I’m not misconstruing anything. You said John 3:18 doesn’t apply to everyone, just specific people at a specific time. So either John 3:16 also does or it doesn’t. There’s no middle option. I can’t help the fact that you seem think that a verse can both apply universally and non-universally, but it’s got to be one or the other. And there’s no indication that both shouldn’t be applied equally.
You can talk about context all you want, but nowhere in that context does it say one should apply universally and one should not. You just seem hell-bent on avoiding that uncomfortable fact since it would mean either that most important biblical verse in Christianity doesn’t apply to all Christians or that two verses later, the verse does apply to all non-Christians.
I can’t help that Christianity is either less redemptive than it sounds or more hateful than it sounds. That’s not my problem.
Again- If John 3:16 applies to everyone, so does John 3:18
If John 3:18 doesn’t apply to everyone, neither does John 3:16.
There is no rational alternative. Telling me I’m trying to misconstrue everything doesn’t change that point. Either both are universal or neither are universal.
You refuse to say whether or not 3:16 applies universally, you only claim 3:18 does not. All you have to do is say whether or not 3:16 is universal and you refuse to do it.
I see. I am talking about the conversation as a whole, since I dislike taking verses out of context.
The underlying topic is universal: Righteousness and who gains eternal life at the Resurrection. Jesus teaching is entirely centered around this. So in a way, it’s all universal.
But there’s an extra layer to the entire conversation: acceptance of Jesus as the Messiah. So the entire conversation is filled with scathing barbs aimed at Israel, and Nicodemus as a representative of Israel. 18 contains one of these barbs. Does this help?
Is that what I said? No. Is that what the scripture says? Also no.
I don’t understand why you are so hell-bent on trying to misconstrue and reframe everything.
Got it. John 3:16 applies to everyone, John 3:18 only applies to Israel’s leadership at the time.
Weird that John 3:17 doesn’t make that clear. John 3:15 and John 3:19 don’t either.
Is that what I said? No. Is that what the scripture says? Also no.
I don’t understand why you are so hell-bent on trying to misconstrue and reframe everything.
I’m not misconstruing anything. You said John 3:18 doesn’t apply to everyone, just specific people at a specific time. So either John 3:16 also does or it doesn’t. There’s no middle option. I can’t help the fact that you seem think that a verse can both apply universally and non-universally, but it’s got to be one or the other. And there’s no indication that both shouldn’t be applied equally.
You can talk about context all you want, but nowhere in that context does it say one should apply universally and one should not. You just seem hell-bent on avoiding that uncomfortable fact since it would mean either that most important biblical verse in Christianity doesn’t apply to all Christians or that two verses later, the verse does apply to all non-Christians.
I can’t help that Christianity is either less redemptive than it sounds or more hateful than it sounds. That’s not my problem.
Is that what I said? No. Is that what the scripture says? Also no.
I don’t understand why you are so hell-bent on trying to misconstrue and reframe everything.
Again- If John 3:16 applies to everyone, so does John 3:18
If John 3:18 doesn’t apply to everyone, neither does John 3:16.
There is no rational alternative. Telling me I’m trying to misconstrue everything doesn’t change that point. Either both are universal or neither are universal.
Why would you think there is any kind of difference between them? All of John 3:1-21 is a single conversation about a single topic.
I don’t think there is a difference.
I think they both apply universally.
You refuse to say whether or not 3:16 applies universally, you only claim 3:18 does not. All you have to do is say whether or not 3:16 is universal and you refuse to do it.
I see. I am talking about the conversation as a whole, since I dislike taking verses out of context.
The underlying topic is universal: Righteousness and who gains eternal life at the Resurrection. Jesus teaching is entirely centered around this. So in a way, it’s all universal.
But there’s an extra layer to the entire conversation: acceptance of Jesus as the Messiah. So the entire conversation is filled with scathing barbs aimed at Israel, and Nicodemus as a representative of Israel. 18 contains one of these barbs. Does this help?