John 3:16 is one of the most popular and quoted verses in the Bible, but what does it mean? Often times we apply our own interpretation on to a translation. When I was a kid, I memorized this verse in the King James Version:
John 3:16 KJV - 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.
Ther are two parts of this verse that we often get wrong. We imply a meaning to it that is not there in the text. I will break out the two parts and cover them separately.
First Mistake
The first thing we get wrong, is that we think this verse is telling us WHY God sent Jesus to die on the cross. That is a wrong assumption. The words are actually telling us HOW God showed his love for us. We often imply the mean of the first part of John 3:16 to be "Because God loved the world so much that he sent his only Son to die for it." Another way of saying this would be, "God sent his Son to die for the world because he loves us so much." This is how I typically hear people explain John 3:16, but is that what Jesus is really saying? We need to look at the greek words that Jesus spoke and the first greek word is οὕτως, which means "in this manner", "in this way", "thus" or "so". Below is the first part of the verse in greek and then three different ways it could be translated into english. Just a bit of a warning though.
When you take greek directly to english it has a bit of a tendancy to sound like Yoda from Star Wars.
Greek: Οὕτως γὰρ ἠγάπησεν ὁ Θεὸς τὸν κόσμον, ὥστε τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ τὸν μονογενῆ ἔδωκεν
English option 1: In this manner for loved God the world, that the Son, the only begotten, he gave
English option 2: Thus for loved God the world, that the Son, the only begotten, he gave
English option 3: So for loved God the world, that the Son, the only begotten, he gave
While all three options are technically accurate, which one does a better job of communicationg the idea? Which one gets the point across most effectively and with the least amount of confusion? These are the descisions that the translaters have to make. The ESV translation actually gives two options.
"For God so loved the world,[a] that he gave his only Son" but then footnote "a" gives this interpretation, "For this is how God loved the world".
One of the reasons I mainly use the ESV is because they strive to stay true the meaning of the original greek words. What Jesus is saying is basically this; "This is how God showed his love for the world. He gave his only Son for it." John tells us this again in 1 John 4:9. The same man who quotes Jesus in John 3:16 continues to teach this principle in his letter to the churches that we call 1 John.
1 John 4:9 - This is how God showed his love among us: He sent his one and only Son into the world that we might live through him.
This interpretation is also consitent with Paul's teachings in Romans. Romans 5:8 But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.
So the first part of John 3:16 is telling us how God showed his love for us, not why he sent his Son to die for us. I have heard multiple sermons talking about the wrong interpretation of John 3:16. Do you see the significance of the difference? The incorrect interpretation is all about us. It is all about how important we are. It says that we are so important that God sent Jesus to die for us. This builds up our pride. The Biblical view though is that God's love is so great that he sent Jesus to die for me even though I am not worth it. Compare the wrong interpretation to the correct interpretation that is all about God and how great his love is. If we were to preach a sermon on the correct interpretation of John 3:16 it would be all about how great God's love is. He loves us lowly humans enough to die for us as compared to "I'm so important to God that he died for me". The value of why God loves us lies in God, not in us. John 3:16 is telling us how God loved us, not why he loves us.
Second Mistake
The second mistake we make with John 3:16 is that we think it teaches "free will". The second part of John 3:16 in the KJV goes like this.
that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
We often read that old word "whosoever" and interpret it to mean "if anyone", but there is no "if" in the greek. The greek words are ἵνα πᾶς. ἵνα means "that", "in order that", "so that". πᾶς in the plural means "all", "every" or "each". So once again, let us look at this in both greek and english, and we see that there is no "if".
Greek: ἵνα πᾶς ὁ πιστεύων εἰς αὐτὸν μὴ ἀπόληται
English option 1: in order that all the beliving in him not should perish
English option 2: in order that every the beliving in him not should perish
English option 3: in order that each the beliving in him not should perish
This is not saying that if anyone believes in Jesus, they won't perish. It is saying that those people that beleive in Jesus won't perish. It has nothing to do with unbelievers. It is not talking about unbelivers. It is simply stating that the believers won't perish. This verse can't be used as "evidence" for "free will". This verse is actually silent on the matter of free will. All that John 3:16 is saying is that God showed his love for the world by sending his Son to save those who belive on him. That's it. That is all it is saying. It is not saying that we are valuable, and it is not saying that we have "free will" to choose or reject God. Those are other topics that are not discussed in this verse.
This is one of the examples why I think many Christians hold so strongly to the King James Version only. The wrong interpretations of John 3:16 are extremely popluar and are much easier to teach and defend if we only use the KJV. If we ignore the original greek and the translation in the ESV then we can easily use John 3:16 to tell people that we are more valuable to God than Jesus is, and that we have free will. I'm not saying that the KJV is a bad translation of John 3:16, but it is an outdated version (just as the latin version is). Nobody uses the word "whosoever" any more. It is easy to tell someone that "whosoever" means "if anyone" when it in fact does not.