fallacies of "non-cals"

In John 3:16, the Greek word for world used is κόσμον, (kosmon or kosmos), root to the English "cosmos" which is pretty all encompassing.

Meaning the planet / all creation under the sun, which "should" include all people.

Now a verse like Luke 2:1 uses the Greek word οἰκουμένην (oikoumenēn) which means the land / inhabited world. In this context the Roman empire. The same word is used in Matt 24:14.

So yes, John 3:16 DOES mean the whole world that is the planet including everyone in it.

 

Including Satan and the demons?

 

Gotta love Greek lessons.

Cheers,

Jim

 

This board has got to love you Luke......you bring controversy thus readership! You will get letters!:smilewinkgrin:

 

Luke, you have not posted anything in quite a while and yet when you do come back you come in and immediately go on the attack. Your method does nothing but to drive those who disagree with you further away. Their ten foot pole gets longer and longer when they read such rants. It does nothing to further your argument except for those who already agree with you.

 

You are making a simple mistake. You are assuming they had the same knowledge of the world as we do today. In their time and place the Roman Empire was the world.

In today's world with radio. TV, cell phones, the Internet, etc., etc. the entire world has been preached to. Not in this verse it says "shall be" which is future tense.

There is no logic in your placing this verse here.

Again the Roman Empire was their world. We really do not know how much of the world Paul or others were aware of. So we cannot judge their words by present day knowledge.

I see no way your premise holds.

 

Seems you can't even agree with yourself... and for the record, there are MANY reputable scholars who attest to the FACT that world 'can' and does 'at times' (in scripture) mean - all people, of which you state you agreement to above..

What you present is a misunderstanding perpetuated by many who know very little about the other sides views or their arguments. There are 'very' few non-cals or Arminians who state that 'all' always means 'everyone, since it can mean either all of a thing/whole OR all of a part of a thing/whole; or that "world" always at all time means ALL mankind. Just because it has varied definitions (not contradicting ones) I do agree with you that one does not or should not pick and choose which best fits their view or theological position.

There is one silly non-biblical definition of "world" that is commonly 'tried' to be perpetuated but has no historical substance to it.. and that is the term "world" can mean or refer to 'God's elect'.

 

World

I think Pink had a lot of good things to say , but when it comes to his version of world I will have to disagree. When you can't comprehend God, does not mean you need to fit into your doctrine or say God really didn't mean that He meant is this. Does that remind you of someone?

When man say's he loved the world he means all he sees. When God said He loved the world that He sent His Son, He means all He sees. We know what God wants, He wants all men to be saved and come to the knowledge of the truth. All meaning all He sees. That will not trump the will of God which is those who trust in His Son be saved.

Exodus 19:
5 Now therefore, if you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant, then you shall be a special treasure to Me above all people; for all the earth is Mine.

Psalm 73:28
But it is good for me to draw near to God;I have put my trust in the Lord GOD, That I may declare all Your works.

 

No historical substance? Quite the contrary. Snips follow regarding what some saints of the past said of the meaning of the word "world" in John 3:16.

F.Turretin : special towards a few

John Flavel : the elect of God in the world. The world signifies the elect :because they are scattered through all parts,and are among all ranks in this world;these are the objects of this love."

Owen : the special love of God to His elect

Pink : the world of God's people

S.Rutherford : the special particular love of God commensurable with election. The love in John 3:16 "is restricted to the church...It is an actual saving love love and therefore not a general love."

L. Boettner : the elect in the whole world

Gill : the object of God's special love

James Durham : world doesn't mean all men

 

Think better question in relation to your points is:

IF Jesus died for the sins of ALl people, unlimited atonement in its extent (Which I do believe is taught in Bible)

Is His Will that ALL should come to repentance and faith in same way?

otherwords, can it be that God just might have different ways ALL gets expressed, that he may have a general/specific Will being address...

general Will Jesus died/atoned for indeed ALL
specific Will Just those elected/chosen By God have atoning work applied on their behalf?

 

That is historical substance?

 

There is NO historical substance here regarding the words known usage from the Greek, Rippon.

I'm referring to the word's known historical definition(s), IOW - how the word was used 'historically' in the Greek, not people almost two thousand years later wishing to 'add' a new definition to those already established.

 

I agree that the terms "all" and "whole world" don't always mean every person, however you must acknowledge, if you are being objective, that they are "inclusive" not "exclusive" terms and thus could not mean "a select few." One must look at the context in which the words are being used to make the determination of the author's intent. So, while you may be correct in your assessment that "all" and "whole world" doesn't always mean every individual, you also can't say that these terms have ever been used to mean "a selected few." That is a presumption you bring to the text which is your fallacy.

Actually, even that phrase doesn't always mean every individual in the world. For example:

Acts 21:28:
shouting, "Men of Israel, help us! This is the man who teaches all men everywhere against our people and our law and this place. And besides, he has brought Greeks into the temple area and defiled this holy place."

Obviously he hadn't taught every single person in the world. But, look at the point. It is inclusive. He is saying that the gospel is being preached without exclusion...to every one without discrimination. Now, Calvinists typically don't have a problem with that interpretation when it comes to the gospel because you agree that it is to be preached to all without exception. However, when we look at verse about the atonement or God's love/desire etc, the method of interpretation changes from "inclusion" (all with out exception) to "exclusive" (a select few). It is just inconsistent.

Not even close.

Good to have you back Luke. BTW, I'm still wanting to hear your response to the question regarding Christ's need in hiding the gospel if men are born totally depraved.

 

I neglected to read through all the thread before responding, so I could have just wrote, "What he said." :thumbsup:

 

:thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

Just curious in how you define term "total depravity"

 

That was a topic of another thread and I don't wish to hijack this one, so please ask that in another related thread. Thanks

 

Almighty God is crystal clear in His scriptures that it is not His will that any should perish, but that all would come to repentance, and faith in Christ alone.

God can and does cause that saving truth to come to all, with the "drawing" and convicting ministry of the Holy Spirit.

Those who freely choose to heed Gods message will be saved.

Those who freely choose to reject Gods message will be lost

This is the gospel of Jesus Christ