John 3:16, The Meaning of "kosmos"

[The Archangel]

God is Love. Salvation can be had if we are repentant The problem is many cannot repent because they simply do not have the fortitude to admit they're wrong . This is why conviction is so important. Conviction I believe breaks down pride.
MB

Again, you're missing the point. Of course, God is love, but that is not all He is. What is more, we do not get to define God's love according to our understanding of love. God demonstrated His love for Job in a way that, to most of us, would look like hate--but it wasn't. So, the love of God--again--is not reducible to only salvation.

The Archangel

 

[The Archangel]

Thank you archangel for that, but you are wrong. For GOD so loved the world he sent his only begotten son to die for sinners. Your problem is that you do not believe what God says. You say you do but you don't and the judgment will prove it. I hope you will repent before you get there.

When God says he so loved the world that he sent his only begotten son to die in the place of the sinners of the world, is that just too simple for you to believe? I think some of you thinks God is playing games. Hell is real. Wake up.

Are you questioning whether or not I am a true Christian because I happen to disagree with you????

Now, you should be quite cautious about telling me what I believe and pretending to know the thoughts and attitudes of my heart. You are neither omniscient nor omnipotent and, therefore, cannot know what you claim to know.

The Archangel

 

[Wesley Briggman]

There are two people groups on the earth who have a hard time believing that God loved the world. It is Jews and Calvinists. They think that God's love is limited to them. The Jews thought it because they were born of Abraham and the Calvinists because they suppose themselves to be a special class of elected humans. In John 3 Jesus is transcending both of these groups.He is saying in John 3 that there is no limit on his love and the proof is that he, God, came in the form of a man to pay the penalty for all sin by substituting himself as the object of the anger of God against our sin.

Jesus Christ would have saved the man who drove the spikes in his hands if he would have asked him to. He did save the thief on the other cross who asked him to.

[Jhn 17:8-9 ESV] 8 For I have given them the words that you gave me, and they have received them and have come to know in truth that I came from you; and they have believed that you sent me. 9 I am praying for them. I am not praying for the world but for those whom you have given me, for they are yours.

It should be obvious that the "them, they and those" in the above verses are a unique group/special class that Christ is praying for. Those not included in His prayers, are not in God's family.

I am not a Calvinist. He was an Anti-Semite. I am not.

[1Pe 2:9 ESV] 9 But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light.

Thankfully I was among the called or if you prefer, the elect.

 

[Van]

Psalms 5:5,". . . thou hatest all workers of iniquity."

God can both love (agape) and hate sinners. Your premise seems to be God cannot love and hate at the same time the same individual.

 

[agedman]

God can both love (agape) and hate sinners. Your premise seems to be God cannot love and hate at the same time the same individual.

God’s relationship for the believer - Love is expressing what is best toward the other person.

A verse that goes along with this principle is, “All things work for ....”

God’s relationship for the unbeliever is that of a lack of reconciliation. Because the unbeliever is in rebellion, then there is no “love.”

This passage that presents this principle is,

29How much worse punishment, do you think, will be deserved by the one who has trampled underfoot the Son of God, and has profaned the blood of the covenant by which he was sanctified, and has outraged the Spirit of grace?30For we know him who said, “Vengeance is mine; I will repay.” And again, “The Lord will judge his people.” 31It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.​

 

[JD731]

Are you questioning whether or not I am a true Christian because I happen to disagree with you????

Now, you should be quite cautious about telling me what I believe and pretending to know the thoughts and attitudes of my heart. You are neither omniscient nor omnipotent and, therefore, cannot know what you claim to know.

The Archangel

You just judged what I said to you and I have a right to judge what you say. John 3:16 says for God so loved the world that he sent his only begotten son that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life.

If you can say you believe the simple statement that is written there I will admit I was wrong and will apologize.

 

[The Archangel]

You just judged what I said to you and I have a right to judge what you say. John 3:16 says for God so loved the world that he sent his only begotten son that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have everlasting life.

If you can say you believe the simple statement that is written there I will admit I was wrong and will apologize.

What, pray tell, about John 3:16 do you suspect I do not believe--and why?

And, I didn't miss that you have indeed questioned my salvation. I didn't "judge" what you said; I pointed out that 1.) you had a contradiction in thought and 2.) that God's love is not reducible to salvation alone. What about that means that I don't believe in John 3:16????

The Archangel

 

[agedman]

@JD731.

Questioning the salvation of a contributing poster is not allowed on the BB.

Please do not do so.

 

[JD731]

@JD731.

Questioning the salvation of a contribvbuting poster is not allowed on the BB.

Please do not do so.

This is the debate forum. The world in Jn 3:16 is a point of contention among the participants. I am on the side that believes what it says, that God loved the world so much that he sent his son, Jesus Christ, who was doing the talking BTW, and should know about his Father, to die for the sins of the world, that whosoever believes in him would not perish in the lake of fire, but would have everlasting life. That is some serious love for the world if you ask me.
Now I do not know who is saved. That is above my pay grade. I think many Reformed are probably saved and confused. I don’t think I have ever heard the testimony of one who was not an “Armenian” first. However, I do not accept the Reformed faith as the alternative expression of Christianity it claims to be. We disagree on many simple truths of the Scriptures but we also disagree on the fundamentals of the faith. This begs the question how can both be right and have different fundamental truths to guide us?
I am opposed to the Reformed faith on almost every doctrine they teach about every subject but I am not against individuals who hold those doctrines but if there is a debate I must talk with them and challenge them on those things they teach. Do you know another way to debate? This is probably not going to be a good place for me if I am prone to take things too personal.
BTW, I do think what one believes about what God says determines whether they are saved, don’t you? Can you think of any other way to be saved?

1 Peter 1:23
Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

 

[The Archangel]

This is the debate forum. The world in Jn 3:16 is a point of contention among the participants. I am on the side that believes what it says, that God loved the world so much that he sent his son, Jesus Christ, who was doing the talking BTW, and should know about his Father, to die for the sins of the world, that whosoever believes in him would not perish in the lake of fire, but would have everlasting life. That is some serious love for the world if you ask me.

Herein is part of the problem... The text doesn't say "God loved the world so much." The word translated "so" is the word "thusly." For example, if I am demonstrating how to do something (like through a curve ball) I might say, "grip the ball like so." That is what the "so" in John 3:16 means. So, what is being said is this: God demonstrated His love for the world in this manner.

Now, "whosoever believeth" is not a proper translation. The Greek participle is literally "all the ones believing." No mention is made here of how they became "believing."

As the text says, God sent Christ into the world to die for sinners because of His love for them. The Calvinist has no problem affirming this. We differ on the sinners for whom He died. But the means of salvation of sinners--the life, death, and resurrection of Christ--is not really being debated.

The Archangel


Post number: 3,000.

 

[ThyWordIsTruth]

It should be noted that the "New World Translation" isn't simply a good translation mis-read with a bias. It is, actually, wrong in translating many aspects of Greek. For instance, John 1:1 says "the word was a god" instead of what the Greek says "The Word was God." That isn't simply a bias in reading; it is a deep and unrecoverable flaw in the translation.

The Archangel

I know that! However, are you saying that apart from their wilful corruptions, that the rest of their translation is not the Word of God? Are you saying that this cannot save a person?

 

[ThyWordIsTruth]

The election is God's and is conditional on being wholly unmerted on the part of His elect.

does not the sinner need to "believe"? Or, does God do the believing for them? The "believing" is something that the sinner is required to do for themselves, just as they must "repent" (say that they are sorry for their sins), before they can be forgiven and saved.

 

[JD731]

Now, "whosoever believeth" is not a proper translation. The Greek participle is literally "all the ones believing." No mention is made here of how they became "believing."

.

This makes my point.

The Reformed can do that to any word or verse in the Bible that does not fit their theological viewpoint, and they do. When you do this you are saying you do not believe the text you are reading and you then morph into a translator and not a believer. Anybody can do this but thank God there are people who would not even dream of it.

How am I wrong about my conclusion?

 

[The Archangel]

I know that! However, are you saying that apart from their wilful corruptions, that the rest of their translation is not the Word of God? Are you saying that this cannot save a person?

Seeing as how it is God who saves using a particular medium (a preacher, His word, etc.), the question as you asked it is not answerable. No particular translation saves; God saves.

The Archangel

 

[The Archangel]

This makes my point.

The Reformed can do that to any word or verse in the Bible that does not fit their theological viewpoint, and they do. When you do this you are saying you do not believe the text you are reading and you then morph into a translator and not a believer. Anybody can do this but thank God there are people who would not even dream of it.

How am I wrong about my conclusion?

You seem to have an issue with considering which came first, the Greek or the English. Of course, it is the Greek. What we hold are translations--some good, some bad, some better than others. The best translation is the one you'll read every day (unless, perhaps it's the JW "New World Translation). But in any translation the original is still authoritative. If the word "so" is taken to mean "so much" (in Jn 3:16)--which you're doing--and if the original word (οὕτως) means "as follows" or "thus"--which it does--your understanding, wrong as it is, cannot correct the original.

To insist your understanding of an English word must correct the original is to, essentially, deny the traditional understanding of the inspiration of Scripture. In your world the reader--as opposed to the author--gets to decide what words mean. Now, that might be en vogue in the world today, but the doctrine of inspiration never goes along with the reader determining the meaning of the text; the author determines the meaning.

The Archangel

 

[37818]

God can both love (agape) and hate sinners. Your premise seems to be God cannot love and hate at the same time the same individual.

God's love is offered but not uncondtionally to sinners. John 3:16, "God so loved the world, . . . . ουτω γαρ ηγαπησεν ο θεος τον κοσμον . . . ." " . . . . in-order-that everyone who believes in him might not perish, but may have everlasting life." -- MLV

 

[agedman]

This makes my point.

The Reformed can do that to any word or verse in the Bible that does not fit their theological viewpoint, and they do. When you do this you are saying you do not believe the text you are reading and you then morph into a translator and not a believer. Anybody can do this but thank God there are people who would not even dream of it.

How am I wrong about my conclusion?

First, I wasn’t questioning your view, I just wanted to remind you of a policy that we all follow.

Second, John 3:16 is not violated by examining.

I am far too old to “get into the weeds” very far. However, the fact is that only those who believe are redeemed. The “whosoever” is just as accurately stated as “those who” or “all who.”

Do you not agree?


Perhaps the single great divide is not the rendering of John but rather the view of “freedom of the will.”

Can a person, of their own intellectual conjuring, without the impress and benefits of both the Word and work of the Holy Spirit, be saved.

The typical Baptist will admit that, “No, such cannot.”

Then either one must accept some form of prevenient grace - not ever found or mentioned in the Scriptures, or the person is drawn toward some form of the reformed view.

 

[37818]

does not the sinner need to "believe"? Or, does God do the believing for them? The "believing" is something that the sinner is required to do for themselves, just as they must "repent" (say that they are sorry for their sins), before they can be forgiven and saved.

God provides the truth for the sinner to hear in order to change one's mind to believe, 2 Timothy 2:25, ". . . if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; . . ."

 

[ThyWordIsTruth]

God provides the truth for the sinner to hear in order to change one's mind to believe, 2 Timothy 2:25, ". . . if God peradventure will give them repentance to the acknowledging of the truth; . . ."

so, sinners are mere robots that do not have to think for themselves, but carry out what God "makes" them do

 

[ThyWordIsTruth]

Seeing as how it is God who saves using a particular medium (a preacher, His word, etc.), the question as you asked it is not answerable. No particular translation saves; God saves.

The Archangel

I know that God does the saving, but my point is that He does use imperfect human translations to do this,and not only our "standard" versions like the KJV, etc