God so Love the World

[seer]

John 3:16-18

"For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son."

To remain consistent the Calvinist must rewrite this text to say that God so love the elect. But is this possible? In the context there are two classes of men - those who believe and those who don't. Are we to believe that Christ excludes one class of men from the world in this context? Hardly, they are two closely linked in the text. Both classes of men are included in the "world" that God so loved.

Another example:

Compare John 17:14 with John 17:21

Vs.14:

"I have given them your word and the world has hated them, for they are not of the world any more than I am of the world."

Clearly the world includes the non-elect. Is this the same world that God loved - or a different world?

Vs.21

"that all of them may be one, Father, just as you are in me and I am in you. May they also be in us so that THE WORLD MAY BELIEVE that you have sent me."

The same world that Christ just mentioned in verse 14 (the world of the non-elect) is the same world that Christ now hopes "may believe."

There is no question that John's "world" comprehends the non-elect. And is the same world that God so loved and that Christ hopes "may believe."

[theist]

seer,

Tim and Tom are brothers.
Tim is saved.
Tom is reprobate.

For God so loved Tim and Tom, he gave his only begotten Son so that Tim may not perish, but have everlasting life.
Tom was sent to hell...

In what way is tom loved?

in HIS grip,

rustyb

[seer]

Again, theist try to deal with the points. Point one: how can you honestly deny that both classes of men are in the world that God loved Jn.3:16-18. And two: find a consistent method showing us who the world consists of in Jn.17.

"For God so loved Tim and Tom, he gave his only begotten Son so that both Tim and Tom MAY NOT perish, but have everlasting life."


"In what way is tom loved?"

God gave his Son for Tom. Tom rejected God's offer of forgivness.

[theist]

seer,

It may appear to some of our readers that the exposition we have given of John 3:16 in the chapter on "Difficulties and Objections" is a forced and unnatural one, inasmuch as our definition of the term "world" seems to be out of harmony with the meaning and scope of this word in other passages, where, to supply the world of believers (God’s elect) as a definition of "world" would make no sense. Many have said to us, "Surely, ‘world’ means world, that is, you, me, and everybody." In reply we would say: We know from experience how difficult it is to set aside the "traditions of men" and come to a passage which we have heard explained in a certain way scores of times, and study it carefully for ourselves without bias Nevertheless, this is essential if we would learn the mind of God.

Many people suppose they already know the simple meaning of John 3:16, and therefore they conclude that no diligent study is required of them to discover the precise teaching of this verse. Needless to say, such an attitude shuts out any further light which they otherwise might obtain on the passage. Yet, if anyone will take a Concordance and read carefully the various passages in which the term "world" (as a translation of "kosmos") occurs, he will quickly perceive that to ascertain the precise meaning of, the word "world" in any given passage is not nearly so easy as is popularly supposed. The word "kosmos," and its English equivalent "world," is not used with a uniform significance in the New Testament. Very far from it. It is used in quite a number of different ways. Below we will refer to a few passages where this term occurs, suggesting a tentative definition in each case:
_
"Kosmos" is used of the Universe as a whole: Acts 17:24 - "God that made the world and all things therein seeing that He is Lord of heaven and earth."

"Kosmos" is used of the earth: John 13:1; Ephesians 1:4, etc., etc.- "When Jesus knew that his hour was come that He should depart out of this world unto the Father, having loved His own which were in the world He loved them unto the end." "Depart out of this world" signifies, leave this earth. "According as He hath chosen us in Him before the foundation of the world." This expression signifies, before the earth was founded—compare Job 38:4 etc.

"Kosmos" is used of the world-system: John 12:31 etc. "Now is the judgment of this world: now shall the Prince of this world be cast out"— compare Matthew 4:8 and 1 John 5:19, R. V.

"Kosmos" is used of the whole human race: Romans 3:19, etc.—"Now we know that what things soever the law saith, it saith to them who are under the law: that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God."

"Kosmos" is used of humanity minus believers: John 15:18; Romans 3:6 "If the world hate you, ye know that it hated Me before it hated you." Believers do not "hate" Christ, so that "the world" here must signify the world of unbelievers in contrast from believers who love Christ. "God forbid: for then how shall God judge the world." Here is another passage where "the world" cannot mean "you, me, and everybody," for believers will not be "judged" by God, see John 5:24. So that here, too, it must be the world of unbelievers which is in view.

"Kosmos" is used of Gentiles in contrast from Jews: Romans 11:12 etc. "Now if the fall of them (Israel) be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them (Israel) the riches of the Gentiles; how much more their (Israel’s) fulness." Note how the first clause in italics is defined by the latter clause placed in italics. Here, again, "the world" cannot signify all humanity for it excludes Israel!
"Kosmos" is used of believers only: John 1:29; 3:16, 17; 6:33; 12:47; 1 Corinthians 4:9; 2 Corinthians 5:19. We leave our readers to turn to these passages, asking them to note, carefully, exactly what is said and predicated of "the world" in each place.

Thus it will be seen that "kosmos" has at least seven clearly defined different meanings in the New Testament. It may be asked, Has then God used a word thus to confuse and confound those who read the Scriptures? We answer, No! nor has He written His Word for lazy people who are too dilatory, or too busy with the things of this world, or, like Martha, so much occupied with "serving," they have no time and no heart to "search" and "study" Holy Writ! Should it be asked further, But how is a searcher of the Scriptures to know which of the above meanings the term "world" has in any given passage? The answer is: This may be ascertained by a careful study of the context, by diligently noting what is predicated of "the world" in each passage, and by prayer fully consulting other parallel passages to the one being studied. The principal subject of John 3:16 is Christ as the Gift of God. The first clause tells us what moved God to "give" His only begotten Son, and that was His great "love;" the second clause informs us for whom God "gave" His Son, and that is for, "whosoever(or, better, ‘every one’) believeth;" while the last clause makes known why God "gave" His Son (His purpose), and that is, that everyone that believeth "should not perish but have everlasting life." That "the world" in John 3:16 refers to the world of believers (God’s elect), in contradistinction from "the world of the ungodly" (2 Pet. 2:5), is established, unequivocally established, by a comparison of the other passages which speak of God’s "love." "God commendeth His love toward US"—the saints, Romans 5:8. "Whom the Lord loveth He chasteneth"—every son, Hebrews 12:6. "We love Him, because He first loved US"—believers, 1 John 4:19. The wicked God "pities" (see Matt. 18:33). Unto the unthankful and evil God is "kind" (see Luke 6:35). The vessels of wrath He endures "with much long-suffering" (see Rom. 9:22). But "His own" God "loves"!!
- A.W. Pink

in HIS grip,

rustyb

[theist]

seer,

also, for the sake of argument; I direct you to another resource.

http://www.planetkc.com/puritan/Articles/John3_16_f.htm

It's an interesting article, you might find your answers there; unless, your purpose is just to argue?

in HIS grip,

rustyb

[seer]

rusty, I have read all these things before. As a matter of fact I just reread Pink's book two weeks ago. And this is why I'am asking the question because the arguments are weak.

1. Please tell me how you can exclude unbelievers from the world that God so love when Christ plainly put unbelievers in that context.

2. Show me a consistent way to understand who is included in the "world" in John 17. You can't! The same world of unbelievers in 17:6,9 are the same world that Christ says may in fact believe.

3. In other words Rusty, please show me in the book of John were the word "world" does not naturally include the non-elect.

If you really want to see how weak your arguments are go here:

http://www.crisispub.com/greek/

Unless you prefer your man made theology over scripture.

[seer]

BTW - "For God so loved Tim and Tom that he gave his one and only Son, that WHOEVER (Either Tim or Tom or Both) believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life."

Weak Rusty...

[theist]

seer,

John 17:21 can mean that christians should become as one, loving on another, as to have the pagans give them praise for such- which is giving Glory to God.

or, one can translate it, That the elect, who are in unbelief, may become saved.

but, you have the burden also, because you point out that the world will always hate them and their message, so then, how can a world (who has no ears to hear and eyes to see), fulfilling the lusts of the flesh, seeking not the Glory of God, and expressing their hostitlity to God come to belief?

Also, look at the MANY way "world" is used in Chapter 17, more than 2 ways...

in HIS grip,

rustyb

[theist]

seer,

John 3:16 reads?

God loved every single person of every age so much that He gave His only-begotten Son to die for them so that as a result, anyone can receive eternal life simply by making their own free-will decision to trust in Jesus Christ.

in HIS grip,

rustyb

[seer]

Again Rusty, show me in the book of John or chapter 17 were the world would NOT naturally include the non-elect.


or, one can translate it, That the elect, who are in unbelief, may become saved.

Of course it does not say that at all. And as a matter of fact EVERY TIME Christ uses the word "world" in that chapter it naturally includes the non-elect. So now Christ suddenly changes the meaning to include only the elect? Get real rusty...

[theist]

seer,

I don't know what you want. Do you say that God wants the world, which can't believe in him (1Cor 2:14, 1Cor 1:18) to believe in him, apart from his actions? Does this "believe"(v21) imply faith?

Rather, tell me what it says.

in HIS grip,

rustyb

[seer]

I don't know what you want. Do you say that God wants the world, which can't believe in him (1Cor 2:14, 1Cor 1:18) to believe in him, apart from his actions? Does this "believe"(v21) imply faith?

No Rusty, I am asking you to show me in the book of John were the word world is used and it does not naturally include the non-elect. From there we can move on to your other points.

[theist]

seer,

I am not going to debate this issue. It's one of semantics and grammatics. So, I will say, of my own personal opinion, often when "world" is used, it's a generalization. So, when I see "world", I don't say "hmm, that's the elect" or "that's every single person in existance"; I see the grandness of it, the limits and the maginitude. The gospel was for the world, to be preached to the world, and to be spread throughout the world.

"the rule of thumb, is that a passage with only one possible meaning (hence, a clear passage) allows us to interpret a passage with several different possible meanings. A variant reading cannot be used to overthrow the clear meaning of another passage." - CD

Romans 5:6 You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly.

in HIS grip,

rustyb

[joelkaki]

Seer, I'll just give you my thoughts on this. I believe world in John 3:16 to refer to world as in Gentiles, not just Jews. I believe Christ to be putting away any ideas of Jewish exclusivism here. He is saying that it is not just the Jews--natural Jewish descent does not save. In His talk with Nicodemus, He emphasizes the new birth--not Jewish exclusivism. In other words, Jesus was conveying that you must be born again; merely being born a Jew does not grant you eternal life. God so loved the WORLD (which you must admit has multiple meanings), not just the Jews, but Gentiles as well, that he gave his son, so that whoever believes, not just of Jews, but whoever believes, will have everlasting life.

Joel

[theist]

Joel,

I agree with that remark. I also believe when jesus says "I will draw all men to me", he means the exact same thing. Truly, he gave his son for both jew and gentile.

I wonder how the jews felt about that comment (assuming Jesus said it)....

jew, "Whole world?!"
Jesus, "Yes, I have two flocks"
jew, "I cannot understand him!"

in HIS grip,

rustyb

[seer]

God so loved the WORLD (which you must admit has multiple meanings), not just the Jews, but Gentiles as well, that he gave his son, so that whoever believes, not just of Jews, but whoever believes, will have everlasting life.

There is nothing in the passage to suggest that Christ is dealing with Jewish exclusivism here. That thought is imported. But my point remains - every time we find the word "world" in the Gospel of John it naturally includes the non-elect. And John 3:16 is no exception,expecially since Christ names two classes of men one verse later. You would have to contend that one class of men belongs to the world while the other doesn't.

[theist]

seer,

Would you agree Jesus came to save the world, in that he was saying the new covenant was for not only the jews? You must admit, that was the prevalent thought of the day; A saviour to rebuild and save the jewish people from the gentiles. I, being of the reformed faith, have no problem with those verses. I think you might have a hard time say Jesus died for everysingle person, knowing that not all men are going to heaven. In what way did Jesus die for these people? Did he setup a method of being saved or did he literally take their sins away? Does a special word combination make the act complete, as if Jesus had only done half the work- man doing the other half by believing?

in HIS grip,

rustyb

[seer]

I think you might have a hard time say Jesus died for everysingle person, knowing that not all men are going to heaven. In what way did Jesus die for these people? Did he setup a method of being saved or did he literally take their sins away? Does a special word combination make the act complete, as if Jesus had only done half the work- man doing the other half by believing?

First Theist, it is clear that Christ introduces two classes of men in this discourse - believers and unbelievers. How one can be excluded from the world that God so loved is beyond me.

Second,EVERY time John uses the word "world" in his gospel it naturally includes the non-elect. If you can find me an exception,please show me.

Third, of course men have to believe to be saved. The offer is universal (whosoever will). Christ's work on the cross was ONLY potential for you when you were still in unbelief. You were under God's wrath.

[seer]

Notes by Malcolm L. Lavender

“16For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18He 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.”

We note several things about God: 1) God acts: He loved, He gave His Son; 2) God had a purpose: the salvation of the world; 3) Salvation is expressed in the potential[18] mood: subjunctive–may not perish, may have eternal life; 4) World is a monadic[19] construction, which means it is indivisible.

The Scriptures declare that God loved the world.[20] The world is in the accusative case and the direct object of God’s love. This is called the accusative of extent. This is an urgent, compelling love extended to ton kosmon (the world) without limitation whatsoever; for who [except the Calvinist] could look at the cross and see the bleeding, writhing Jehovah-Saviour dying there for ton kosmon and demand limitation! Clearly, the world, the whole world, is the object of God’s love. Thus, the extent of His love is specified and extended to its object—ton kosmon! Extent cannot be limited as in atonement; extent is the world and cannot be divided into a class or cast system in which sufficiency in atonement is for the non-elect/damned and efficiency is for the elect/saved.

The noun world is a construction in which the noun, in syntax, is monadic. Thus, the world is viewed as an indivisible unit incapable of being separated or divided into the elect and damned.

The world in monadic construction can no more be divided into the saved and damned than light, a monadic construction, can be divided into darkness and light.

the world: The world, discussed above, is a construction in the singular number and is the only such thing of its kind. The world is all humanity separated from God by the Fall, so lost. The world is the direct object, terminus, or end of the action of the verb, “loved.” The world is a construction that cannot be divided into some receiving an outward general call and damned regardless of what they do; and others receive a special inward call and are irresistibly saved. All are the objects of God’s love–loved collectively, but respond to that love individually.

everyone believing in Him: [10]Everyone translates pas[11] (everyone, all), all, the great mass of humanity considered individually; so there is nobody else–everyone, all. No distinction can be made here as to the kind of call that is received—outward general call/ a special inward call—with respect to believing unto salvation, and the object is the whole world. God’s love is all-inclusive to the world as a whole, but that love is responded to individually, person by person.

may not perish[12]…may have[13] eternal life:[14] The benefits of may not perishing and may have eternal life are in the subjunctive mood, expressing desire, potential, probability; the benefits are strictly conditional, conditioned on believing. The two calls, therefore, one call to “irresistible grace” and the other with “no grace in the call,” simply cannot not be brought into harmonize with the potential moods here. The benefits of an “irresistible call,” such as “irresistible grace,” simply cannot be expressed in potential construction–may not perish…may have.

but[15] the world may be saved:[16] First, it is the world that may be saved, not a group in a caste system known as the elect and all others excluded. The statement here is in a potential mood as a desire or possibility. The argument for irresistible grace, then, brought about by an efficacious or a special inward call is absolutely out of the question in the light of a potential mood; further, the Calvinistic claim for the decree is invalid, apostate, unregenerate unbelief that the Atonement is for Adam’s fallen race.



http://www.crisispub.com/greek/1.htm#penal_atonement_cannot_be_constructed

[Pilgrim]

The real issue is that seer assumes that the only expressin of love that God can have is to include all of humanity in salvation. That is a false dilema.

[seer]

The real issue is that seer assumes that the only expressin of love that God can have is to include all of humanity in salvation. That is a false dilema.

In what sense does God love a person that He has given no chance of salvation?

[Pilgrim]

In what way does he not? You assume a one to one corrolation between what seems painful or unfair to a human (or you personally) with what is in actuality bad or evil.

I would assume you make the same mistake in the other way as well. That is to say, you have confused what feels good to you or what seems right to you ( a finite being) with what is actually good or right.

[seer]

In what way does he not? You assume a one to one corrolation between what seems painful or unfair to a human (or you personally) with what is in actuality bad or evil.

No Pilgrim, I want to know how God LOVES a person He has given no hope and intends to torment for eternity.

Or is hell an act of love towards the sinner? Remember you brought up this love thing.

[seer]

That is to say, you have confused what feels good to you or what seems right to you ( a finite being) with what is actually good or right.

We are talking about love, and we know what love does.

"Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs. Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth. It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres. Love never fails."

And love, loves it's neighbor as well as it's enemies...