>>On that basis, then, who would know this verse better...people who speak Greek or people who don’t? People like your friend who study NT Greek as an academic subject in the 20th century, or the people who spoke it natively in the 1st and 2nd centuries?<<
Here is the problem. She followed up by reminding me that those people that actually know and understand the original text disagree strongly on some interpretations. IOW, trusting the experts is like believing the “majority of climate scientists” regarding Man Made Global Warming.
See, it’s just not that easy to trust flawed men. We are left with the scripture as interpreted and, more importantly, the Holy Spirit, to guide us. Fortunately, the core of Christianity is very simple indeed: Christ and Him crucified and being raised from the dead 3 days later as the perfect sacrifice for all of our sins.
With all our bickering and honest discussion of the nuances and “meat” of scripture, it really IS about John 3:16 in the end.
Yes of course. That's because we are far removed from the original audience and we have to infer a meaning from historical data. That wasn't the case in the first centuries A.D.
And I strongly reject the argument that we can't trust the Fathers because "They are flawed men." What are you? What am I? If they are flawed, we are flawed even more. And if we have a reliable guide in the Holy Ghost, were they not reliably guided as well?