Tag Archives: John 3:17

Son of God – John, Part 4

Posted on by

This is round three of my attempt to determine whether that the light has come into the world and people loved the darkness rather than the light[1] is the judgment/condemnation God did not send his Son into the world to do[2] and has been done already to the one who does not believe,[3] or the basis for judging,[4] and the rationale or justification for condemning one to burn in hell for all eternity.  First, that the light has come into the world and people loved the darkness rather than the light could be a judgment.  (“Oh, you lover of darkness” is admittedly a bit weak as condemnation.)  But loving darkness rather than light is merely a preference, and cannot be a basis for judging apart from the reality that preference indicates:  because their deeds were evil.[5]  In other words evil deeds supply the power that justifies making a preference for darkness a basis for judging, and then condemning someone to hell.

I never thought to question the translation of πονηρὰ (a form of πονηρός)[6] as evil until I read the definitions in the NET online Bible: “1) full of labours, annoyances, hardships 1a) pressed and harassed by labours 1b) bringing toils, annoyances, perils; of a time full of peril to Christian faith and steadfastness; causing pain and trouble 2) bad, of a bad nature or condition 2a) in a physical sense: diseased or blind 2b) in an ethical sense: evil wicked, bad.”  But was Jesus speaking ethically as a moral philosopher?  It seems to me that I would have related to Him a whole lot sooner if that were the case.  I loved Socrates.

But before I substitute any other definitions I should point out that the NET translation is not alone in translating πονηρὰ evil.  The NAS and KJV use the word evil, too.  That is getting very close to the beginning of translating the New Testament into the English language.  This is a long tradition.  Perhaps the translators of the NAS and KJV didn’t know all the meanings for πονηρὰ that the translators of the NET had at their disposal.  So I’ll begin with the more limited definition from Strong’s Concordance: “hurtful, that is, evil (properly in effect or influence, and thus differing from G2556, which refers rather to essential character…).”

Now this is the basis for judging: that the light has come into the world and people loved the darkness rather than the light, because their deeds were [hurtful].[7]  Obviously, hurtful lacks the justificatory power of evil (e.g., the power to justify judging and condemning someone to hell), but it does sound like Jesus.

Saul, Saul, Jesus said, why are you persecuting me?  You are hurting yourself by kicking against the goads.[8]  The implication here was that Jesus had already reached out to Saul in other more subtle ways.  But Saul’s faith in his religion was so strong that it took nothing less than a personal appearance in all his glory (which Saul perceived as a blinding light and a voice) to persuade Saul to hear.  Jesus did not say, “Saul, Saul, you evil sinner, why are you arresting my followers and condemning them to death?”  His concern was that Saul’s persistent and stubborn resistance to the insistent and stubborn call of God was hard on Saul.

So I said, Paul (Saul) continued, “Who are you, Lord?”  And the Lord replied, “I am Jesus whom you are persecuting.  But get up and stand on your feet, for I have appeared to you for this reason, to designate you in advance as a servant and witness to the things you have seen and to the things in which I will appear to you.  I will rescue you from your own people and from the Gentiles, to whom I am sending you to open their eyes so that they turn from darkness (σκότους)[9] to light (φῶς)[10] and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a share among those who are sanctified by faith in me.”[11]

So rather than standing back in ethical detachment as a moral philosopher, using people’s preference for darkness as a basis for judging and then condemning them to hell, this sounds as if Jesus sent Saul (Paul) to open their eyes so that they turn from darkness (σκότους) to light (φῶς) and from the power of Satan to God, so that they may receive forgiveness of sins and a share among those who are sanctified by faith in [Jesus].  In this light then, that the light (φῶς) has come into the world and people loved the darkness (σκότος) rather than the light (φῶς) sounds more like a judgment than a basis for judging.  And this judgment prompted at least two action items on the divine to-do list.  It is the reason God sent his Son into the world, that the world should be saved through him, and the reason Jesus, the Son, sent Saul to open [Gentile’s] eyes.

To be fair to the NET translators, they didn’t think Jesus was speaking in John 3:19.  Perhaps John was speaking ethically as a moral philosopher.  So I turned to another instance of πονηρὰ translated evil in John’s Gospel.  The world cannot hate you, Jesus told his half brothers, but it hates me, because I am testifying (μαρτυρῶ, a form of μαρτυρέω)[12] about it that its deeds are evil (πονηρά).[13]  Again evil is used in all three translations, KJV, NAS and NET.

KJV

NAS

NET
7:7 The world cannot hate you; but me it hateth, because I testify of it, that the works thereof are evil. “The world cannot hate you, but it hates Me because I testify of it, that its deeds are evil.” “The world cannot hate you, but it hates me, because I am testifying about it that its deeds are evil.”

If Jesus had been traveling around Judea “testifying” that people’s deeds were evil, it would seem a little bit like what God did not send his Son into the world to do (that is, judge or condemn the world).  But Jesus had also said, If I testify (μαρτυρῶ) about myself, my testimony is not true,[14] and, the deeds that the Father has assigned me to complete – the deeds I am now doing – testify (μαρτυρεῖ, another form of μαρτυρέω) about me that the Father has sent me.[15]  It isn’t hard for me to imagine that Jesus’ righteousness testified to those around Him that their deeds didn’t measure up.  But here I picked up the scent.  It will be harder to throw me off the trail.

The word evil conjures an image of sin and sinners, violations of God’s holy law.  But that doesn’t square with the Gospel narratives at all.  It wasn’t an angry mob of prostitutes and tax collectors that led Jesus to Golgotha.  It was a mob of religious people, indignant because his deeds of righteousness testified that their religious deeds were hurtful (as opposed to evil).  Their religion kept them from coming to Him.  He was ready to forgive their sin, their evil, but their faith in their religion and their own “righteous” deeds were the hurtful deeds that caused them so much harm.

I feel more confident now to substitute what the NET translators considered the first definition of πονηρὰ (a form of πονηρός):  Now this is the [judgment]: that the light has come into the world and people loved the darkness rather than the light, because their deeds were [full of labours, annoyances, and hardships].[16]  This definitely sounds like Jesus.  Come to me, He said, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest.  Take my yoke on you and learn from me, because I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls.  For my yoke is easy to bear, and my load is not hard to carry.[17]

If I continue in this vein, rejecting the ethical definition of φαῦλα (a form of φαῦλος),[18] I get, For everyone who does [ordinary or worthless] deeds hates the light and does not come to the light, so that their deeds will not be exposed [e.g., as ordinary or worthless].  But the one who practices the truth comes to the light, so that it may be plainly evident that his deeds have been done in God.[19]

While in is a perfectly acceptable translation of ἐν,[20] the NET translators used with 145 times and by 135 times in other places in the New Testament.  But the one who practices the truth comes to the light, so that it may be plainly evident that his deeds have been done [by] God, would have further highlighted the contrast between righteousness and ordinary or worthless religious works done in one’s own strength.

It seems to me now that the translation of πονηρά as evil in these two instances was at best the work of moral philosophers recasting Jesus in their own image.  At worst it was the religious mind reasserting itself while attempting to remain in the shadows by focusing the light away from itself and on to the evil.  But Jesus said to them, “I tell you the truth, tax collectors and prostitutes will go ahead of you into the kingdom of God!”[21]

[1] John 3:19 (NET)

[2] John 3:17 (NET)

[3] John 3:18 (NET)

[4] John 3:19 (NET)

[5] John 3:19b (NET)

[7] John 3:19 (NET)

[8] Acts 26:14b (NET)

[11] Acts 26:15-18 (NET)

[13] John 7:7 (NET)

[14] John 5:31 (NET)

[15] John 5:36b (NET)

[16] John 3:19 (NET)

[17] Matthew 11:28-30 (NET)

[19] John 3:20, 21 (NET)

[21] Matthew 21:31b (NET) Table

Son of God – John, Part 3

Posted on by

This is round two of my attempt to determine whether that the light has come into the world and people loved the darkness rather than the light[1] is the judgment/condemnation God did not send his Son into the world to do[2] and has been done already to the one who does not believe,[3] or the basis for judging,[4] and the rationale or justification for another unspecified judgment/condemnation.  Secondly, assuming that this unspecified judgment/condemnation is to burn in hell for all eternity, I am attempting to discover whether John 3:16-21 offers any scriptural support for the gospel I was socialized into: believe in the Lord Jesus Christ or burn in hell for all eternity.

Jesus certainly taught his disciples about hell (γέεννα).[5]  The note in the NET provides a brief historical sketch: “The word translated hell is ‘Gehenna’ (γέεννα, geenna), a Greek transliteration of the Hebrew words ge hinnom (‘Valley of Hinnom’). This was the valley along the south side of Jerusalem. In OT times it was used for human sacrifices to the pagan god Molech (cf. Jer 7:31; 19:5-6; 32:35), and it came to be used as a place where human excrement and rubbish were disposed of and burned. In the intertestamental period, it came to be used symbolically as the place of divine punishment (cf. 1 En. 27:2, 90:26; 4 Ezra 7:36).”

Jesus said, fear the one who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.[6]  Fear the one who, after the killing, has authority to throw you into hell.  Yes, I tell you, fear him![7]  Woe to you, experts in the law and you Pharisees, hypocrites!  You cross land and sea to make one convert, and when you get one, you make him twice as much a child of hell as yourselves![8]  You snakes, you offspring of vipers!  How will you escape being condemned to hell?[9]

He made the following comparisons:  It is better to lose one of your members than to have your whole body thrown into hell.[10]  It is better for you to enter into life crippled than to have two hands and go into hell, to the unquenchable fire.[11]  It is better to enter life lame than to have two feet and be thrown into hell.[12]  It is better for you to enter into life with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into fiery hell.[13]  It is better to enter into the kingdom of God with one eye than to have two eyes and be thrown into hell, where their worm never dies and the fire is never quenched.[14]  And finally Jesus said, whoever says “Fool” will be sent to fiery hell.[15]

That is some strong language.  It lends credence to the NET translation, Now this is the basis for judging: that the light has come into the world and people loved the darkness rather than the light…[16]  After all, this section begins with the statement that God gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.[17]  The Greek word translated will…perish is ἀπόληται (a form of ἀπόλλυμι).[18]  (The negation is μὴ.)  One of the metaphorical definitions of ἀπόληται according to the NET online Bible is: “1e) metaph. to devote or give over to eternal misery in hell.”  It is translated lose in Matthew 5:29, 30 (NET).

If your right eye causes you to sin, tear it out and throw it away!  It is better to lose (ἀπόληται) one of your members than to have your whole body thrown into hell.  If your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away!  It is better to lose (ἀπόληται) one of your members than to have your whole body go into hell.

It was translated be lost in the parable of the lost sheep (Matthew 18:10, 12-14 NET).

See that you do not disdain one of these little ones [who believe in me[19]].  For I tell you that their angels in heaven always see the face of my Father in heaven…What do you think?  If someone owns a hundred sheep and one of them goes astray, will he not leave the ninety-nine on the mountains and go look for the one that went astray?  And if he finds it, I tell you the truth, he will rejoice more over it than over the ninety-nine that did not go astray.  In the same way, your Father in heaven is not willing (οὐκ[20] ἔστιν[21] θέλημα[22]) that one of these little ones be lost (ἀπόληται).

It was translated will perish when Jesus foretold his disciples’ future (Luke 21:10-19 NET):

Nation will rise up in arms against nation, and kingdom against kingdom.  There will be great earthquakes, and famines and plagues in various places, and there will be terrifying sights and great signs from heaven.  But before all this, they will seize you and persecute you, handing you over to the synagogues and prisons.  You will be brought before kings and governors because of my name.  This will be a time for you to serve as witnesses.  Therefore be resolved not to rehearse ahead of time how to make your defense.  For I will give you the words along with the wisdom that none of your adversaries will be able to withstand or contradict.  You will be betrayed even by parents, brothers, relatives, and friends, and they will have some of you put to death.  You will be hated by everyone because of my name.  Yet not a hair of your head will perish (ἀπόληται).  By your endurance you will gain your lives.

When they were all satisfied, after Jesus fed 5,000 or more people with five loaves of bread and two fish, Jesus said to his disciples, “Gather up the broken pieces that are left over, so that nothing is wasted (ἀπόληται).”[23]  But ἀπόληται was translated to perish once again in John’s Gospel when Caiaphas prophesied (John 11:49-53 NET).

Then one of them, Caiaphas, who was high priest that year, said, “You know nothing at all!  You do not realize that it is more to your advantage to have one man die for the people than for the whole nation to perish (ἀπόληται).”  (Now he did not say this on his own, but because he was high priest that year, he prophesied that Jesus was going to die for the Jewish nation, and not for the Jewish nation only, but to gather together into one the children of God who are scattered.)  So from that day they planned together to kill him.

“He was led like a sheep to slaughter, and like a lamb before its shearer is silent, so he did not open his mouth.  In humiliation justice (κρίσις)[24] was taken from him.  Who can describe his posterity?  For his life was taken away from the earth.”[25]  This was the passage from Isaiah that the Ethiopian eunuch read (aloud presumably) when Philip was led by the Holy Spirit to accompany his chariot on the road from Jerusalem to Gaza.  Then the eunuch said to Philip, “Please tell me, who is the prophet saying this about – himself or someone else?”  So Philip started speaking, and beginning with this scripture proclaimed the good news about Jesus to him.[26]

This translation of κρίσις as justice leads me back to the translation of κρίσις as the basis for judging, for what is justice if not a basis for judging?  Now this is the basis for judging: that the light has come into the world and people loved the darkness rather than the light, because their deeds were evil.[27]  Viewed this way people were not condemned to be given over to eternal misery in hell because they loved the darkness rather than the light, but because loving the darkness rather than the light demonstrated that their deeds were evil.  For everyone who does evil deeds hates the light and does not come to the light, so that their deeds will not be exposed.  But the one who practices the truth comes to the light, so that it may be plainly evident that his deeds have been done in God.[28]

One of the definitions of πονηρὰ (a form of πονηρός),[29] the word translated evil in verse 19, is “evil wicked, bad.”  And one of the definitions of φαῦλα (a form of φαῦλος),[30] the word translated evil deeds in verse 20, is “bad, base, wicked.”

[1] John 3:19 (NET)

[2] John 3:17 (NET)

[3] John 3:18 (NET)

[4] John 3:19 (NET)

[6] Matthew 10:28 (NET)

[7] Luke 12:5 (NET)

[8] Matthew 23:15 (NET)

[9] Matthew 23:33 (NET)

[10] Matthew 5:29, 30 (NET)

[11] Mark 9:43 (NET)

[12] Mark 9:45 (NET)

[13] Matthew 18:9 (NET)

[14] Mark 9:47, 48 (NET)

[15] Matthew 5:22b (NET) Table

[16] John 3:19 (NET)

[17] John 3:16 (NET)

[23] John 6:12 (NET)

[25] Acts 8:32, 33 (NET)

[26] Acts 8:34, 35 (NET)

[27] John 3:19 (NET)

[28] John 3:20, 21 (NET)

Son of God – John, Part 2

Posted on by

The next occurrence of Son of God (υἱοῦ τοῦ θεοῦ) in John’s Gospel is found in verse 18 of the third chapter.

KJV

NAS

NET
3:18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. “He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. The one who believes in him is not condemned.  The one who does not believe has been condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the one and only Son of God.

The first thing I noticed here is that the KJV has believeth on the Son of God where the NAS and NET have believes in the Son of God.  The Greek word is εἰς[1] which is to or into.  Believe into the Son of God is an interesting image of entering in to the Son of God or the life of the Son of God, everyone who believes in (εἰς) him will…have eternal life.[2]  In Romans 10:11 below the Greek word is ἐπ᾿ (a form of ἐπί)[3] which is on or upon, but the NAS and NET translators still rendered it in.

KJV

NAS

NET
10:11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed. For the Scripture says, “WHOEVER BELIEVES IN HIM WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED.” For the scripture says, “Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.”

This is also an interesting image of resting upon the Son of God: He is like a man building a house, who dug down deep, and laid the foundation on (ἐπὶ) bedrock.[4]  Apparently the translators picked one of these two images and stuck with it.

Again, in John 3:18 κρίνεται (another form of κρίνω[5]) was translated condemned in the KJV and NET and judged in the NAS.  Whatever God did not send his Son into (εἰς) the world to do in verse 17 was not done to the one who believes in (εἰς) Him.  The one who does not believe has been condemned already.[6]  The Greek word translated condemned in the KJV and NET and judged in the NAS is κέκριται (another form of κρίνω).  So whatever God did not send his Son into (εἰς) the world to do is done already to the one who does not believe…because he has not believed in the name of the one and only Son of God.[7]  So what is it that God did not send his Son into the world to do, that was not done to those who believe in the Son of God, but done already to those who do not believe?  Here is where the three translations diverge.

KJV

NAS

NET
3:19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. “This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil. Now this is the basis for judging: that the light has come into the world and people loved the darkness rather than the light, because their deeds were evil.

In the KJV and NAS the condemnation or judgment that God did not send his Son into the world to do, that was not done to those who believe in the Son of God, but was done already to those who do not believe was that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light (KJV), and that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light (NAS) respectively.  In the NET the condemnation is not clearly defined, only that the light has come into the world and people loved the darkness rather than the light is the basis for making an unspecified condemnation (or, judgment, as the case may be).

Here the Greek word is κρίσις.[8]  The translators of the KJV and NAS treated κρίσις as if it were the noun of the verb κρίνω.  The translators of the NET did not.  The translators of the NET are probably about my age.  I assume they were socialized into a gospel similar to mine: believe in the Lord Jesus Christ or burn in hell for all eternity.  Their translation of John 3:16-19 certainly supports that gospel.  The unspecified condemnation, then, would be to burn in hell for all eternity.  It is just; it is justice because light has come into the world and people loved the darkness rather than the light.  In other words, Jesus has been here and gone and people prefer their sins to Jesus’ righteousness.  Why are people like this? Because their deeds [are] evil.  So people loving darkness rather than light when light has come into the world is a basis for judging them.  It makes perfect sense relative to the gospel I was socialized into, but is it what the Scripture says?

I was surprised to discover that John 3:1-15 didn’t necessarily support[9] “believe in the Lord Jesus Christ or burn in hell for all eternity.”  But I could let it go because I was confident that John 3:16-21 was completely clear on the matter.  Now that confidence is shaken and it is that much more difficult for me to let go.  Every thought, every word comes slowly.  But I will consider the alternative implications of κρίσις being the noun that is equivalent to the verb κρίνω.

“For God did not send the Son into the world to judge (κρίνῃ, another form of κρίνω; NET condemn) the world…”

John 3:17a (NAS)

 “Do not judge (κρίνετε, another form of κρίνω) so that you will not be judged (κριθῆτε, another form of κρίνω).  For by the standard you judge (κρίνετε, another form of κρίνω) you will be judged (κριθήσεσθε, another form of κρίνω), and the measure you use will be the measure you receive.”

Matthew 7:1, 2 (NET)
Now this is the basis for judging (κρίσις): that the light has come into the world and people loved the darkness rather than the light, because their deeds were evil.

John 3:19 (NET)

 Speak and act as those who will be judged (κρίνεσθαι, another form of κρίνω) by a law that gives freedom.  For judgment (κρίσις) is merciless for the one who has shown no mercy.  But mercy triumphs over judgment (κρίσεως, a form of κρίσις).

James 2:12, 13 (NET)

In this round I began with the NAS translation, “For God did not send the Son into the world to judge (κρίνῃ; NET condemn) the world…”[10]  The word κρίνῃ (a form of κρίνω) was only used once in the New Testament.  I can’t say that judge is a better translation than condemn.  I can only observe the symmetries if judge were accepted as the better translation.  If the Father did not send his Son into the world to judge the world, then it makes perfect sense that Jesus taught his disciples not to judge: “Do not judge (κρίνετε, another form of κρίνω) so that you will not be judged (κριθῆτε, another form of κρίνω).  For by the standard you judge (κρίνετε, another form of κρίνω) you will be judged (κριθήσεσθε, another form of κρίνω), and the measure you use will be the measure you receive.”[11]

The Greek words κρίνετε, κριθῆτε and κριθήσεσθε are also forms of κρίνω and are translated do judge and you judge, and you will be judged in the NET.  The negation comes from Μὴ[12] in the first instance of κρίνετε (Μὴ κρίνετε, Do not judge) and μὴ κριθῆτε (you will not be judged [‘Μ’ is the uppercase and ‘μ’ the lowercase of the letter ‘mu’ in the Greek alphabet]).  And this is a “qualified negation” according to Strong’s Concordance as compared to the “absolute denial” of οὐ,[13] the negation used in God did not (οὐ) send his Son into the world to condemn (or, judge) the world,[14] and, The one who believes in him is not (οὐ) condemned (or, judged).[15]

It also makes sense to me that Jesus’ half-brother James would have a handle on judging, judgment and mercy from growing up in the home with his elder brother, while Paul the former Pharisee had to learn that lesson sometime after he wrote 1 Corinthians 5 and before Galatians 6:1-5.  Another thing worth noting is that the NET translators treated κρίσις as if it were the noun for the verb κρίνεσθαι (another form of κρίνω): Speak and act as those who will be judged (κρίνεσθαι) by a law that gives freedom.  For judgment (κρίσις) is merciless for the one who has shown no mercy.  But mercy triumphs over judgment (κρίσεως).[16]  And finally, κρίσις was translated simply judgment.  There is nothing intrinsic to the word ending that justifies translating it the basis for judging in John 3:19 (NET).

[2] John 3:16b (NET)

[4] Luke 6:48 (NET)

[6] John 3:18b (NET)

[7] John 3:18b (NET)

[9] I tell you the solemn truth, unless a person is born of water and spirit, he cannot enter (εἰσελθεῖν) the kingdom of God (John 3:5 NET), may provide support for “believe in the Lord Jesus Christ or burn in hell for all eternity.”  On the other hand it may have been Jesus’ way of turning a phrase when Nicodemus said, He cannot enter (εἰσελθεῖν) his mother’s womb and be born a second time (John 3:4 NET).

[10] John 3:17a (NAS)

[11] Matthew 7:1, 2 (NET) Table

[14] John 3:17a (NET)

[15] John 3:18a (NET)

[16] James 2:12, 13 (NET)

Son of God – John, Part 1

Posted on by

The first time the phrase Son of God (υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ) occurs in John’s Gospel account is in the story when Nathaniel first met Jesus (John 1:47-49 NET).

Jesus saw Nathanael coming toward him and exclaimed, “Look, a true Israelite in whom there is no deceit!”  Nathanael asked him, “How do you know me?”  Jesus replied, “Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, I saw you.”  Nathanael answered him, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the king of Israel!”

Earlier Philip found Nathanael and told him, “We have found the one Moses wrote about in the law, and the prophets also wrote about – Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.”  Nathanael replied, “Can anything good come out of Nazareth?”  Philip replied, “Come and see.”[1]  Nathaniel put his prejudice aside and did exactly that.  But it says to me that he already had a preconceived notion that the one Moses and the prophets wrote about, the king of Israel, was also the Son of God.  Even Jesus seemed a bit surprised at how easily Nathaniel believed: Because I told you that I saw you under the fig tree, do you believe?  You will see greater things than these.[2]

For this is the way God loved the world, the next time there is mention of God’s Son in John’s Gospel began, He gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.[3]  I want to compare the King James Version (KJV), and the New American Standard Bible (NAS) with the New English Translation (NET).

KJV

NAS

NET
3:16 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. “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life. For this is the way God loved the world: He gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life.

The first thing I noticed was that the KJV and NAS share the phrase only begotten Son (τὸν υἱὸν τὸν μονογενῆ[4]) where the NET has one and only Son.  The note in the NET explains: “Although this word is often translated ‘only begotten,’ such a translation is misleading, since in English it appears to express a metaphysical relationship. The word in Greek was used of an only child (a son [Luke 7:12, 9:38] or a daughter [Luke 8:42]). It was also used of something unique (only one of its kind) such as the mythological Phoenix (1 Clement 25:2). From here it passes easily to a description of Isaac (Heb 11:17 and Josephus, Ant. 1.13.1 [1.222]) who was not Abraham’s only son, but was one-of-a-kind because he was the child of the promise. Thus the word means ‘one-of-a-kind’ and is reserved for Jesus in the Johannine literature of the NT. While all Christians are children of God (τέκνα θεοῦ, tekna theou), Jesus is God’s Son in a unique, one-of-a-kind sense. The word is used in this way in all its uses in the Gospel of John (1:14, 1:18, 3:16, and 3:18).”

I am unclear what the term “metaphysical relationship” meant, so I want to repeat what Luke’s Gospel said about Jesus’ ‘one-of-a-kind’ relationship to his Father.  When Mary Jesus’ mother was visited by the angel Gabriel and told of his birth, she asked, “How will this be, since I have not had sexual relations with a man?”  The angel replied, “The Holy Spirit will come upon (ἐπελεύσεται, a form of ἐπέρχομαι)[5] you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow (ἐπισκιάσει, a form of ἐπισκιάζω)[6] you.  Therefore the child to be born will be holy; he will be called the Son of God (υἱὸς θεοῦ).[7]

While his mother Mary was engaged to Joseph, Matthew wrote, but before they came together (συνελθεῖν, a form of συνέρχομαι),[8] she was found to be pregnant through the Holy Spirit.  Because Joseph, her husband to be, was a righteous man, and because he did not want to disgrace her, he intended to divorce her privately.  When he had contemplated this, an angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary as your wife, because the child conceived (γεννηθὲν, a form of γεννάω)[9] in her is from the Holy Spirit.”[10]

The next thing I noticed was that the KJV has no quotation marks.  The translators proposed no theory of who was speaking in John 3:16-21.  The NAS translators on the other hand used quotation marks to indicate their belief that Jesus was still speaking to Nicodemus.  The NET translators ended Jesus’ quotation marks at verse 15, indicating their belief that John was speaking.

KJV

NAS

NET
3:17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. “For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him.” For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world should be saved through him.

Here I noticed that the KJV and NET have condemn where the NAS has judge for the Greek word κρίνῃ.[11]  For clarity I’ll work through the NET definitions of κρίνῃ.  God did not send his Son into the world 1) to separate, put asunder, to pick out, select, or choose the world; God did not send his Son into the world 2) to approve, esteem, or to prefer the world; God did not send his Son into the world 3) to be of the world’s opinion, or to deem, or think like the world; God did not send his Son into the world 4) to determine, resolve, or decree the world; God did not send his Son into the world 5) to judge the world or 5a) to pronounce an opinion concerning right and wrong 5a1) or to summon the world to trial or 5b) to pronounce judgment upon, or to subject the world to censure or 5b1) to act the part of judge or arbiter in matters of common life, or pass judgment on the deeds and words of others; God did not send his Son into the world 6) to rule, or govern the world or 6a) to preside over it with the power of giving judicial decisions; God did not send his Son into the world 7) to contend together, as a warrior or combatant with the world; or 7a) to dispute with it or 7b1) have suit at law with the world.

Ordinarily I soar over this rugged terrain at about 30,000 feet.  I already know what it means.  I know most people die and go to hell.  This was Jesus, or John, certainly the Holy Spirit, vindicating God of the destruction of so many souls:  God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world.  Let God be proven true, Paul wrote, and every human being shown up as a liar, just as it is written: “so that you will be justified in your words and will prevail when you are judged.”[12]  But as I sit here now, a relativist, gazing up at this majestic rocky cliff face of absolute negation, I begin to wonder, “Is that all it means?  Is it really just God saving face?  What did God send his Son into the world to do?”

God sent his Son into the world that the world should be saved through him.  Here I noticed that the KJV and NAS have might be where the NET had should be saved.  The Greek is ἀλλ᾿ ἵνα σωθῇ ὁ κόσμος δι᾿ αὐτοῦ: ἀλλ᾿ (but) ἵνα (that) σωθῇ (to save) ὁ (the) κόσμος (world) δι᾿ (through) αὐτοῦ (him).  I know I’m no Greek scholar, but I don’t find any might be or should be in this text.  Is one or the other of them really contained within the word ending?  Is it a theological interpretation?  Is it just to make the English flow better?  I admit I don’t know, but I’m willing to keep on searching.

[Addendum: July 20, 2019] The Greek verb σωθῇ (should be saved) is in the subjunctive mood.  According to the “Greek Verbs (Shorter Definitions)” at ntgreek.org: “The subjunctive mood indicates probability or objective possibility. The action of the verb will possibly happen, depending on certain objective factors or circumstances.  It is oftentimes used in conditional statements (i.e. ‘If…then…’ clauses) or in purpose clauses.  However if the subjunctive mood is used in a purpose or result clause, then the action should not be thought of as a possible result, but should be viewed as a definite outcome that will happen as a result of another stated action.”  How one translates σωθῇ here depends then on whether one considers it to be in a “result clause” or not.

[1] John 1:45, 46 (NET)

[2] John 1:50 (NET)

[3] John 3:16 (NET)

[7] Luke 1:34, 35 (NET)

[10] Matthew 1:18b-20 (NET) Table

[12] Romans 3:4 (NET)