What's the meaning in John 3: 16?

[marco]

There are huge problems in the following:


“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.� John 3: 16


(a) In what way is LOVE shown by a father releasing a son to be tortured and killed?

(b) What is the meaning of "only begotten". It seems to be interpreted as "God's only son" with some emotion attached to the singularity. In what sense does God have a son, or beget one?

[marco]

There are huge problems in the following:


“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.� John 3: 16

There are problems with accepting Jesus, not least because we don't know what he's supposed to be: he didn't say directly. We have to debate the matter. Is eternal life for the best debater?

Begotten seems a misnomer; Jesus was artificially created. If the purpose of this man was to stay hidden for 30 years, come out and be killed, then why would he bother preaching? Death not words was the important thing.

Surely a lot of heartache could have been spared had he been murdered by Herod as an infant? Everyone would still be redeemed by the death, mystically.

God need have shown no affection for the flesh artificially created so love isn't appropriate. And if we accept Jesus was a real son, then having him killed is an act of brutality, not an act of love. Were God's hands tied to this savage act?

[WPG12]

[Replying to post 2 by marco]

And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world.
John 8:23 KJV

I guess it would depend on which world you think he is referring to, the world God created, or the world men say he created.

Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.
John 18:36 KJV


While men would look at a physical world and point to it as the world that was created. Jesus actually points to a different world, which men cannot comprehend. Unless they really have become a "new creature" in that other world.


Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
2 Corinthians 5:17 KJV

[marco]

[Replying to post 2 by marco]

And he said unto them, Ye are from beneath; I am from above: ye are of this world; I am not of this world.
John 8:23 KJV

I guess it would depend on which world you think he is referring to, the world God created, or the world men say he created.

Jesus answered, My kingdom is not of this world: if my kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews: but now is my kingdom not from hence.
John 18:36 KJV


While men would look at a physical world and point to it as the world that was created. Jesus actually points to a different world, which men cannot comprehend. Unless they really have become a "new creature" in that other world.


Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new.
2 Corinthians 5:17 KJV

I cannot see in any of this a response to the question about "love" or any indication of what "begotten" means. I think we're all conversant with Christ's kingdom not being of this world. Still, we have to do our best to understand what John might have been saying even though we're looking though dark glasses.

[JehovahsWitness]

I cannot see in any of this a response to the question ... of what "begotten" means.

The word John uses is not "begotten" but only-begotten from the Greek monogenes. The word is defined as folows:

single of its kind, only

- Thayer’s Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament, ,1889 p. 417

“the only member of a kin or kind

Liddell and Scott’s Greek-English Lexicon, Oxford, 1968, p. 1144

So John 3:16 was indicatingthat Jesus is "one of a kind", God's son in a unique way.



JW


RELATED POSTS


Why is Jesus called the "only-begotten" son of God? (Tigger)
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 51#p786451

Was Jesus "divine"?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 96#p870896

Further reading : Who is Jesus Christ?
https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/2005681

[WPG12]

[Replying to post 4 by marco]

I don't think we have to do our best to understand anything at all, everyone does their best to understand, and it never really works out well, in these things. Either you see it or you don't. It's in perception, John says God so loved the world, but then John says Jesus says that all these things are done in parables so they aren't converted. Why? Because it is a matter of the heart, what you care about and why.

Men try to search it out all of the time, and it's impossible, it cannot be comprehended that way.

[Divine Insight]

There are huge problems in the following:


“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.� John 3: 16

Is this the same God who had previously so hated the world that he drowned out all humans and repented that he had ever created them?

[WPG12]

[Replying to post 7 by Divine Insight]

Sure it is, who says God doesn't hate anyone?

[Divine Insight]

(b) What is the meaning of "only begotten". It seems to be interpreted as "God's only son" with some emotion attached to the singularity. In what sense does God have a son, or beget one?

Well, if we recognize this to be nothing more than the standard type of mythologies of the region then it makes perfect sense.

The creators of this religion are simply trying to claim that Jesus was the "ONLY" begotten demigod Son of God and that all the other religions that claim to have demigods are all false.

So this really amounts to nothing more than this culture proclaiming that their demigod is real and all the other demigods are false.

So that's where this "only begotten Son of God" comes from.

Obviously if they weren't competing with other demigod myths they wouldn't have had any need to put this into their religious dogma. They could have just said, "Son of God" and be done with it. The fact, that they felt the need to proclaim that Jesus was the "only" Son of God born of a virgin mortal woman clearly indicates that they are simply copying from other demigod myths and just trying to claim that only their myths are true, all the others are false.

No actual God would have needed to do that.

In fact, there would be no reason why any real God would have needed to use a demigod born of a virgin woman anyway.

Aren't we forgetting that "With God all things are possible?"

God could have simply created Jesus from the dust of the desert with a body that was already 30 years old, and just had him walk into Jerusalem from there and start preaching. Why bother having him born of a filthy virgin mortal woman who is filled with sin and deserving of damnation?

In fact, that's probably a good topic for a new thread:

Did Mother Mary deserve to be damned? And if so, when did she become "saved"?

When was Mother Mary granted undeserved amnesty for her sins?

Before, or after Jesus was born?

[Divine Insight]

[Replying to post 7 by Divine Insight]

Sure it is, who says God doesn't hate anyone?

God is not supposed to hate anyone. God is supposed to be "love".

God is supposed to be righteous. In fact, according to Jesus we are to love our enemies not hate them. So if it's wrong for us to hate enemies then it must be wrong for God to hate his enemies too.

After all, isn't morality supposed to be absolute and objective in this theology?

Or can God just do whatever he wants whether it's moral or not?

I think you might be confusing Yahweh and Zeus.

Zeus is allowed to be immoral and unrighteous. Yahweh is not.