# John 3:16



## Batman (Oct 29, 2004)

Before I post this...let me state without hesitation that I fall within the Reformed camp 95% of the time. This is one of several scriptures I have heard used to try to diffuse Calvinism...

"For God so loved the world (not just the elect) that He gave His only Son that whoever (not just the elect) should believe in Him should not perish but have eternal life."

I believe wholeheartedly that I was chosen by God from the beginning. I believe, via scripture, that the only reason I (or any Christian) believe is because God called me to be His. 

I know many committed, well-studied Christians who have a difficult time believing that some are destined from the beginning to hell, considering scriptures like John 3:16. 

Isn't there room to say that there may exist, in our limited vision, a paradox, mabey a mystery in this area that we will not understand until we are in heaven? This is not to take anything from the God's absolute sovereignty...God is undoubtedly the author and finisher of our faith, but can we also say that there are some issues we will never fully be able to grasp in our human state?

Just some thoughts I've been chewing on for a while.


----------



## JohnV (Oct 29, 2004)

Welcome aBoard, Batman. 



> _Originally posted by Batman_
> Before I post this...let me state without hesitation that I fall within the Reformed camp 95% of the time. This is one of several scriptures I have heard used to try to diffuse Calvinism...


Well, that's where I fall all the time. And I'm always falling, and especially in camp, at night


> "For God so loved the world (not just the elect) that He gave His only Son that whoever (not just the elect) should believe in Him should not perish but have eternal life."
> 
> I believe wholeheartedly that I was chosen by God from the beginning. I believe, via scripture, that the only reason I (or any Christian) believe is because God called me to be His.
> 
> ...



There are some things that we won't understand, because they belong to God to know. This subject is always difficult because it involves so many aspects, such as the extent of free will, the responsibility of sin, and so on. So you are right, I think, about some mysteries. It is imperitive, as you say, to uphold the sovereignty of God, and not to undermine it with our own excuses. And that, I would think, is the issue with most objections to the decree of reprobation. Man's utter fallenness, or 'Total Depravity', and 'Limited Atonement' seem hard to swallow, but most Arminians can be backed up to the point where they say the same things in their own theology. They're just not used to being consistent or thorough. It's the hardliners that will oppose, even to contradicting themselves, that are problematic. And in such cases its not much use talking about God's mysteries to them.

Jut remember, not even the fanciest argument does any damage to the truth. It can't harm truth in any way at all; it just harms the person doing the arguing. We just have to be careful not to let it harm us.


----------



## BobVigneault (Oct 29, 2004)

John 3:16 says nothing about man's ability to believe, only that the grounds for having eternal life is believing. From scripture we know that no man is willing, and that no man is able to believe. 

Therefore, we may state the truth of John 3:16 as "Whoever will believe will be saved, BUT no one WILL believe for no one is ever willing apart from God's moving." Or we can say, "Whoever will believe will be saved, BUT no one will believe for no one is able apart from the Spirit's enabling."

John 3:16 tells us why the elect are saved, it also tells us why those not called will not be saved. "You do not believe because you are not my sheep." John 10:25


----------



## RamistThomist (Oct 29, 2004)

Go to www.apuritansmind.com and look for McMahon's articles on this topic.


----------



## tdowns (Oct 29, 2004)

*Lutheran*

Is it true that Lutherans don't hold to eternal security? I always thought they held to the reformed doctrines of grace?


----------



## RamistThomist (Oct 29, 2004)

> _Originally posted by tdowns007_
> Is it true that Lutherans don't hold to eternal security? I always thought they held to the reformed doctrines of grace?



Depends on who you ask and how they answer. Luther's book on the Bondage of the Will would seem to preclude a believer's falling away, but yes, some in the Lutheran camp hold that.


----------



## fredtgreco (Oct 29, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Batman_
> Before I post this...let me state without hesitation that I fall within the Reformed camp 95% of the time. This is one of several scriptures I have heard used to try to diffuse Calvinism...
> 
> "For God so loved the world (not just the elect) that He gave His only Son that whoever (not just the elect) should believe in Him should not perish but have eternal life."
> ...



Hello and welcome!

First, could you please review the signature guidelines for the Board? You can get them by clicking on the Signature Requirements words in my signature.

Second, here are some thoughts that I put together for a sermon last year. Essentially, we need to interpret John 3:16 in light of John 3:17 - which Arminians never do. Here at more length:



> The second point today is that God´s love has an object. We have seen that God initiates love, and that His love is great. But God´s act of love is fixed upon an object. Our text tells is that the object of God´s love is the world. What does this mean? Does it mean the entire world? Here the text and its context indicate that God´s love is for His people. We see from the immediate context that "œthe world" here cannot be the entire world. Why do I say this? Because in the very next sentence John says, "œFor God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved" (3:17). If we take the word "œworld" in 3:16 to mean every single person without exception or distinction, then our Lord would appear to be teaching universalism, that is, that everyone will be saved. It just doesn´t make any sense to take the same word in consecutive sentences in two very different ways. That means that it is much better to understand the use of "œworld" in 3:16 by limits of 3:17. This makes even more sense when we take our text in the context of the teaching of the rest of Scripture. In our passage, Christ is speaking to a leading teacher of Judaism who previously missed the point of the OT. Remember that it is God Who is the initiator. It is the Spirit Who blows "œwhere He wills." Christ is not speaking to someone who is unfamiliar with God´s love, just someone who is unfamiliar with the extent of God´s love. The Jews, especially the Pharisees, thought that God´s love was limited to the physical children of Abraham. John highlights this for us later in his gospel, when he recounts in chapter 8 how they try to correct Jesus´ teaching on the forgiveness of sins by claiming Abraham as their father. Their hope was not in God, but in their parentage. That is what Christ is seeking to correct in Nicodemus. He is pointing out that salvation is for all kinds of people. John says much the same thing in 1 John 2:2, when he says that Christ is "œthe propitiation for our sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world."
> The implication is that Jesus knows that we already stand condemned and in need of the love and provision of God. All sorts of people, no matter what they think they can boast in, are the objects of God´s love. That is because God knows our need better than we know it ourselves. That is true for all of us, for there is a danger that we might place our hope and trust in something other than God and minimize our need. Our sin is like a tree. Even if we think we know our own sin, and have seen all its ugliness, that is only like the tree branches above the ground. Our sin is so much greater than we can even realize "“ you know that the roots of a tree, hidden and unseen, are as large as the entire tree above ground "“ that is what our sin is like. God knows all our sin, and yet places His love on us.
> There is one more thing that shows us that God´s love is specific and purposeful, not general and vague. It is directed to those that believe "“ "œGod so loved the world that whoever believes in Him." There is a purpose behind God´s love, as we have seen earlier. We can take comfort from the fact that God directs His love toward us and does so even though we did not first love Him, and even though we are not lovely. But God does require something of us "“ belief. We cannot fool ourselves into thinking that we do not need to rest upon God. But again, let´s not forget the bigger picture here. The objects of God´s love are those who believe in Him, but the broader point of John 3 is that we must be born again, that we are incapable, that God is the initiator. We dare not imitate the Jews and trust in something other than God, even if what that something is, is our believing in God. It is the Spirit that gives birth, it is God, as Paul says, that gives the gift of faith. That is a part of His making His people the specific objects of His love.


----------



## Batman (Oct 29, 2004)

*Good stuff...*

Thanks for the replies, fellas.


----------



## irishcalvinist (Oct 30, 2004)

*Samuel Rutherford on John 3:16*

Samuel Rutherford put it this way; `The love of 3 of John 16 is restricted to the church... The loved world, the world saved (v17), the world of which Christ is the Saviour (John 4:42), the world that Christ giveth His life unto (John 6:33) and for whose life he giveth His life (v55), the world of which Abraham, but much more Christ, is heir (Rom 4:13) the reconciled world, occasioned by the Jews falling off Christ (Rom 11:15). All these are the Elect, Believing, and Redeemed World;'

Reformed in Christ,

Sean-
http://www.cprf.co.uk


----------



## ConfederateTheocrat (Oct 31, 2004)

"Whosoever believeth in Him" *shall not perish* (*the 5th Point of Calvinism). That is very consistent with Calvinism. Whosoever believes was predestined to do so.


----------



## CalsFarmer (Nov 2, 2004)

Check out Romans 8:19 to 22, deliverance of creation from the bondage of corruption. Now compare with 'world'.


----------



## Batman (Nov 2, 2004)

Calsfarmer...I read the passage, I don't quite know what you mean.


----------



## CalsFarmer (Nov 2, 2004)

Batman...

WORLD - CREATION

All of creation.


----------



## Batman (Nov 2, 2004)

So you believe in universalism?...I'm not following you. Are you implying we can insert the word "creation" where "world" is in that passage?..."For God so loved the CREATION, that He gave His only begotten son, that whoever would believe in him would not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send His son into the CREATION to condemn the CREATION, but to save the CREATION through him."


----------



## Scott Bushey (Nov 2, 2004)

The easiest way to understand the word Kosmos is in light of the rest of biblical harmony. The book of Ephesians supports the elective decree. There is no arguing that men are elected by God unto salvation. The word Kosmos must be weighed alongside this fact. Not everyone is elect, but the elect will assuredly come from every tongue, tribe and nation.

Rev 7:9 After these things I saw, and behold, a great crowd which no one was able to number them, out of every nation, even tribes and peoples and tongues, standing in front of the throne, and before the Lamb, having been clothed with white robes, and in their hands palm branches.


----------



## CalsFarmer (Nov 2, 2004)

Batman,

No I do not believe in universalism . You are reading more into it than I intended.


----------



## Scott Bushey (Nov 2, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Batman_
> So you believe in universalism?...I'm not following you. Are you implying we can insert the word "creation" where "world" is in that passage?..."For God so loved the CREATION, that He gave His only begotten son, that whoever would believe in him would not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send His son into the CREATION to condemn the CREATION, but to save the CREATION through him."



For the sake of whatever point CalsFarmer is trying to make, The word does not affect the outcome of the doctrine.


----------



## RamistThomist (Nov 2, 2004)

Perhaps he is trying to say "the created order with respect to the Redeemed" will be saved/restored? I won't take that route because I do not know/think that is what Paul means. I agree with Scott; this verse does not prove/disprove Calvinism.

Anyway, I think McMahon pointed this out: "whosoever" is added by the translators.


----------



## CalsFarmer (Nov 2, 2004)

thank you


----------



## Me Died Blue (Nov 2, 2004)

I've never understood why many non-Calvinists think that the "whosoever" in John 3:16 even seemingly challenges Calvnism in any way. Indeed, _whosoever believes_ (elect or non-elect) will indeed have eternal life. The thing is, because of Total Depravity and Irresistible Grace, only the elect will ever believe.

As to the word "world," Genesis 3:20, 6:13, 17, Matthew 10:22, Mark 1:5, John 1:10, 12:19, Acts 2:17, Acts 10:12, Romans 1:8, 2 Timothy 4:17, 1 John 2:15, 5:19, Revelation 12:9 and Revelation 13:3 all use either "world" or "all" in a clearly non-literal way.


----------



## Batman (Nov 2, 2004)

good stuff, guys.


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (Nov 2, 2004)

This may be of help:

http://www.apuritansmind.com/Arminianism/McMahonExegesisOfJohn3_16.htm


----------



## fredtgreco (Nov 2, 2004)

> _Originally posted by Finn McCool_
> Perhaps he is trying to say "the created order with respect to the Redeemed" will be saved/restored? I won't take that route because I do not know/think that is what Paul means. I agree with Scott; this verse does not prove/disprove Calvinism.
> 
> Anyway, I think McMahon pointed this out: "whosoever" is added by the translators.



I'm not sure what is meant here, but the Greek in John 3:16 is clearly of a whosoever category. Literally it is "everyone who believes" -- pa/j o` pisteu,wn



[Edited on 11-2-2004 by webmaster]


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (Nov 2, 2004)

> _Originally posted by fredtgreco_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by Finn McCool_
> ...



As a participle it is the believing ones. Any believing ones? Yes, but not the Arminian "whosoever" (i.e. everyone and anyone who has ever lived). Rather, the believing ones.


----------



## fredtgreco (Nov 2, 2004)

> _Originally posted by webmaster_
> 
> 
> > _Originally posted by fredtgreco_
> ...



Absolutely, that is why it is "whosoever believes" not whosoever. We are on the same page here


----------



## WrittenFromUtopia (Dec 25, 2004)

I find it mind-boggling that Arminians try to explain John 3:16 while ignoring the context of John 3:1-15 and all the verses _after_ 16.


----------



## Average Joey (Jan 1, 2005)

Jhn 3:36 He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him.


----------



## Robin (Jan 1, 2005)

Here's a simpler way to get what's going on....

*Never* read Bible verses yanked out of context. Read from John 3:1 all the way through without stopping to v. 21...This will reveal the plain message of the Text.

Jesus is dialogging with a Pharisee/Elder - who should know about what Jesus explains to him. All during the dialog, Jesus is using "indicative" language -- meaning He is explaining how things are. Jesus is not telling Nicodemus to "do" anything - (the "imperative" language.) 

Arminians (as well as cultists) confuse these two styles of languages in the NT. This is why there is always bad doctrine coming out of it. This is a very important issue to understand! Remember, any language explaining matters of fact, is "indicative" -- any language explaining things to do, is "imperative." Always keep the order of these in place: "indicative" before "imperative." Indicative language is the Gospel; Imperative language is the Law. This is not a problem if we read from beginning to end - large chunks of Scripture (NT) and/or the entire epistle/Gospel. 

As Fred points out, v. 17 comes to the point that Jesus is making as Jesus locks-down what His mission is all about.

Robin

[Edited on 1-2-2005 by Robin]


----------

