in this way, He gave is uniquely divine Son so that everyone believing into Him will not perish but have everlasting life.
Note, folks, no reference for the false claim. Jesus was sent first to the Jews, but then to the Gentiles. So the false claim Jesus was sent only to the house of Israel, the Jews, is unbiblical obfuscation.
What Jesus says in Matthew 15:24 is was sent first only to the Jews, but elsewhere Jesus says He was sent to the Gentiles. If Jesus was sent "only" to the Jews, the Jesus sinned in verse 28 where He ministered to the Gentiles.
When Jesus died, He became the means of salvation not only for Jewish believers, but also for the whole of humanity which includes Gentiles. 1 John 2:2
Last edited:
Johann!@#
Member
Primarily:
Galatians 1:15-17
Also:
Acts Of The Apostles 11:7
Important to remember:
Galatians 2:9
Last edited:
24 But he answered and said, I was not sent but unto the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Mt 15
Gill:
"...as a priest, or as a Saviour and Redeemer, he was sent to make satisfaction and atonement for the sins of all God's elect, and to obtain eternal redemption and salvation for all of them, whether Jews or Gentiles; but as a prophet, in the discharge of his own personal ministry, he was sent by his Father only to the Jews; he was the "minister of the circumcision", Romans 15:8..."
Gill:
"...as a priest, or as a Saviour and Redeemer, he was sent to make satisfaction and atonement for the sins of all God's elect, and to obtain eternal redemption and salvation for all of them, whether Jews or Gentiles; but as a prophet, in the discharge of his own personal ministry, he was sent by his Father only to the Jews; he was the "minister of the circumcision", Romans 15:8..."
Johann!@#
Member
15:24 "I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel"
Remember Jesus helped other Gentiles, but within the geographical boundaries of the Promised Land. If Jesus had begun a healing ministry in a Gentile land, He would have been rejected by the Jewish populous in general because of their prejudices. The phrase "lost sheep of the house of Israel" shows the spiritual condition of the Jewish people (cf. Matt. 10:6; 9:36).
The "shepherding" imagery began in Num. 27:17 (cf. Zech. 10:2). Psalm 23; 78:52; Isa. 40:11; Jer. 31:10 depict YHWH as the Shepherd of Israel. This imagery becomes Messianic in Micah 5:2; Zech. 11:4-17; and John 10:1-10. The bad shepherds are contrasted with the good shepherd in Ezekiel 34.
Sheep needed constant care and protection. They were helpless, defenseless, and easily influenced animals! Calling God's people sheep is not a compliment, but a spiritual reality!
Could I make one more comment on the word "only"! Jesus helped this needy Gentile, as He did several other Gentiles. These are foreshadowings of His worldwide goal (cf. Matt. 28:18-20; Luke 24:46-47; Acts 1:8). The Messiah came for all humans made in God's image (cf. Gen. 1:26-27). Genesis 3:15 is not a promise to Israel, but to humans. The call of Abraham included a concern for Gentiles (cf. Gen. 12:3). The giving of the law on Mt. Sinai included God's concern for the world (cf. Exod. 19:5)!
15:26 "dogs" This is the only use of this term in the NT. Its harshness is diminished by the fact that it is diminutive in form, "puppies" (JB, "house-dogs"). The Jews called the Gentiles "dogs." This dialogue was intended to help the disciples overcome their prejudice against Gentiles. Jesus recognized and publicly affirmed that her faith was great (cf. Matt. 15:28)!
15:27 "crumbs" People often used bread to wipe their hands after eating.
15:28 "O woman, your faith is great" Jesus complimented Gentiles several times (cf. Matt. 8:10). This was to:
show His love for Gentiles
stimulate the disciples' global worldview