A New Look at John iii.16

Here again is my translation:

For in this way God loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, so that all who believe in Him might not perish but have eternal life.

The first difference you see between mine translation and the popular translation is in the first clause: "For in this way God loved." Actually, this is the same as "For God so loved." The "so" is a perfect translation of the Greek outwV (pronounced houtos), but people have misunderstood how the word works in this passage. outwV is not conveying the idea that God loved the world so much; like me telling my wife I love her so much. That is not what Christ said, nor John penned. The thought was the manner in which God loved the world. The same word, outwV, was used two verses earlier, when Jesus said, "Just as Moses raised up the serpent in the desert, in the same way (outwV) must the Son of Man be raised up" (Jo. iii.14). We are not supposed to see that God loved the world so much, but how God loved.

The second difference is where I translate the Greek paV o pisteuwn as "all who believe" instead of "whosoever"--the phrase is also found in verse 15 and twice in verse 18. My translation is still short, however, because I am finding it difficult to properly convey the message of the Greek participle here. The thought and message of Christ here is of "all the believing ones" in Him, or "all the ones believing" in Him. When we see the word "whosoever" in this verse, we immediately get this idea of this open, indefinite amount of people--we picture Christ with His arms wide open to all the world (kosmon) saying and pleading, "Whosoever believes in Me," unlimited in number, with an opportunity for all people of all time to receive eternal life. Yet that is not what Christ said or intended at all. The phrase is very definite: all the believing ones. There is no invitation or open call in this verse; Christ is stating the fact that all the believing ones have eternal life.

Now let us move on to the theological implications. Some (would it be safe to say most?) fellow Christians believe "the world," kosmon, here refers to all people of all time: all people that God ever created. Some (again, most?) also believe that "gave" refers specifically to the substitutionary death of Christ; so when Christ said, "He gave His only begotten Son," He meant He was given to die for the world, though He had not yet been nailed to the cross. This undoutedly leads to a discussion of the atonement.

Those who say "the world" means all people of all time, and believe that Christ was given as a ransom on the world's behalf, fall into a dilemma in this passage. Here is what the text looks like if we insert those particular interpretations:

For God so loved all people of all time (the world) that He gave His only begotten Son to die for the world (all people of all time), that whosoever among the world (all people of all time) believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life.

Here is the dilemma: you do not have a real, substitutionary (aka vicarious) atonement. What you have is universalism and provisional atonement mixed together, and you ultimately arrive at no real atonement at all. If Christ died for the whole world--all people of all time--then all people of all time have had the penalty for their sin paid in the person of Christ. If anyone among the world--all people of all time--can believe and receive eternal life, then Christ could not have died for the whole world. Had He died on someone's behalf, would that person not be atoned for? Or, was the death only a symbol, allowing merely for the possibility of atonement? Are we not left with the possibility that not one person would believe in Him, thereby rendering His death in vain? Certainly a possibility by this thinking, as unpopular an idea as that may be.

The Scriptures teach that Christ died on behalf of His sheep (Jo. x). This does not mean that He died metaphorically, not actually dying for them. He truly laid down His life for His sheep. His sheep know His voice, and they will go to Him.

**Blogging is difficult. Journaling is difficult for me. I am used to papers you write over days and weeks. But, this is good because you can get a lot of thoughts out at once and really deal with them. It would be great to get some comments on this.**