The plausibility of John 3:18

[Reformed1689]

John 3:9-21 (NASB)
9 Nicodemus said to Him, "How can these things be?"
10 Jesus answered and said to him, "Are you the teacher of Israel and do not understand these things?
11 "Truly, truly, I say to you, we speak of what we know and testify of what we have seen, and you do not accept our testimony.
12 "If I told you earthly things and you do not believe, how will you believe if I tell you heavenly things?
13 "No one has ascended into heaven, but He who descended from heaven: the Son of Man.
14 "As Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up;
15 so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life.
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.
17 "For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him.
18 "He who believes in Him is not judged; he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19 "This is the judgment, that the Light has come into the world, and men loved the darkness rather than the Light, for their deeds were evil.
20 "For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed.
21 "But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God."

Not sure what your point is here.... You still haven't answered my points about Adam.

 

[MB]

Exactly which is why I posted The plausibility of John 3:18

My comments were taken horribly out of context by @JonC in a lame attempt to discredit my position by making it appear I was going against Scripture.

What position is that? I wasn't aware you had a position. Why not start a new thread on your position. That way we would all know you have a position.
MB

 

[JonC]

Well, is that not what the verse says, that "he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God" (emphasis mine).

Leave the Elect talk out of this for a moment. The grammatical construction of this passage makes it a now-and-not-yet situation. It is very similar to when Paul writes that we are glorified in Romans 8:30. Our glorification at this present time is positional. We have not been completely glorified. We do not yet have heavenly bodies. We are not yet in the eternal state and present with Christ. However, those things are so certain for the child of God that Paul wrote as though they were already a present reality. In the same way, those who have not believed have been judged (condemned in the KJV) already. Judgment and condemnation are reserved for those who die in their sins (unbelief). Jesus is speaking about those who will die in their sins. The grammatical construction of the passage supports this.

I agree with that - that it is a now and not yet situation. But I believe at the same time that it is referencing all of man (in the same way). This is why the idea of assurance is so difficult. One can only look at what they can see (the present) but the truth extends much further.

With Nicodemus, I believe that Jesus was making a legitimate point about having to be "born again" (or, for those who prefer, "born from above). I do not think that Jesus was saying those who are already condemned are toast, and those who will believe are good to go. Instead the focus was on the fact that Jesus did not come to judge the world but that through Him the world might be saved.

That does not, however, allow for an interpretation that those who do not believe are condemned for anything other than their refusal to believe. That is the larger issue because I understand your point, but I do not exactly understand @davidtaylorjr rejection of the idea. Of course we are talking about an ultimate state of condemnation (I can see the passage no other way).

That said, we also have to remember that when we speak of God's wrath and God's Judgment in a soteriological context, I believe it has to be "on that day" or the day of Judgment.

 

[Reformed1689]

That does not, however, allow for an interpretation that those who do not believe are condemned for anything other than their refusal to believe. That is the larger issue because I understand your point, but I do not exactly understand @davidtaylorjr rejection of the idea. Of course we are talking about an ultimate state of condemnation (I can see the passage no other way).

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt...maybe you just missed what I said. Yes, the ULTIMATE state of condemnation is for unbelief. But what was the original reason for that condemnation? What is the original reason for the penalty? Sin.

As far as the passage, yes, they are ULTIMATELY condemned because of unbelief. But you have to factor in Adam. What was he condemned for? His sin. It wasn't an unbelief in the work of Christ. You can't just cherry-pick a verse to come up with a doctrinal position. People are condemned because of their sin. They seal that condemnation with their unbelief.

 

[JonC]

Not sure what your point is here.... You still haven't answered my points about Adam.

My point is that I do not understand how the idea that those who do not believe are condemned because they do not believe. Insofar as Adam, I believe that Adam had faith in the Promise. So he would be among those who believe.

I believe that the way to salvation has always been Christ (even in the Old Testament). I believe that those who are condemned in the Old Testament are so because they reject God (they reject the Godhead evidenced to them). Is this enough to save them? I don't know - that is not a question that concerns me because it is enough to convict them (I hold to election to include double predestination).

So insofar as Adam, if Adam is saved it is because he believes in Christ (in the Promise). If Adam did not believe, then Adam is condemned.

 

[Reformed1689]

Insofar as Adam, I believe that Adam had faith in the Promise. So he would be among those who believe.

Was Adam condemned before the promise was made? That is my point. The answer is YES. At that moment of sin he was subject to death. The penalty for sin.

 

[JonC]

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt...maybe you just missed what I said. Yes, the ULTIMATE state of condemnation is for unbelief. But what was the original reason for that condemnation? What is the original reason for the penalty? Sin.

I've answered this (insofar as my view goes).

I believe that through Adam's transgression sin entered the world, and through sin death. The original reason for that condemnation is a lack of faith (unbelief). I do not believe that "belief" is simple cognitive belief. When Scripture speaks of believing in the name of Christ it is much more than knowing about Christ and believing that He is real or even that He can save us. Adam's disobedience evidenced a disbelief (a reliance on something or someone other than God). That is why we, I believe, see repentance and belief always as elements of faith.

 

[SovereignGrace]

My point is that I do not understand how the idea that those who do not believe are condemned because they do not believe. Insofar as Adam, I believe that Adam had faith in the Promise. So he would be among those who believe.

I believe that the way to salvation has always been Christ (even in the Old Testament). I believe that those who are condemned in the Old Testament are so because they reject God (they reject the Godhead evidenced to them). Is this enough to save them? I don't know - that is not a question that concerns me because it is enough to convict them (I hold to election to include double predestination).

So insofar as Adam, if Adam is saved it is because he believes in Christ (in the Promise). If Adam did not believe, then Adam is condemned.

The point is, all of us were born in an already condemned state. The exact opposite of this is justification. There’s no middle option. All who were born in places where the gospel was never proclaimed were already condemned, because they were born condemned in Adam. Nothing they had to do to become condemned, as they were in that condemned state, even from conception.

 

[JonC]

Was Adam condemned before the promise was made? That is my point. The answer is YES. At that moment of sin he was subject to death. The penalty for sin.

Old ground. We've already covered that I do not believe God's wrath is physical death but the condemnation at Judgment.

 

[Reformed1689]

I believe that through Adam's transgression sin entered the world, and through sin death.

Full stop. It was sin that caused the punishment/penalty/debt. Unbelief by the way IS sin. It all goes back to sin. That's the whole point. Sin has punishment that must be paid.

 

[JonC]

The point is, all of us were born in an already condemned state. The exact opposite of this is justification. There’s no middle option. All who were born in places where the gospel was never proclaimed were already condemned, because they were born condemned in Adam. Nothing they had to do to become condemned, as they were in that condemned state, even from conception.

Take that up with John (not JonC) .

I actually agree that mankind is born condemned in the sense that we are all "under the curse". But I see God's wrath as the final Judgment, not physical death.

 

[Reformed1689]

Old ground. We've already covered that I do not believe God's wrath is physical death but the condemnation at Judgment.

That has nothing to do with this. There is still punishment for sin whether it is now or at the judgment. A penalty must still be paid.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Old ground. We've already covered that I do not believe God's wrath is physical death but the condemnation at Judgment.

What about the flood? God’s wrath was melted out to them as He drowned them. What about Abiram, Dathan and Korah?

 

[JonC]

Full stop. It was sin that caused the punishment/penalty/debt. Unbelief by the way IS sin. It all goes back to sin. That's the whole point. Sin has punishment that must be paid.

It does all go back to sin, but not sin as a transgression. It goes back to sin as a power. Why did Adam transgress God's command? Was Adam somehow created with a "fatal flaw"? No. Adam allowed temptation to over come him and sin was conceived of his lusts (the lust of the flesh).

We disagree here as I know you view sin as a moral transgression (we've already covered this....let's not start all over when we get to a new thread). But I don't I see sin as something much larger and much more pervasive.

 

[JonC]

. A penalty must still be paid.

Verse please.

 

[Reformed1689]

Old ground. We've already covered that I do not believe God's wrath is physical death but the condemnation at Judgment.

I knew this didn't sound right. You contradicted this statement in a private message:

You said:

I believe that the penalty for sin is a physical death.

Now you are saying it isn't?

 

[JonC]

What about the flood? God’s wrath was melted out to them as He drowned them. What about Abiram, Dathan and Korah?

Yes. Sin has consequences....even for believers. But this is not the Judgment.

 

[SovereignGrace]

Yes. Sin has consequences....even for believers. But this is not the Judgment.

But those instances show God’s wrath is not just at the day of judgment, but also physical death as well. Just like Pharaoh and his army being drowned in the Red Sea. God pours His wrath out on sinners now and will fully pour it out on the day of judgment.

 

[Reformed1689]

It does all go back to sin, but not sin as a transgression. It goes back to sin as a power.

And how do you arrive at that biblically?

 

[JonC]

I knew this didn't sound right. You contradicted this statement in a private message:

You said:



Now you are saying it isn't?

It depends on what you view as "sin". You see it as a moral transgression. I've spoken of "sin" as something larger. The penalty of sin is death (a physical death). Even believers will face this penalty (or consequence...."wages" of sin). But this is sin as a "power" - ALL experience this penalty, even my child who died in infancy. But he was innocent - he will not face Judgment for his sinful acts because he never lived to commit a sinful act. Yet he is not here today because he died as a result of sin.