The Meaning of 'World' in John 3:16

[HankD]

No, not Israel only ever, but in this dialogue Israel (or the Jewish arrangement) is in view. I'm pretty sure Nicodemus never understood non-Jews to be included in 3:16.

As Nicodemus, 'the eleven' did not understand non-Jews to be included in the 'great commission', as you call it, else Peter would not have been called onto the carpet for preaching the gospel to Cornelius. It wasn't until Acts 11 that this realization came to be:

18 And when they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then to the Gentiles also hath God granted repentance unto life. Acts 11

No, it shows the truth of passages such as these:

5 Now there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, from every nation under heaven. Acts 2

21 For Moses from generations of old hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath. Acts 15

15 And he saith unto me, The waters which thou sawest, where the harlot sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues. Rev 17

There was nothing small or insignificant about the 'Jewish arrangement' of that day.

Good answer.

HankD

 

[JonShaff]

No, not Israel only ever, but in this dialogue Israel (or the Jewish arrangement) is in view. I'm pretty sure Nicodemus never understood non-Jews to be included in 3:16.



As Nicodemus, 'the eleven' did not understand non-Jews to be included in the 'great commission', as you call it, else Peter would not have been called onto the carpet for preaching the gospel to Cornelius. It wasn't until Acts 11 that this realization came to be:


There was nothing small or insignificant about the 'Jewish arrangement' of that day.

I would disagree

If they read Isaiah, Malachi, Pentateuch, Joshua...they would get some sort of understanding that "The Nations"/heathens/Isles would partake in the Glory of God through the Holy One's work/Ministry.

Now, i cannot say whether or not they took the scriptures literally/Seriously. But i would say, if they did, they would understand that the *World* would mean all nations because the Old Testament declares those truths. Just my humble opinion.

 

[kyredneck]

If they read Isaiah, Malachi, Pentateuch, Joshua...they would get some sort of understanding that "The Nations"/heathens/Isles would partake in the Glory of God through the Holy One's work/Ministry.

The point was that 'the eleven' did not understand non-Jews to be included in the 'great commission' as commonly called; and the apostle to the Gentiles was not present when it was given. From all appearances they still held to Christ's directions given in Matthew 10:5-6 up until Acts 11.

 

[TCassidy]

It could have been written exactly as you wrote it.

HankD

It is.

εἰς τοῦτο γὰρ καὶ κοπιῶμεν καὶ ἀγωνιζόμεθα, ὅτι ἠλπίκαμεν ἐπὶ Θεῷ ζῶντι, ὅς ἐστι σωτὴρ πάντων ἀνθρώπων, μάλιστα πιστῶν.

For to this end we both labor and suffer reproach, because we have set our trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe. WEB

For to this end we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of believers. EMTV

 

[HankD]

The point was that 'the eleven' did not understand non-Jews to be included in the 'great commission' as commonly called; and the apostle to the Gentiles was not present when it was given. From all appearances they still held to Christ's directions given in Matthew 10:5-6 up until Acts 11.

Quite true and you also showed that they were wrong about Christ's will for them.

HankD

 

[kyredneck]

Quite true and you also showed that they were wrong about Christ's will for them.

Christ's will or not?:

9 and when they perceived the grace that was given unto me, James and Cephas and John, they who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship, that we should go unto the Gentiles, and they unto the circumcision; Gal 2

15 But when it was the good pleasure of God, who separated me, even from my mother`s womb, and called me through his grace,
16 to reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the Gentiles; straightway I conferred not with flesh and blood: Gal 1

 

[kyredneck]

16 And other sheep I have, which are not of this fold: them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice: and they shall become one flock, one shepherd. Jn 16

Quite true and you also showed that they were wrong about Christ's will for them.

Acts 10 is where it is recorded WHEN it was Christ's good pleasure to bring 'the other sheep' into the fold.

 

[HankD]

It is.

εἰς τοῦτο γὰρ καὶ κοπιῶμεν καὶ ἀγωνιζόμεθα, ὅτι ἠλπίκαμεν ἐπὶ Θεῷ ζῶντι, ὅς ἐστι σωτὴρ πάντων ἀνθρώπων, μάλιστα πιστῶν.

For to this end we both labor and suffer reproach, because we have set our trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe. WEB

For to this end we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of believers. EMTV

"No acrobatics needed. He died for all in a limited way (the refreshing rains fall on the just and on the unjust) but in a special way for believers (the atonement). Couldn't be clearer. "

I meant that you put in in Standard English with an explanation and illustration giving the impression that the raw KJV Jacobean-Elizabethan English is/was just as clear as your Standard English equivalent translation.

Not so, IMO.

Maybe not so in the Greek either IMO (μάλιστα), but I will bow to your superior knowledge (in this case ).

You did quote the Greek but few there be that can read it.

HankD

 

[HankD]

Christ's will or not?:

9 and when they perceived the grace that was given unto me, James and Cephas and John, they who were reputed to be pillars, gave to me and Barnabas the right hands of fellowship, that we should go unto the Gentiles, and they unto the circumcision; Gal 2

15 But when it was the good pleasure of God, who separated me, even from my mother`s womb, and called me through his grace,
16 to reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the Gentiles; straightway I conferred not with flesh and blood: Gal 1

Absolutely Christ's will which the apostles had difficulty discerning. Sorry for the confusion. My bad.

HankD

 

[kyredneck]

You're not bad Hank. You're a good soul.

 

[HankD]

You're not bad Hank. You're a good soul.

Hmm, you haven't talked with my wife

HankD

 

[kyredneck]

Hmm, you haven't talked with my wife

Know all about it. Hero to Nero in five.

 

[HankD]

Know all about it. Hero to Nero in five.

HankD

 

[utilyan]

John 1
11He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him. 12But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, 13who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

1 peter 1
22Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently: 23Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.


My question kind of centers around these 2 verses.

Those who receive him and believe in his name are given right to become children of God.

Wasn't the right given PRIOR to receiving and believing?


Born again by the word of God. Wouldn't totally depraved lack the ability to comprehend the word of GOD?

Why is scripture saying we are born again by the word of God rather then, we are born again, regenerated then we comprehend scripture.


I don't agree with the Calvinist position or at least my possible misrepresented version of it. But a lot of the non-Calvinist positions I've read sound like they ought to be Calvinist if they actually believe what they say they believe.

Well that's why above I want to see what does that "being born again by the word of God" mean? Cause that can mean a lot of things like Jesus, scripture, The gospel, or even on God's command.

 

[Iconoclast]

John 1
11He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him. 12But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, 13who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.

1 peter 1
22Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently: 23Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.


My question kind of centers around these 2 verses.

Those who receive him and believe in his name are given right to become children of God.

Wasn't the right given PRIOR to receiving and believing?


Born again by the word of God. Wouldn't totally depraved lack the ability to comprehend the word of GOD?

Why is scripture saying we are born again by the word of God rather then, we are born again, regenerated then we comprehend scripture.


I don't agree with the Calvinist position or at least my possible misrepresented version of it. But a lot of the non-Calvinist positions I've read sound like they ought to be Calvinist if they actually believe what they say they believe.

Well that's why above I want to see what does that "being born again by the word of God" mean? Cause that can mean a lot of things like Jesus, scripture, The gospel, or even on God's command.

If you follow out jn 1: 13....you will study yourself into the position.....it all happens at one point in time.....the light switch goes on....at regeneration the truth of the word is welcomed by a new heart.....ezk 36 jer 31

 

[utilyan]

If you follow out jn 1: 13....you will study yourself into the position.....it all happens at one point in time.....the light switch goes on....at regeneration the truth of the word is welcomed by a new heart.....ezk 36 jer 31

I noticed from verse 13 we can pull "who were born of God" and "given right to children of God" as detailing the receivers.


If I think someone's light switch is off, should I let them know or should I let God know?

 

[Iconoclast]

I noticed from verse 13 we can pull "who were born of God" and "given right to children of God" as detailing the receivers.


If I think someone's light switch is off, should I let them know or should I let God know?

God already knows. we just need to let them know .

 

[The Biblicist]

It is.

εἰς τοῦτο γὰρ καὶ κοπιῶμεν καὶ ἀγωνιζόμεθα, ὅτι ἠλπίκαμεν ἐπὶ Θεῷ ζῶντι, ὅς ἐστι σωτὴρ πάντων ἀνθρώπων, μάλιστα πιστῶν.

For to this end we both labor and suffer reproach, because we have set our trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of those who believe. WEB

For to this end we both labor and suffer reproach, because we trust in the living God, who is the Savior of all men, especially of believers. EMTV

πάντων ἀνθρώπων is anarthrous and could be just as easily translated "all classes" or "all kinds" men rather than understood as all men without exception, just as in John 12:32.

 

[utilyan]

πάντων ἀνθρώπων is anarthrous and could be just as easily translated "all classes" or "all kinds" men rather than understood as all men without exception, just as in John 12:32.

So when it say all men fell because of Adam, its NOT all men without exception.


Today modern day Pharisees at the same goal and service of the Devil. Looking for every reason to tell someone they can't go to heaven.

Matthew 23
13“But woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, because you shut off the kingdom of heaven from people;



Today the Pharisees call themselves clean while everyone else is dirty.

25“Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you clean the outside of the cup and of the dish, but inside they are full of robbery and self-indulgence. 26“You blind Pharisee, first clean the inside of the cup and of the dish, so that the outside of it may become clean also.

They'll even tell you they can't clean the inside, even though Christ commands it.



Matthew 7
4“Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ and behold, the log is in your own eye? 5“You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.

The Pharisees position is what Jesus says is false. You can't take log out of your own eye and you can't take speck out of your brothers.

The only thing that can do is have the chosen status. You keep the Log, License to sin.

Now you can love God and Neighbor, but that gentile cannot, not the pagans, nor can those Samaritans. Only YOU Pharisees can love God and neighbor.

Only you can do TRUE GOOD not like Jesus who does GOOD things in demon's motives.


This is the exact same argument being thrown in this thread:

Matthew 12
24But when the Pharisees heard this, they said, “This man casts out demons only by Beelzebul the ruler of the demons.”
25And knowing their thoughts Jesus said to them, “Any kingdom divided against itself is laid waste; and any city or house divided against itself will not stand. 26“If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand?


In other words they are saying, If your not chosen or one of us everything GOOD you do have the Devil for its origin not God.

A Pharisees say when I do a good act its truly good. It has God for its motivation. But when you do good it has Beelzebul for motivation.


Folks, Jesus was told same thing. Did he say well look, hold on im born again with a bigger status then you have? No.

His comeback was KEEPING the wrongly condemned status and still doing good:

25And knowing their thoughts Jesus said to them, “Any kingdom divided against itself is laid waste; and any city or house divided against itself will not stand. 26“If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand?


How does Jesus justify his own acts? He could have said... I am chosen, I am the Christ, I am God.

NONE of those. In fact he takes the Diabolical status:

27“If I by Beelzebul cast out demons, by whom do your sons cast them out? For this reason they will be your judges.


There is no status or privileged condition with Jesus. Right is Right and Wrong is WRONG.

 

[Yeshua1]

Ok well you can disagree with me but this statement is just false. This is a prime example of why reasonable discussions cannot be had with many Cals.

Martins point on this though is true, as we cannot asign same meaning to every world was used in the NT!