These verses brought tears to my eyes:

"Weeping may endure for a night, but joy cometh in the morning."

"I would have despaired unless I had known the goodness of the Lord in the land of the living."

Thank you so much Christiana.

Thank you ALL for your prayers.

In times of despair the battle rages in ones soul. The height of carnality overshadows the glimpse of spirituality and only the prayers of saints can secure a sure victory.

Since I am a firm believer in prayer, I ask that some would pray for me as I am going through a deep trial of despair. Sometimes hope can only be attained through the prayer of the saints.

This I covet.

Of course you will not accept that, because you are desperate. So, out of the kindness of my heart, I will allow you to use your theological liberal as a source simply because it would take less time to allow you to use your definition than to prove to you how ridiculous your source is.

OK, now that you have found a definition that agrees with your theological bias, there must be another reason other than that it agrees with your theology for you to infuse it into the text. The question then becomes, if "all of humanity" and "believers only" are valid definitions of kosmos, then which one should we apply to John 3:16?

DJC49 wrote:
"I'm laughing, Yamil, at your soft-shoe shuffle as you spin around and hair-split the difference between what a dictionary and a lexicon is."

That's fine. If that is what you choose. But you still have to deal with his circular reasoning.

You can't assume that Kosmos means "believers" because John 3:16 uses it, and state that John 3:16 means "believers" because is uses the word "kosmos"

You are also faced with the problem of "kosmos" meaning both "believers" and "unbelievers" without any linguistic restriction. The only restriction would be one's theological bias.

I already done the research for you. Thayer's Lexicon has been noted and rejected a long time ago. If you want to place your faith on one theological liberal who is a heretic by no uncertain terms then go right ahead. It is quite obvious from Thayer's lexicon that he is making a theological statement NOT a linguistic one.

Like I said, all you have is circular reasoning. Getting a theological liberal to parrot the same lie does not help your case one bit.

You can't say that Kosmos means elect because John 3:16 says so, and John 3:16 says so because Kosmos means elect.

God will not in one page reffer to the world as those that are lost and then flip around and call the world those that are saved. Only a Calvinist would do that.

DJC49 wrote:
"Fabricating definitions"
Hahahahaha! Good one, Yamil!
Trouble is, I made no "definition" per say, but rather took time to provide a brief yet cogent explanation of what the meaning and scope of the word "WORLD" was as found in John 3:16.
Admit it. You just didn't agree with it. And THAT'S the bottom line.
It's my guess that providing explanation is sorta taboo as far as you're concerned, huh.
If that's the case, you probably have a REAL BIG PROBLEM with any Bible commentary since said commentaries, of necessity, "fabricate definitions" concerning the Scriptures.

Besides you contradict yourself all in one sentence. You state that you make no explanation but you want to provide the meaning.

Fabricating definitions that do not exist anywhere and forcing it into the Bible is at the very least a flagrant disrespect towards the Scriptures.

You can't state that if God wills someone to be saved that he must make them saved

then make a 360 and state

That God wills to sanctify his elect but has not done it yet.

You can't state that those without the Holy Spirit cannot resist the calling of God, while those who are sealed with the spirit do.

I just thought that since you have a problem with dispensationalism, then you may need to talk to your pastor concerning the issue.

DJC49 wrote:
According to my hermeneutic, Yamil, God not only DESIRES the elect's sanctification, but sees it through, by His grace through faith, to the end!
Check out: 1 Thess 5:23; Heb 2:11; Acts 26:18 and 1 Cor 6:11.
Looks as if God's gettin' the job done!
Ya know, you have a rather peculiar notion even of sanctification (as if it were some sort of sinless state).
Now what were you saying about "strawmen?"

The dehhvastating truth is that you cannot point to one elect who has been sanctified.

But it serves to see the hypocrisy of your hermeneutic and the ridiculousness of your strawman.

Somehow in your twisted mind:

Its ok for God to will you not to sin without making you not sin

But somehow

Its not ok for God to will the lost to be saved without making them to be saved.

Sounds like a theological agenda to me. And all that mass confusion simply because you want to fabricate a definition for "world" that does not exist.

You disqualify one valid (and the most common) meaning for one that does not exist.

Hopefully you are not trying to teach that Abraham is going to inherit all the elect!

quote wrote:
Rom 4:13 For the promise, that he should be the heir of the world, was not to Abraham, or to his seed, through the law, but through the righteousness of faith.
The world is Abraham's inheritance by promise. God is not a promise breaker. Those who are not children of promise predestined to be born again of the incorruptible seed of Abraham and Sarah are not part of the world of John 3:16.
Deal with it instead of giving us your usual soft shoe routine.

DJC49 refers to an article that employs the whole worn out circular reasoning: Kosmos does not mean "all of humanity" because John 3:16 does not refer to all of humanity; john 3:16 does not refer to all of humanity because kosmos does not refer to all of humanity.

Do you not fear what you are doing by adding to the Bible?

The dehhvastating truth is that your definition does not exist anywhere; not in the Bible, not any dictionary, nor anywhere else in the world.

You see, to me, the sovereignty of God is not simply a theory to me that I manipulate to serve my theology.

I actually believe that God is sovereign. And because I believe he is sovereign, I am going to practice that truth in his Word by allowing him to mean what he states, and state what he means.