John 3:16

[cygnusx1]

This was the explanation given by Frances Turretin, Reformed theologian in Geneva (1623-1687):

The love treated of in John 3:16. . . cannot be universal towards all and every one, but special towards a few... because the end of that love which God intends is the salvation of those whom He pursues with such love... If therefore God sent Christ for that end, that through Him the world might be saved, He must either have failed of His end, or the world must necessarily be saved in fact. But it is certain that not the whole world, but only those chosen out of the world are saved; therefore, to them properly has this love reference.... Why then should not the world here be taken not universally for individuals, but indefinitely for anyone, Jews as well as Gentiles, without distinction of nation, language and condition, that He may be said to have loved the human race, inasmuch as He was unwilling to destroy it entirely but decreed to save some certain persons out of it, not only from one people as before, but from all indiscriminately, although the effects of that love should not be extended to each individual, but only to some certain ones, viz, those chosen out of the world? (Theological Institutes)

​

About the word, world, in Scripture, Abraham Kuyper, the Dutch theologian (1837-1920) wrote:

For if there is anything that is certain from a somewhat more attentive reading of Holy Scripture, and that may be held as firmly established, it is, really, the irrefutable fact, that the word, world, in Holy Scripture, means "all men" only as a very rare exception and almost always means something entirely different.

​

In explanation, specifically, of the "world" of John 3:16, Kuyper went on to say that the reference is to the "proper kernel" of the creation, the elect people of God, "which Jesus snatches away from Satan."

...out of this kernel, out this congregation, out of this people, a "new world," a "new earth and new heaven," shall one day appear, by a wonder-work of God. The earth does not merely serve to allow the elect to be saved, in order then to disappear. No, the elect are men; these men form a whole, a collection, an organism; that organism is grounded in creation; and because now this creation is the reflection of God's wisdom and the work of His hands, God's administration of it may not come to nothing, but in the Great Day God's will with this creation shall be perfectly realized. [Dat De Genade Particulier Is (That Grace is Particular). My translation of the Dutch.]

​

Essentially the same is the interpretation of Arthur W. Pink (1886-1952):

Turning now to John 3:16, it should be evident from the passages just quoted that this verse will not bear the construction usually put upon it. "God so loved the world." Many suppose that this means, The entire human race. But "the entire human race" includes all mankind from Adam till the close of earth's history: it reaches backward as well as forward! Consider, then, the history of mankind before Christ was born. Unnumbered millions lived and died before the Savior came to the earth, lived here "having no hope and without God in the world," and therefore passed out into eternity of woe. If God "loved" them, where is the slightest proof thereof? Scripture declares "Who (God) in times past (from the tower of Babel till after Pentecost) suffered all nations to walk in their own ways" (Acts 14:16). Scripture declares that "And even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient" (Rom. 1:28). To Israel God said, "You only have I known of all the families of the earth" (Amos 3:2). In view of these plain passages who will be so foolish as to insist that God in the past loved all mankind! The same applies with equal force to the future .... But the objector comes back to John 3:16 and says, "World means world. "True, but we have shown that "the world" does not mean the whole human family. The fact is that "the world" is used in a general way... Now the first thing to note in connection with John 3:16 is that our Lord was there speaking to Nicodemus, a man who believed that God's mercies were confined to his own nation. Christ there announced that God's love in giving His Son had a larger object in view, that it flowed beyond the boundary of Palestine, reaching out to "regions beyond." In other words, this was Christ's announcement that God had a purpose of grace toward Gentiles as well as Jews. "God so loved the world," then, signifies, God's love is international in its scope. But does this mean that God loves every individual among the Gentiles? Not necessarily, for as we have seen the term "world" is general rather than specific, relative rather than absolute . . . the "world" in John 3:16 must, in the final analysis refer to the world of God's people. Must we say, for there is no other alternative solution. It cannot mean the whole human race, for one half of the race was already in hell when Christ came to earth. It is unfair to insist that it means every human being now living, for every other passage in the New Testament where God's love is mentioned limits it to His own people-- search and see! The objects of God's love in John 3:16 are precisely the same as the objects of Christ's love in John 13:1: "Now before the Feast of the Passover, when Jesus knew that His time 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." We may admit that our interpretation of John 3:16 is no novel one invented by us, but one almost uniformly given by the Reformers and Puritans, and many others since them. (The Sovereignty of God)

http://www.prca.org/pamphlets/pamphlet_52.html
​

 

[cygnusx1]

Universal terms are frequently used in connection with the death of Christ, as also in connection with the categories which define its import (cf. II Cor. 5:14, 15, 19; I Tim. 2:6; Heb. 2:9; I John 2:2). It is surprising that students of Scripture should with such ease appeal to these texts as if they determined the question in favor of universal atonement. The Scripture frequently uses universal terms when, obviously, they are not to be understood of all men inclusively and distributively or of all things inclusively. When we read in Genesis 6:13. "The end of all flesh is come before me," it is plain that this is not to be understood absolutely or inclusively. Not all flesh was destroyed. Or when Paul says that the trespass of Israel was the riches of the world (Rom. 11:12), he cannot be using the word "world" of all men distributively. Israel is not included, and not all Gentiles were partakers of the riches intended. When Paul says, "all things are lawful for me" (I Cor. 6:12; cf. 10:23), he did not mean that he was at liberty to do anything and everything. Examples could be multiplied and every person should readily perceive the implied restriction. An expression must always be interpreted in terms of the universe of discourse. Thus in Hebrew 2:9 the expression "every one on whose behalf Christ tasted death must be understood as referring to every one of whom the writer is speaking, namely, every one of the sons to be brought to glory, of the sanctified, of the children whom God has given to Christ and of whom He is not ashamed (vss. 10, 11, 12, 13). And it must not be overlooked that in II Corinthians 5:14, 15 the "all" for whom Christ died do not embrace any more than those who died in Him "one" died for all: therefore all died." In Paul's teaching to die with Christ is to die to sin (cf. Rom. 6:2-10).
The atonement is efficacious — it accomplishes redemption, it makes purification for sin, it reconciles to God, it secures the salvation of those for whom it was intended. Only on this premise is He the Saviour. Only on this basis is He freely offered as Saviour to all without distinction. It is not as Saviour He would be offered to all men if He did not actually save (cf. Matt. 1:21).

http://www.the-highway.com/atonement_murray.html

 

[Elderone]

cygnusx1

Thanks for the informative posts and site addresses

 

[cygnusx1]

cygnusx1

Thanks for the informative posts and site addresses

I find it really challenging to examine just what is being said in John 3:16

The word “world” cannot be loosely translated as meaning every one for all time, including those who have already perished. No one would grant that it includes all men in hell, or those who had previously been in hell at the time of the crucifixion. But by not granting this, the scope of those for whom God “so loves” is already limited. I quote John Owen at length, “First…Now, this love we say to be that, greater than which there is none. Secondly, by the “world,” we understand the elect of God only, though not considered in this place as such, but under such a notion as, being true of them, serves for the farther exaltation of God's love towards them, which is the end here designed; and this is, as they are poor, miserable, lost creatures in the world, of the world, scattered abroad in all places of the world, not tied to Jews or Greeks, but dispersed in any nation, kindred, and language under heaven. Thirdly, “i[na pa/j o` pisteu,wn” “in order that every believer,” is to us, and is declarative of the intention of God in sending or giving his Son, con­taining no distribution of the world beloved but a direction to the person whose good was intended, that love being an unchangeable intention of the chiefest good. Fourthly, “Should not perish, but have life everlasting,” contains an expression of the particular aim and intention of God in this business; which is, the certain salvation of believers by Christ. And this, in general, is the interpretation of the words which we adhere unto, which will yield us sundry arguments, efficient each of them to evert the general ransom; which, that they may be the better bottomed, and the more clearly convincing, we will lay down and compare the several words and expression of this place, about whose interpreta­tion we digress, with the reason of our rejecting the one sense and embracing the other:­ The first difference in the interpretation of this place is about the cause of sending Christ; called here love. The second, about the object of this love; called here the world. Thirdly, Concerning the intention of God in sending his Son; said to be that believers might be saved.[24] As Owen again states, “It is the special love of God to his elect, as we affirm, and so, consequently, not any such thing as our adversaries suppose to be intended by it, - namely, a velleity or natural inclination to the good of all.”[25] It must be kept in mind that Owen did believe God gave good things to lost men, but it does not argue a natural disposition in Him to do so in this saving sense.

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

 

[cygnusx1]

bump

 

[cygnusx1]

I am trying to find Warfield on John 3:16 , I found him very helpful years ago , anyone seen his comments on this verse please post them , thanks !

See Benjamin B. Warfield's famous sermon on John 3:16 "God's Immeasurable Love" in, The Saviour of the World: Sermons Preached in the Chapel of Princeton Theological Seminary (Cherry Hill, N.J.: Mack Publishing Co., reprint, 1972), pp. 69-87.

 

[BBAS 64]

Good Day, Brother

As always your threads are packed with much "good Stuff". I am thankful for people such as yourself.

Just thought I would add here, in the KJV 1611 the translators cross ref. to 1 JN 4:9

1Jo 4:9 In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.

The 1611:

http://dewey.library.upenn.edu/sceti/printedbooksNew/index.cfm?TextID=kjbible&PagePosition=1320

Interesting....

Peace to u,
Bill

 

[cygnusx1]

Good Day, Brother

As always your threads are packed with much "good Stuff". I am thankful for people such as yourself.

Just thought I would add here, in the KJV 1611 the translators cross ref. to 1 JN 4:9

1Jo 4:9 In this was manifested the love of God toward us, because that God sent his only begotten Son into the world, that we might live through him.

The 1611:

http://dewey.library.upenn.edu/sceti/printedbooksNew/index.cfm?TextID=kjbible&PagePosition=1320

Interesting....

Peace to u,
Bill

thanks brother Bill

 

[seekingpurity047]

I figured I'd add more. If you look at the context from John 3:16-18, the world cannot mean all men, because then it would imply universal salvation, which is, I must say, not biblical. Plus, taking a look at verse 18, it's quite clear that Jesus is not talking about the whole world of people without exception.

To the glory of God,

Randy