John 3:16-18

[A.ModerateOne]

It is great English because that is what we are suppose to do. One would only think it is poor English because the concept is foreign to them.
Contextually the Gospel of John brings this truth out as the OP shares.

Though εἰς can be translated "in" it shouldn't be because contextually INTO fits with the rest of the Gospel, For He is the vine and we are the branches. Without Him we can do nothing. Jo 15:5

The prayer of a righteous man availeth much. So it is written...

Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.
(Joh 17:20-23 KJV)

Where do you get the idea that other sections of the gospel of John override the immediate context of John 3:16-18? Why do translators at times translate the same Greek word differently according to the immediate context? I find a strong caution given us in the following:

"Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. 21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." (2Pet 1:20-21, KJV)

We can't have private interpretation apart from the Holy Spirit who inspired the revelation of the Scriptures, therefore we need this same Holy Spirit to illuminate what He inspired. If I think I have more of the Holy Spirit than the witness of the church through the centuries, and my private interpretation is the correct one, I'm acting with great arrogance. Cherry picking and using odd definitions is how the cults twist the Holy Scriptures. I say "Bye" along with pescador.

 

[HIM]

Well I would definitely agree that we must be grafted into the vine and grammatically speaking that usage would be correct but I don’t see that as being the case in John 3:16-18. We’re dealing with a Greek to English translation and the goal is to translate it so that it is grammatically correct in the English language. The term “believes in Him” is not referring to a grafting into Him it’s referring to maintaining a current status or present state of belief in Him.

That is what we have been left to believe. But is not what the Gospel bring outs.

For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that everyone believing into Him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God did not send His Son into the world that He might judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. The one believing into Him is not condemned; but the one not believing has already been condemned, for he has not believed into the name of the only begotten Son of God.
(Joh 3:16-18 LITV)

Believing into Him fits into the overall context of the letter.

Truly, truly, I say to you, The one believing into Me has everlasting life. I am the Bread of life. Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness and died. This is the Bread coming down out of Heaven, that anyone may eat of it and not die. I am the Living Bread that came down from Heaven. If anyone eats of this Bread, he will live forever. And indeed the bread which I will give is My flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. Then the Jews argued with one another, saying, How can this One give us his flesh to eat? Then Jesus said to them, Truly, truly, I say to you, Except you eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink His blood, you do not have life in yourselves. The one partaking of My flesh and drinking of My blood has everlasting life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For My flesh is truly food, and My blood is truly drink. The one partaking of My flesh and drinking of My blood abides in Me, and I in him. Even as the living Father sent Me, and I live through the Father; also the one partaking Me, even that one will live through Me.
(Joh 6:47-57 LITV)



We can't abide in Him and live through Him without believing into Him.

In that day you shall know that I am in My Father, and you are in Me, and I am in you.
(Joh 14:20 LITV)

We can't be in Him without believing into Him.

But Jesus cried out and said, The one believing into Me does not believe into Me, but into the One sending Me. And the one seeing Me sees the One who sent Me. I have come as a Light to the world, that everyone who believes into Me may not remain in the darkness.
(Joh 12:44-46 LITV)

For without Him we can do nothing.

 

[HIM]

Where do you get the idea that other sections of the gospel of John override the immediate context of John 3:16-18? Why do translators at times translate the same Greek word differently according to the immediate context? I find a strong caution given us in the following:

"Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation. 21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." (2Pet 1:20-21, KJV)

We can't have private interpretation apart from the Holy Spirit who inspired the revelation of the Scriptures, therefore we need this same Holy Spirit to illuminate what He inspired. If I think I have more of the Holy Spirit than the witness of the church through the centuries, and my private interpretation is the correct one, I'm acting with great arrogance. Cherry picking and using odd definitions is how the cults twist the Holy Scriptures. I say "Bye" along with pescador.

Private interpretation?

 

[BNR32FAN]

That is what we have been left to believe. But is not what the Gospel bring outs.

For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that everyone believing into Him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God did not send His Son into the world that He might judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. The one believing into Him is not condemned; but the one not believing has already been condemned, for he has not believed into the name of the only begotten Son of God.
(Joh 3:16-18 LITV)

Believing into Him fits into the overall context of the letter.

Truly, truly, I say to you, The one believing into Me has everlasting life. I am the Bread of life. Your fathers ate the manna in the wilderness and died. This is the Bread coming down out of Heaven, that anyone may eat of it and not die. I am the Living Bread that came down from Heaven. If anyone eats of this Bread, he will live forever. And indeed the bread which I will give is My flesh, which I will give for the life of the world. Then the Jews argued with one another, saying, How can this One give us his flesh to eat? Then Jesus said to them, Truly, truly, I say to you, Except you eat the flesh of the Son of Man, and drink His blood, you do not have life in yourselves. The one partaking of My flesh and drinking of My blood has everlasting life, and I will raise him up at the last day. For My flesh is truly food, and My blood is truly drink. The one partaking of My flesh and drinking of My blood abides in Me, and I in him. Even as the living Father sent Me, and I live through the Father; also the one partaking Me, even that one will live through Me.
(Joh 6:47-57 LITV)



We can't abide in Him and live through Him without believing into Him.

In that day you shall know that I am in My Father, and you are in Me, and I am in you.
(Joh 14:20 LITV)

We can't be in Him without believing into Him.

But Jesus cried out and said, The one believing into Me does not believe into Me, but into the One sending Me. And the one seeing Me sees the One who sent Me. I have come as a Light to the world, that everyone who believes into Me may not remain in the darkness.
(Joh 12:44-46 LITV)

For without Him we can do nothing.

Believing in Him fits the context just fine and is grammatically correct.

 

[HIM]

Believing in Him fits the context just fine and is grammatically correct.

The idea of believing into him is foreign to us. It is grammatically correct it is the idea that is the issue for you

 

[A.ModerateOne]

If we profess Christ here is some information you should know. John 3:16-18 should be translated as follows.

For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that everyone believing INTO Him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God did not send His Son into the world that He might judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. The one believing INTO Him is not condemned; but the one not believing has already been condemned, for he has not believed INTO the name of the only begotten Son of God.
(Joh 3:16-18 LITV)

In respect to the Greek word εἰς translated INTO in the above text here is an excerpt From the BDAG lexicon which is basically a dictionary.

εἰς prep. w. acc. (Hom.+; s. the lit. under ἀνά, beg., also ATheimer, Die Präp. εἰς, ἐν, ἐκ im NT: Progr. z. 24. u. 29. Jahresbericht des niederösterr. Landes- Real- u. Obergymnasiums Horn 1896; 1901; AOepke, TW II 418–32), indicating motion into a thing or into its immediate vicinity or relation to something.
1 extension involving a goal or place, into, in, toward, to...

Though εἰς can be translated "in" it shouldn't be because contextually INTO fits with the rest of the Gospel, For He is the vine and we are the branches. Without Him we can do nothing. Jo 15:5

The prayer of a righteous man availeth much. So it is written...

Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.
(Joh 17:20-23 KJV)

I had decided to discontinue any comments on this thread, but upon researching the question of "into" instead of "in", I came upon some interesting articles. Maybe it would help if you answered a couple questions:

Have you used the Recovery Version of the Bible, or is that where you got this idea? You quoted Jay P. Green's LITV but I've found that another extremely literal Bible, the Recovery Version that uses "into".

Do you embrace the Living Stream Ministry and Local Church movement?

For any left in the dark about the use of "into", it may be well to check at least two web sites:

https://www.apologeticsindex.org/379-local-church-encyclopedia-of-cults-and-new-religions

https://www.apologeticsindex.org/r22.html

If this idea is coming from the Witness Lee movement? If so, remember when you bought something made in China that needed assembling, do you remember the quality of the English grammar and composition in the instructions that made it difficult to follow? If your approach is connected with Witness Lee, the problem with language is a problem. My closest friend is from China and I have to proof read his important business emails at times to make sure they fit American English. I'm posting this as a possible explanation for such insistence on "into" instead of "in". This will be my last on this thread.

 

[HIM]

I had decided to discontinue any comments on this thread, but upon researching the question of "into" instead of "in", I came upon some interesting articles. Maybe it would help if you answered a couple questions:

Have you used the Recovery Version of the Bible, or is that where you got this idea? You quoted Jay P. Green's LITV but I've found that another extremely literal Bible, the Recovery Version that uses "into".

Do you embrace the Living Stream Ministry and Local Church movement?

No and this is not something new, it is written and taught throughout John's Gospel and through out the NT. Us in Christ and He in us that the world might believe.
We can't be in Christ unless we believe into Him.

And the reason you are not continuing is because you have no real argument against the Truth other than to say it just isn't so.
Take care.

 

[A.ModerateOne]

No and this is not something new, it is written and taught throughout John's Gospel and through out the NT. Us in Christ and He in us that the world might believe.
We can't be in Christ unless we believe into Him.

And the reason you are not continuing is because you have no real argument against the Truth other than to say it just isn't so.
Take care.

You did not answer the questions I asked.

There comes a point after an extreme view, based on an extreme literal translation has been refuted many times in various ways in this thread, a time comes to stop it:

"Whoever teaches otherwise and does not agree with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the teaching that is in accordance with godliness, 4 is conceited, understanding nothing, and has a morbid craving for controversy and for disputes about words. From these come envy, dissension, slander, base suspicions" (1Tim 6:3-4, NRSV)

"Remind them of this, and charge them before the Lord to avoid disputing about words, which does no good, but only ruins the hearers." (2Tim 2:14, RSV)

 

[HIM]

You did not answer the questions I asked.

There comes a point after an extreme view, based on an extreme literal translation has been refuted many times in various ways in this thread, a time comes to stop it:

"Whoever teaches otherwise and does not agree with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the teaching that is in accordance with godliness, 4 is conceited, understanding nothing, and has a morbid craving for controversy and for disputes about words. From these come envy, dissension, slander, base suspicions" (1Tim 6:3-4, NRSV)

"Remind them of this, and charge them before the Lord to avoid disputing about words, which does no good, but only ruins the hearers." (2Tim 2:14, RSV)

your questions were answered by the word no. And the fact that you still have no rebuttal to the op other than it isn’t true because I don’t think it is is noted. And now you would argue that the words God used should not be looked at, studied and discussed. And add insult to injury you are trying to use God’s word to say we shouldn’t look deeply into God’s word.

 

[Clare73]

If we profess Christ here is some information you should know.

John 3:16-18 should be translated as follows. For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that everyone believing INTO Him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God did not send His Son into the world that He might judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him. The one believing INTO Him is not condemned; but the one not believing has already been condemned, for he has not believed INTO the name of the only begotten Son of God.
(Joh 3:16-18 LITV)

In respect to the Greek word εἰς translated INTO in the above text here is an excerpt From the BDAG lexicon which is basically a dictionary.

εἰς prep. w. acc. (Hom.+; s. the lit. under ἀνά, beg., also ATheimer, Die Präp. εἰς, ἐν, ἐκ im NT: Progr. z. 24. u. 29. Jahresbericht des niederösterr. Landes- Real- u. Obergymnasiums Horn 1896; 1901; AOepke, TW II 418–32),

indicating motion into a thing or into its immediate vicinity or relation to something.
1 extension involving a goal or place, into, in, toward, to...

Though εἰς can be translated "in" it shouldn't be because contextually INTO fits with the rest of the Gospel, For He is the vine and we are the branches. Without Him we can do nothing. Jo 15:5

The prayer of a righteous man availeth much. So it is written...

Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.
(Joh 17:20-23 KJV)

Unless "into" refers to one's faith in Christ and one's trust on Christ for entrance into Christ's body, the church.
Note my change to Biblical wording.

 

[Danthemailman]

You did not answer the questions I asked.

There comes a point after an extreme view, based on an extreme literal translation has been refuted many times in various ways in this thread, a time comes to stop it:

"Whoever teaches otherwise and does not agree with the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ and the teaching that is in accordance with godliness, 4 is conceited, understanding nothing, and has a morbid craving for controversy and for disputes about words. From these come envy, dissension, slander, base suspicions" (1Tim 6:3-4, NRSV)

"Remind them of this, and charge them before the Lord to avoid disputing about words, which does no good, but only ruins the hearers." (2Tim 2:14, RSV)

Amen and well said.