by Angus Harley

The most fought over, and yet most cherished verse in the bible, is John 3:16. How are we meant to read and interpret this verse? Usually, we are taken down the road of the debate between Calvinists and Arminians. Calvinists believe that Jesus died ‘for the elect’ only; Arminians says that Jesus died for ‘every single person in the world’. Amyraldianism, a half-way house, follows Arminianism on the issue of the extent of the atonement. In this article, I will avoid using these models as a grid to interpret John 3:16. Having said this, I will interact with the above views.

John 1

From the beginning of John’s Gospel, we read that the Word and God, and the Word as God, created all things. It is fascinating that John in 1:1-5 does not use the term kosmos. This is reflective, in my view, of John’s use of perspective. For John’s first references to kosmos (“world”) are of a fallen world in darkness, in need of the Light of Word (1:9-10). The stage for the drama of redemption is set: the world is fallen and dark, and into it comes the light of the Word.

As in Genesis 3:13ff. and Deuteronomy 9:13-14, God could have wiped out the world. The very fact that he perseveres with it entails his purpose to save it. The Word as light is not coming in the hope of salvation, trying to save, for he will save the world.

Embedded in this contrast between the world in darkness compared to the light of the Word is a paradox, or irony. For, John says that the Light who was in that world, created it (1:10). If we did not have 1:1-5, and we were uninitiated into the Gospels, we might conclude that 1:10 implies that it was the Word that created a world of darkness. John is creating a deliberate tension, however. The Word did not create an evil kosmos, but he will save an evil kosmos. John does not try to explain to us how this highly ironic dichotomy and tension came to pass. He expects us to accept it ‘as is’.

By coming into the world of darkness, the Light was not embracing an evil world, but he was saving the world he created. This is what John the Baptist recognizes in 1:29. The method of God dealing with darkness and sin is that the Lamb of God, his sacrifice, was in the world to remove the world’s sin. The world is not just planet earth, but is primarily, in John 1, the people who inhabit earth (1:10).

There is no attempt by John to build a setting that is theological and, therefore, ahistorical. John is looking back on Jesus’ historical ministry, not giving us a lesson on Dogmatic Theology. As the Word made flesh, the Son of the Father comes into the world as its Light. It is that contemporaneous Light that John the Baptist points to as the Lamb. This Lamb “takes away” the sin of the world. It is sin taken away then- present tense. John’s point is not that Jesus’ death impacts the elect of eternity, or Jewish OT believers, or every single person who has been, or will be. Thus, the Samaritan woman says of Jesus, “ “This One is indeed the Savior of the world” ” (4:42). He does not become the Savior at the cross; he is the Savior now to the Samaritan woman.

Now, we know that his work is actually completed in the cross; but Jesus was busy already giving forgiveness before he died. John’s Gospel is the message about believing in Jesus, not merely Jesus of the cross, but Jesus ministering before your eyes, who saves you through his cross.

Consequently, the world of darkness has its sin taken away by following the Lamb of God. This cannot, and does not, entail that the world considered as every single person has his/her sins taken away. How can we make sense of John the Baptist’s role as a signpost, in that case? He was pointing Israel toward Jesus, toward the Lamb. It required faith to experience the Lamb’s work of taking away the sin of the world. That is why we get the accounts in John 1 of Jesus’ disciples following him. This was an existential act, happening in the sinner’s experience in following the Lamb, ‘in the present’, to be pointed.

If the reader goes through John’s Gospel, there is no verse suggesting that forgiveness- the taking away of sins- is anything other than an existential blessing. It comes to those who seek out Jesus and believe in him. Forgiveness in John is not a ‘merit’ or ‘commodity’ located on the cross that abstractly applies to every single person even if they have no faith; nor is it a blessing merely for the elect as abstracted from faith. Forgiveness, in John, is always and only connected with believing (20:23).

John 2

This chapter unfolds the drama of the Light coming unto his own (Israel) and the tension of it rejecting him. The message being underscored here is that Jesus is the Christ and that the Jews must follow him. However, by the end of John 2 (vv23-25), there is the phenomenon of many disciples who follow the Lamb, yet who are not truly, from their hearts, given over to him. It is plain that the majority of Jews are tied to the wooden, material, regime of the Law, its temple, and so forth, but even in the minority of Jews who do follow him, there are a swathe of fake disciples.

Why are these things important? One reason is that it reminds us that the world that has its sin forgiven is not every single person, or the elect considered abstractly (without faith), but those who follow the Lamb. Also, we are seeing that the salvation of the Lamb is not tied to the Law of Moses, especially to the temple. These things pointed to him, not he to them. Also, the depths of the darkness of the world is such that it is able to infiltrate the Messianic community and mimic its obedience in a truly fleshly, external, form. Judas turns out to be the archetype of this fleshly, faux discipleship.

John 3:1-12

John 3 opens up with the story of the dialogue between Jesus, the Light, and Nicodemus the theologian of the Pharisees and Israel, a son of darkness (at this point). He demonstrates perfectly that the Jews thought of salvation in Israel-centric terms, for the OT kingdom of God was expressed in a physical people (Israel), in a material, physical, land, who worshiped at a bricks-n-mortar temple, and who gave birth to fleshly-children of the kingdom. This Jewish model was exclusively earthly in its nature and orientation, focusing upon a fleshly nation.

Jesus ignores all these Jewish ‘prerequisites’ to kingdom life, and, instead, refers to a birth from above, from heaven (see John 4). It is Nicodemus who misinterprets this teaching as indicating a second, fleshly, birth. However, Jesus uses the term anothen, “above”, not palin (“again”). It is an ‘above birth’ that is required to enter God’s kingdom, for the kingdom and its God are from above (see John 18:36). Thus, the Spirit comes from we ‘know not where’, meaning he has no earthly origin. And he gives life without anyone ‘seeing’ him. Just like the wind. The wind is identified by its sound, and is not actually seen. So, the Spirit is identified by the birth from above, and cannot be seen with fleshly eyes. Jesus is also implying the ‘sound’ of his New Covenant message is the vehicle for the Spirit’s work in men (see John 14:16-26).

Jesus had even dumbed-down his message for Nicodemus’ sake. For he thought solely on the Jewish level of the OT. Jesus’ reference to the “earthly things” is tantamount to stating ‘OT, Jewish, teaching’. Doesn’t the OT itself inform us that the Spirit must break upon Israel to give it life (Eze.36-37)? Isn’t this done by the prophetic word of God? Jesus was from above (3:31), as was the Spirit, and both work in tandem to bring eternal life. God sent the Son to proclaim the prophetic word of life to the nations, and the Spirit raises them up. Later, John 11 shows, from the physical perspective of the body, the same work of God in process: Jesus prays to the Father, speaks his resurrection word and command, and Lazarus, by the Spirit, comes to life.

What Nicodemus was not ‘getting’ was the truly worldwide nature of the Lamb’s salvation. For if the kingdom was above, not below, and it did not focus upon earthly Israel and its flesh, but on the spiritually dead being raised by the Spirit through the Messianic prophetic word, then there were no more fleshly, this-world, inhibitors to the spread of this kingdom Gospel to the nations of the world.

The Jews were caught up with a fleshly, this-world, perspective, and did not comprehend the perspective that being a Jew was not tantamount to divine life. For the Israelites, like the Gentiles, gave birth to flesh, not to spirit.

John 3:13-15

John 3:13 is an enigmatic and crucial verse. I think it is referring to Jesus’ ministry on earth as the Danielic and heavenly son of man who brings the kingdom of God crashing down below, on earth; and it also indicates the prophetic son of man of Ezekiel who speaks life to the dead. The true Son of Man, of the Gospel, came down to minister the word of kingdom life through his resurrection Spirit. This process was already at work before the cross, but it would come to its true and proper culmination in his death. For this was the Lamb of God who “takes away the sin of the world”. The Son of Man was going to ascend upward through the cross: heavenly life came through the curse and death of the cross.

Both these OT images of the son of man reflect particularism. Daniel’s son of man does not represent the world, but only the Israel of God. The son of man’s kingdom like a mighty rock crushes its enemies (Dan.7). Ezekiel’s son of man speaks life into the Israelites. The Davidic kingdom is set up (Eze.37).

As I said before, Jesus is not a minister in the hope of saving some. As the Son of Man his mission is particularized: it is for a particular kingdom and kingdom-people. What Jesus was telling Nicodemus is that the time of the OT kingdom-people of Israel was over, for God was asserting his kingdom from heaven and creating a new kingdom-people: those believing in the Lamb, whether Jew or Gentile.

So, Jesus is teaching the following truths about his kingdom and about taking away the sin of the world:

it is from heaven alone, and is not of earth, nor is even Jewish;

it destroys the kingdoms of men that oppose God,

but it saves those raised up by believing in the Messiah.

This tension between God’s kingdom and the kingdoms of men is once again reflected in the OT Scripture, for Jesus cites Israel’s rebellion in Numbers 21:6-9. God told Moses to raise up the pole with the serpent on it, and the Israelites who looked to it were saved from physical death. Those who do not look die; those who look live. This Israelite model is being applied to the world, to the nations. The clear differentiating factor between the Israelites, between the people of the world, is not nationhood- whether Jew or Gentile- but believing or looking.

The Son of Man represents the kingdom of heaven manifested in the world, to an evil world. He must be lifted up on the cross, exalted on high, so that many might believe and live. The rest will die. For as the Son of Man, he comes with the purpose of destroying the rebellious nations (see comments on 3:17-21) and lifting up his own kingdom-people, those who believe in him and his death and exaltation.

John 3:16

This verse is the culmination of all that has gone before. It is not floating in mid-air, an island unto itself. It is contextualized. The Father sends the Son, underscoring purpose and resolve. The world will be saved. However, this world is evil. How is it then saved? It is saved through believing in the Son who is lifted up on the cross. Israel in the wilderness that did not look, perished; Israel in the wilderness that did look lived. The world that does not believe perishes; the world that does believe has eternal life. Two perspectives of the world: one derived from evil; the other purely from faith.

John 3:17-21

V17 has been mistakenly interpreted to mean that Jesus brought no judgment upon the world. However, the text is not referring to Jesus judging, but to God not judging, “For God did not send the Son into the world to judge the world, but that the world might be saved through Him.” It is God who judges and it is God who saves.

If God does not bring judgment on the world, why does it say in v18, “he who does not believe has been judged already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God”? The reason for the tension between the verses is one of perspective: God sent the Son of Man, his Son, to save a kingdom-people in this world; by contrast, those not of his kingdom, who are evil, are already judged because they refuse the One who is lifted up on the ‘pole’ of the cross. The believing world is saved; the unbelieving world is already judged. Contrasting, concurrent, perspectives!

The judgment on darkness is then confirmed in vv19-20, “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. For everyone who does evil hates the Light, and does not come to the Light for fear that his deeds will be exposed.” See how men (aka, the world) loved darkness, and they loved darkness because their deeds were evil. What does this entail? These deeds or works were against Jesus, not for him. They proceeded from a heart of darkness and evil, one which rejected his Gospel, and then proceeded to crucify him. John’s logic is that world that is of the darkness cannot possibly come to the Light; they love darkness, not Light, evil, not the works of God.

V21 gives the contrast to this perspective, “But he who practices the truth comes to the Light, so that his deeds may be manifested as having been wrought in God.” All along, I have argued that Jesus came as the Word, Son of Man, and Son, to create a kingdom-people from the world. He saves the world, but does so only in that the world believes in him. V21 is the counterbalance to vv19-20. Those verses depict a world that is already darkness, and who refuse to come to Jesus as Light, who love the deeds of darkness. Conversely, John 3:21 refers to sons of Light, those already practicing the truth who come to the Light and do their deeds before God. This brings to mind John 6:29, ““This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He has sent.” ”

Loving the world

Yes, I cheated and left this part unto near the end. The way to read John 3:16 and its reference to God loving the world that he gave his Son is to understand it in the same manner that the Ancient of Days sent the son of man of Daniel 7 to protect the Israel of God and crush the nations of the world. In this light, even the wilderness event when the pole was lifted up indicates particularism. The pole was lifted up for whom? For a repentant people (Deut.21:7)! Until then there was no pole. The cross was for the express purpose of ‘magnetically’ drawing believers to it, not to provide hypothetical reconciliation, or to be a form of persuasion or reaching out to the evil world. The repentant world is saved by faith in Jesus, a world that God loves. For why would he love a world of sheer evil and darkness that hates him and his Son?

Election?

The Amyraldian and Arminian will accuse me of holding the typical Calvinistic model of predestination and particularism. ‘The elect are saved.’ I think by now I have made it abundantly clear that John’s teaching in John 1-3 cannot be reduced to that simplistic belief. John does not think in terms of any kind of abstracted people, whether the elect or every single person. The world is measured over against the Word and his proclamation. One must believe in the Lamb to ‘profit’ from him (excuse the language). It is fundamentally about an evil, unbelieving, dark world vs a believing world that does the truth. If John’s Gospel is about anything, it is concerned with believing in the Lamb!

Having said these things, it is abundantly evident from John’s Gospel that Jesus as the true Son of Man was aiming to deliver a specific people. They are identified by faith. John afterward goes ‘behind the curtain’ to show that this people of light are those chosen by God, and who then come to faith in him (6:36-40; 10:3-18; 15:16). Those that the Father gives to the Son come to the Son, and he will not cast them out. Just as Daniel’s son of man represented the Israel of God, so Jesus represents the true world, the true kingdom of heaven, namely, the sons of faith born of the Spirit.

Which world is God loving in his Son, then? It is the world that comes to the Son as Light, that by faith demonstrates that it does the truth, and which loves the works of the Light of the Son lifted up. Hallelujah!

Postscript on John 3:16 and Revelation 20

I recently wrote an article that essentially took the same approach to understanding the nations of Revelation 20 as you’ve just read. I argued that John is using the concept of concurrent yet contrasting perspectives: the nations are redeemed and follow the Lamb; the nations are controlled by the wicked one. The former loves God; the latter love darkness. Both groups are the nations of the world; both exist together in this world. This is John’s theology here in John 3. The world is both a place of the darkest evil, and yet the world is the redeemed by the Lamb and it follows him. It is the latter alone that is loved by the Father and called forth unto life and faith. Perspectives!