The Meaning of 'World' in John 3:16

[TCassidy]

I don't agree with your post.

Simply put, Christ's payment for sin is available to all, but only credited to those who believe.

And how does that differ from my position? "Sufficient for all, efficient only for believers."

 

[TCassidy]

Yes it could.

HankD

How? He died (in some capacity) for all, but especially (in a special capacity) for believers.

 

[utilyan]

John 3
16“For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.


So Jesus is explaining this to totally depraved Nicodemus?



9Nicodemus said to Him, “How can these things be?” 10Jesus answered and said to him, “Are you the teacher of Israel and do not understand these things?


Wait so is Jesus shocked that totally depraved nicodemus who is not born again nor regenerated teacher did not understand these things.........shouldn't be he more shocked that he was a teacher at all?


John 1
11He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him. 12But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, 13who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God.



But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name,


So.....if they receive him they get right to become children. Shouldn't they get right to become children first then they have the capability to receive him.

Wouldn't the Calvinist position require you to be regenerated.


Like you would be totally depraved.....that is incapable of understanding the gospel.


1 peter 1
22Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently: 23Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.


Can't be born again by the word of God, because you can't read or understand the word of God unless your born again.

 

[TCassidy]

And for a calvie, they *don't want* world to mean the whole world in John 3:16. They must fit (cram) every passage into their framework of tulip.

"World" does not always mean "every person without exception." That has already been demonstrated. How does God loving the world (of mankind, not the planet) negate the gospel as outlined in the Canons of Dort?

 

[glad4mercy]

Your post just shows that Pink was correct. There is no effort to deal with what he actually writes.
But my purpose in quoting the extract was simply to show that kosmos does not always mean 'all the people in the world' which is what many Arminians tend to claim.

False. Arminians do not believe it always means the same thing.

Classic example of a strawman argument

Secondly, you are using a non-sequitur. The fact that "world" doesnt always mean all the people does not prove that it does not mean "all the people" in John 3:16

It certainly doesnt mean "world" as in 1 John 2:15. And you cannot take an instance where a word is used as a synecdoche (John 18:20- quoted earlier) and try to make that the standard for the meaning. (as done earlier)

So tell me. what do you claim world means in John 3:16?

 

[glad4mercy]

"World" does not always mean "every person without exception." That has already been demonstrated. How does God loving the world (of mankind, not the planet) negate the gospel as outlined in the Canons of Dort?

"loving the world" is not the part that refutes Calvinism. THE MANNER (οὕτως) OF LOVE for the world AND IT's PURPOSE that as described by Jesus is.

...and world here does not mean "world system" as in 1 John 2:15 nor is it a synecdoche as in John 18:20, and as I look at the various meanings of KOSMOS, I do not see another that fits here (besides the people of the world), so which meaning of KOSMOS do you place on it in John 3:16?

I hope you're not making it a synecdoche in John 3:16. That would be rather odd

 

[kyredneck]

You did (sorta) by juxtapositioning Matthew 15:24 with John 18:20 thereby giving the impression that "world" in terms of the evangelism of Jesus and the apostles meant Israel only ever.

No, not Israel only ever, but in this dialogue Israel (or the Jewish arrangement) is in view. I'm pretty sure Nicodemus never understood non-Jews to be included in 3:16.

which would then change the following passage for the apostle and disciples to stay in Israel.

Mark 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

Then we have a problem with :

Matthew 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

As Nicodemus, 'the eleven' did not understand non-Jews to be included in the 'great commission', as you call it, else Peter would not have been called onto the carpet for preaching the gospel to Cornelius. It wasn't until Acts 11 that this realization came to be:

18 And when they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then to the Gentiles also hath God granted repentance unto life. Acts 11

Matthew 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:

ya, I know it doesn't say "world" but perhaps it defines it for John 3:16.

No, it shows the truth of passages such as these:

5 Now there were dwelling at Jerusalem Jews, devout men, from every nation under heaven. Acts 2

21 For Moses from generations of old hath in every city them that preach him, being read in the synagogues every sabbath. Acts 15

15 And he saith unto me, The waters which thou sawest, where the harlot sitteth, are peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues. Rev 17

There was nothing small or insignificant about the 'Jewish arrangement' of that day.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

I don't quite trust the judgment of Pink after I read some of his "gleanings from Paul." In the intro he says 2 absurd things...

1. There are no prayers in the book of Acts by the apostles

Pink qualifies this:
[The Apostles] are certainly shown to be men of prayer, as is seen by their own words: "But we will give ourselves continually to prayer and to the ministry of the word" (Acts 6:4). Again and again we behold them engaged in this holy exercise (Acts 9:40; 10:9; 20:36; 21:5; 28:8), yet we are not told what they said. The closest Luke comes to recording words clearly attributable to apostles is in Acts 8:14-15, but even here he merely gives us the quintessence of that for which Peter and John prayed. I regard the prayer of Acts 1:24 as that of the 120 disciples. The great, effectual prayer recorded in Acts 4:24-30 is not that of Peter and John but of the whole company (v.23) who had assembled to hear their report.

Pink may be entirely wrong- he certainly didn't get everything right- but would you like to give us a few of the Apostles' prayers found in Acts? I'd be most interested.

2. There are no prayers towards the "world."

Well, if you can find any, please let me know. I will only note that the Lord Jesus Christ Himself prayed, "I pray not for the world, but for them which Thou hast given Me." 1 Timothy 2:1-2a is not a prayer.

I am throwing the bath water and baby out on this one.

Please yourself.

 

[kyredneck]

The context will always determine the meaning.

I've heard it taught and believe that it could be shown that John always used kosmos in reference to God's religious arrangement.

 

[kyredneck]

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have eternal life."

The context will always determine the meaning.

Following Hodge's first rule of interpretation it would interesting to look into the immediate meanings of some other words in the passage.

 

[Martin Marprelate]

"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on him should not perish, but have eternal life."



Following Hodge's first rule of interpretation it would interesting to look into the immediate meanings of some other words in the passage.

I think you would do well to open a new thread on that.

 

[JonShaff]

And how does that differ from my position? "Sufficient for all, efficient only for believers."

I wouldn't disagree with you what you explicitly state, it's what is implied that we differ on.
That's ok though.

 

[TCassidy]

I wouldn't disagree with you what you explicitly state, it's what is implied that we differ on.
That's ok though.

And just what do you think is implied? Nothing is implied. You may have inferred something that isn't there, but that is pretty common on this forum.

 

[JonShaff]

Pink qualifies this:
[The Apostles] are certainly shown to be men of prayer, as is seen by their own words: "But we will give ourselves continually to prayer and to the ministry of the word" (Acts 6:4). Again and again we behold them engaged in this holy exercise (Acts 9:40; 10:9; 20:36; 21:5; 28:8), yet we are not told what they said. The closest Luke comes to recording words clearly attributable to apostles is in Acts 8:14-15, but even here he merely gives us the quintessence of that for which Peter and John prayed. I regard the prayer of Acts 1:24 as that of the 120 disciples. The great, effectual prayer recorded in Acts 4:24-30 is not that of Peter and John but of the whole company (v.23) who had assembled to hear their report.

Pink may be entirely wrong- he certainly didn't get everything right- but would you like to give us a few of the Apostles' prayers found in Acts? I'd be most interested.


Well, if you can find any, please let me know. I will only note that the Lord Jesus Christ Himself prayed, "I pray not for the world, but for them which Thou hast given Me." 1 Timothy 2:1-2a is not a prayer.


Please yourself.

ACTS Chapter 4

24 So when they heard that, they raised their voice to God with one accord and said: “Lord, You are God, who made heaven and earth and the sea, and all that is in them, 25 who by the mouth of Your servant David have said:

‘Why did the nations rage,
And the people plot vain things?
26 The kings of the earth took their stand,
And the rulers were gathered together
Against the Lord and against His Christ.’

27 “For truly against Your holy Servant Jesus, whom You anointed, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, with the Gentiles and the people of Israel, were gathered together 28 to do whatever Your hand and Your purpose determined before to be done. 29 Now, Lord, look on their threats, and grant to Your servants that with all boldness they may speak Your word,30 by stretching out Your hand to heal, and that signs and wonders may be done through the name of Your holy Servant Jesus.”

31 And when they had prayed, the place where they were assembled together was shaken; and they were all filled with the Holy Spirit, and they spoke the word of God with boldness.

I don't agree with Pink concerning this particular prayer

 

[JonShaff]

And just what do you think is implied? Nothing is implied. You may have inferred something that isn't there, but that is pretty common on this forum.

It's implied that for some they *were* ordained to never have it credited to their account. Forgive me if my inference was incorrect.

 

[TCassidy]

It's implied that for some they *were* ordained to never have it credited to their account. Forgive me if my inference was incorrect.

Why is it that every time a General Redemptionist is backed into a corner they trot out the old Hyper-Calvinist "double predestination" saw and wave it like a battle flag?

What is so hard to understand about the lost already being lost and do not have to be "ordained" to being lost. Are they being "ordained" to be loster than lost?

 

[Martin Marprelate]

ACTS Chapter 4

24

I think Pink's point is that it was those who heard Peter & John's report who prayed (vs.23-24). This may well have included the other apostles, but was not restricted to them.

 

[kyredneck]

I think you would do well to open a new thread on that.

I would participate on such a thread.

 

[HankD]

How? He died (in some capacity) for all, but especially (in a special capacity) for believers.

It could have been written exactly as you wrote it.

HankD

 

[JonShaff]

Why is it that every time a General Redemptionist is backed into a corner they trot out the old Hyper-Calvinist "double predestination" saw and wave it like a battle flag?

What is so hard to understand about the lost already being lost and do not have to be "ordained" to being lost. Are they being "ordained" to be loster than lost?

I wasn't saying they were ordained *to be lost*, i understand we all are lost and in need of the Good Shepherd Seeking and Saving us. I was putting the emphasis of what was being ordained was that some *were never/will never be chosen*.