JOHN 3:16, It's an eternal security text, not a way to get salvation.

[tyndale1946]

Pastor Larry said:

The debt must be paid, either by you or by Christ.

... I'm so thankful Jesus Christ paid my debt because God doesn't accept polluted sacrifices... Brother Glen

 

[tyndale1946]

Why do some brethren on here worship a God of chance instead of a God of purpose?... God purposed to save his people and he did just that... without their help... without their acceptance and rejection of what was done. Elect according to the foreknowledge of God... He planned it... purposed it... willed it... and accomplished it... and in his Son Jesus Christ finished it!... IT IS FINISHED!... What was finished?... All the Father gave him in eternity before Adam and Eve were created... The world... the elect... the believeth!... Brother Glen

 

[Pastor Larry]

Originally posted by tyndale1946:
Pastor Larry said: </font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />The debt must be paid, either by you or by Christ.

... I'm so thankful Jesus Christ paid my debt because God doesn't accept polluted sacrifices... Brother Glen

</font>[/QUOTE]I certainly agree. Hell is eternal because we are not able to make a sufficient payment. Jesus paid it for us, taking our place, as Peter says "The Just for the unjust."

 

[Daniel David]

Tyndale, it is even more amazing that the primitives base an entire doctrine over the mistranslation of the KJV. Can you read greek? Do you understand greek? Clearly, the phrase is "faith in Jesus". That is what saves. Are you saying that Jesus must believe in a person in order for them to be saved? So, faith alone is really a point for Jesus and not us? Please...

 

[changed_like_saul]

Brethren,

Wow!!!

First, let me say this, the word "world" in John 3:16 is just what one of the posters said. In the Greek the word is KOSMOS. By defimition kosmos means "orderly arrangement". Now, it can not mean everyone that has ever lived and evryone that will live. I believe it is more narrow than that. I believe scripture teaches this word "world" to be specific. To prove it, I will use the first word of John 3:16. That word is FOR. It could also be translated as therefore, so we need to know what it's there for

.

Christ is saying I'm about to summarize somthing I've already said. Chirst just finished saying in

John 3:14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:

"as Moses" then "even so"

How about this:

"just like Moses"..."same thing must"

Or this:

"the same reason Moses"..."is the same reason must"

Christ is saying, for the exact same reason Moses lifted up the serpent, is the exact same reason the Son of man be lifted up.

Understand the picture!!! Old Testament. God's people are the Jews/Hebrews, all of them and not the whole world, just the Hebrews.

Remember the story. They, the people, had murmured against God and Moses. Numbers 21:6 And the LORD sent fiery serpents among the people, and they bit the people; and much people of Israel died.

Furthermore, in verse 8 And the LORD said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live.

In verse 6, it tell us much peopple of Israel died. Question, even though "much people" died. Those who died are they still Israelites? Yes, just because they are dead, that does not mean they loose their identity. Now, can any of those Israelites which had died, could they look upon the raised up serpent and it have an effect on them? No!! Why, because they are dead. They could do nothing. One could have propped up a corpse, of one of those dead Israelites, pealed his eyes open and made the corpse's eye point in the direction of the serpent, but could not make him see it, because the corpse has no life. Thererfore did the raised up serpent do anyhtiong for those Israelites? No!!!

How about those that had not been bitten? Could they look upon the rasied serpent and it have any effect upon them? No, because they had not been bitten.

Now, those that were bitten, scriture says "any" that had been bitten and looked would live. Why, because they knew their condition. They new they had been bitten. They new their condition and that death was soon at hand.

So, you see, only the people who know there condition, know they need a savior. Only those who have felt the sting of their on sin burning in their body can seek God and Christ for relief. The dead need nothing for they are dead. Sometimes some may appear to have life, but it is false. But those who have felt the sting of their sin will have the ability to look and the burden of the sting be taken away by the finished work of Jesus Christ.

Therefore, based on Christ's on words the word "world" is not all inclusive but limited to those who are aware of the burden of their sins.

Remember, John 3:14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, {B]even so must{/B]{/I] the Son of man be lifted up:

Changed like Saul,

Elder Chris

 

[tyndale1946]

Preachtheword said:

Tyndale, it is even more amazing that the primitives base an entire doctrine over the mistranslation of the KJV. Can you read greek? Do you understand greek?

No I don't read Greek or understand Greek and a thousand other languages either. The first thing you do is start attacking the KJV which I have not stooped to doing with the one you read. Read the NIV on the John 3:16 as this should fit your doctrine... Instead of believeth which is used in the KJV now it is changed to will believe... One is future the other is past. Since my Bible starts with In the beginning God I'll stick with the past. The Faith OF Jesus Christ makes the Faith IN Jesus Christ a reality. The Primitive brethren have never changed the written word to suit their doctrine as some do! We do not have a flip flop belief and as one brother said on here about me personally. Brother Glen I believe you are in error but I will say one thing about you, you are consistant. Hey maybe I should buy a Greek Bible?... Nah... but then again what do my Primitive brethen think I should do? Do they own one?... It hasn't changed our doctrine... Has it helped those who do?... What benefit is their owning one? I do have a Strongs Concordance I used as a reference for 35 years... Brother Glen

[ June 04, 2002, 03:17 PM: Message edited by: tyndale1946 ]

 

[Nelson]

Originally posted by changed_like_saul: ...let me say this, the word "world" in John 3:16...can not mean everyone that has ever lived and everyone that will live. I believe it is more narrow than that. I believe scripture teaches this word "world" to be specific. To prove it, I will use the first word of John 3:16. That word is FOR...Christ is saying I'm about to summarize somthing I've already said. Christ just finished saying in John 3:14 And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up...

It seems to me that such an interpretation as you suggest above goes beyond the apostle's intent in writing it.

All Jesus is simply stating, in answer to Nicodemus' question, "How?" is for one to be "born of the Spirit," the Son of man would need to die on the Cross. Jesus' answer to Nicodemus' question has nothing to do with a certain number of particular individuals elected for salvation and everything to do with the means by which one is "born of the Spirit" and, as a result, enters the Kingdom of Heaven.

In verse 15, Jesus explains why he must be lifted up: "so (i.e. in order) that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life." Note the "whoever." Does Jesus mean "whoever" from among the elect, which would in turn imply the possibility that some of the elect may not believe?

As I see it, the "whoever" comprehends everyone and anyone as a sinner.

I wholeheartedly agree that "only the people who know their condition, know they need a savior," but that fact does not limit the salvific intent of Jesus' death on the Cross to embrace all of humanity; neither does it mean that those who know they need a savior will believe in the Savior.

[ June 06, 2002, 03:16 PM: Message edited by: Nelson ]

 

[ScottEmerson]

Let's revisit John 3:16. Let's decide on whom the burden of proof lies!

Noman F. Douty in his book, "The Death of Christ," states thse works:

Trench's Synonyms of the New Testament
Kittel's Theological Dictionary of the New Testament
Vine's Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words
Vincent's Word Studies in the New Testament
Robinson's A Greek and English Lexicon of the New Testament
Souter's Pocket Lexicon of the Greek New Testament
Thayer's Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament
Ardnt-Gingrich's A Greek-English Lexicon of the NEw Testament
Abbott-Smith's Manual Greek Lexicon of the NEw Testament
The NEw Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge
Hastings' Bible Dictionary and Dictionary of the Apostolic Church
the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
Tasker's New Bible Dictionary
Harrison in Baker's Dictionary of Theology
John Davis in his Dictionary of the BIble (both harrison and Davis list John 3:16 as referring to mankind, though both are Presbyterians)

Then Douty says,

"But amid all the divisions and sub-divisions listed, the word for world is never said to denote "the elect." These lexicons know nothing of such a use of kosmos in the New Testament, under which to tabulate John 1:29, 3:16-18; 4:42; 6:33, 51; 12:47; 14:31; 16:-8-11; 17-21, 23; II Corinthians 5:19; John 2:2; and 4:14."

He goes on to say,

"All of this is disastrous for advocates of Limited atonement. They have ventured to set themselves above the combined scholarship of lexicons, encyclopedias and dictionaries when they ascribe a different meaning of the word kosmos which will support their theological system."

In fact, I challenge anyone to find any kind of use in ancient or koine Greek outside the NT where "kosoms" is translated "the elect."

Guess what? Scholars haven't found such use yet.

 

[Nelson]

Originally posted by ScottEmerson: Let's revisit John 3:16. Let's decide on whom the burden of proof lies!

Noman F. Douty in his book, "The Death of Christ," states thse works...

Good point. Thanks for the references. I agree that world is not limited to the "elect."

[ June 05, 2002, 08:54 AM: Message edited by: Nelson ]

 

[russell55]

In fact, I challenge anyone to find any kind of use in ancient or koine Greek outside the NT where "kosoms" is translated "the elect."

And who actually translates "kosmos" as "elect"? What people do say is that it means "people throughout the world" (a similar definition can probably be found in most of those lexicons, dictionaries, etc.), rather than every single person in the world, and that given what other scriptures say, these "people throughout the world" are, in actual fact, the elect.

I actually think that in this verse, "kosmos" may very well mean "mankind in general", but not necessarily "every single individual human being who has ever lived". God has a sort of general love for mankind--he is benevolent toward the human race. It is a benevolent act toward mankind in general to make a means by which men can be saved.

I don't think John 3:16 is a verse than needs to be "explained away" by those who hold to limited atonement. It fits perfectly within the particular redemption framework just exactly as it reads.

 

[SolaScriptura]

What I was calling blasphemy was the idea that we could be saved by dying for ourselves, which a MERE substitutional understanding would lead to.

Why are all English translation so aweful? Not one translation translates anti "in place of" in Mt 20:28 - that's ridiculous.

 

[ScottEmerson]

Originally posted by SolaScriptura:
What I was calling blasphemy was the idea that we could be saved by dying for ourselves, which a MERE substitutional understanding would lead to.

Why are all English translation so aweful? Not one translation translates anti "in place of" in Mt 20:28 - that's ridiculous.

I think the reason they translate it "for," is that the word "huper" in Greek implies substitution muhc better than anti. Since the main meaning for anti is for (such as eye for [anti] an eye and so on), they use for, as to not give their own possible bias in the text. To translate anti as "in place of" could very well be seen as a translator adding in his or her own interpretation of Christ's death as substitutionary.

 

[russell55]

Why are all English translation so aweful? Not one translation translates anti "in place of" in Mt 20:28 - that's ridiculous.

Because, for one thing, "anti" is very similar to our English word "for"--it has a range of meaning. "For" can mean "because" (as in "I am posting late, FOR I took a nap), or it can also imply substitution (as in "an eye FOR an eye" where it means one eye in exchange for or in place of another). So it is with "anti". It can mean "because" and it can mean "in place of or instead of", among other things. So the English word "for" is a good translation. We just have to remember that our preposition "for" can take on several different meanings, too.

That said, here are a couple of places where my NAS translate "anti" to show substitution:

Matt 2:22--"When He heard that Archelaus was reigning over Judea IN PLACE OF his father Herod...."

Luke 11:11--"Now suppose one of you fathers is asked by his son for a fish; he will not give him a snake INSTEAD OF a fish, will he?"