I think it both. The reason the [physical] death of God's saints is precious in his sight is because of their eternal destiny. Therefore, I have to think that the reason why [physical] death of the wicked brings no pleasure to God is also due to their eternal destiny. God takes no pleasure in executing his "strange work" (Isa 28:21) for the same reason, but he must be true to his good, holy and righteous nature and punish sinners, both in this world and in the next.
Did Jesus Die on The Cross for The Just/Elect/Saved Whose Names Are Written in The Book of Life OR
- Thread starter MerSee
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
The John who wrote I-II-III John is the same John who wrote the Gospel of John and always used the Greek word that means all of creation. I wonder, since we have access to the Greek and know this means all of creation. If God judges those who try to change the meaning and demean what He came to do? I guess they will find out on Judgement Day 
Do you have any idea of how many "ifs" there are in the Covenant Law of Moses, which was certainly a bilateral, conditional covenant? "If" means, among other things, "on condition that". Of course, it also used to introduce an exclamation expressing a wish...but I don't think that what was Jesus was doing.
Universal Sounding Terms in Scripture Often Are Not Used in the Distributive Sense (Pt 3)
I originally planned to take another tact with passage but time constraints won't permit. So, we'll just jump right in examine the crux of the various problems that we have with the term "world" if used in the distributive sense. The problems are in fact identical in form to the one we saw in 1Jn 2:2, but even more fatal to NR interpretations, as I'll explain. So buckle up, here we go.
We have another instance in scripture where the term "world" is used in a positive way in John 3. (You might recall this is why I took exception to the narrow scope of definition #8 from BLB in my 2093, Pt 2 post.) Let's look at the passage in a few versions. We'll start with the well known "whosoever" version.
John 3:16-17
16 "For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him.
NIV
Then there is the "everyone" version:
John 3:16-17
16 "For God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life. 17 God did not send his Son into the world to condemn it, but to save it.
NLT
And then we have the "anyone" version:
John 3:16-17
16 For God loved the world so much that he gave his only Son so that anyone who believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17 God did not send his Son into the world to condemn it, but to save it.
TLB
And I have a fourth version which I'll share in a moment.
Anyone with a sharp and astute exegetical eye can see the problem immediately in v. 17. The text plainly says that God sent his Son into the world to save it! PERIOD! This presents a huge five-prong problem. First, since God did the sending of the Son, then Jesus revealed in the text his Father's intentions for him. The Father sent him on a specific mission: Save the world, i.e. each and every person in it, since NR folks tell us that the term "world" is always used in the distributive sense. Yet, this would contradict no small number of scriptures; for the Word emphatically does not teach universal salvation.
The second problem is that Jesus was either very confused, given his prayer in John 17, because in that prayer he explicitly omitted the "world" that He was sent to save -- or worse He lied. He either lied about his Father's intentions for universal salvation, or He chose to ignore his Father's wishes for universal salvation and take take his own route, as he also did in his prayer in John 17 when he prayed specifically for only his disciples and for all those who would come believe on him, throughout the world, through their evangelistic efforts.
Thirdly, if the Father truly intended for Jesus to save each and every person in the world, then we could only surmise that Jesus' and the Holy Spirit's salvific work is an epic fail! If I had to rate their work on the scale of 1 to 10, with 10 being the best, then I'd have to rate it off the scale -- maybe a -50 or so since only a remnant is being saved.
Fourthly, another problem with NR interpretation is that they must perform mental gymnastics if they deny v. 17 is teaching universal salvation, while simultaneously insisting that God actually loves each and every person in the world per v.16. Since God so dearly loved every single person in the world, then why would he not intend to save everyone that he so loved and prove that love by sending his one and only Begotten Son into this world to accomplish everyone's redemption? But yet...NRs can never admit to a universal salvation intention -- at least most of them can't.
And lastly, while NRs will tightly cling to their bosom the lie that God does in fact love everyone in the world in a distributive sense, this, too, would present no small number of contradictions with other scriptures.
Now, we can begin to understand why I stated in my 2093 that these two verses are extremely pernicious -- highly injurious to NR theology in the larger context of the passage.
But as I have done in previous posts on this series, I want everyone to be sure to understand what v.17 isn't saying. It isn't saying:
1. God sent Jesus to make salvation possible for the world (i.e. each and every person)
2. Or God sent Jesus into this world to become a potential savior for each and every person.
NO! The text does not allow that. The passage is clear, plain and unequivocal. God sent his Son into this world to save each and every person in it BECAUSE He so loved everyone in the world. An honest NR person would know that he would have to maintain the integrity of the parallel between v.16 and v.17.
So, now that we understand the problems, can they be resolved within the passage itself? I think so. Suppose we altered the wording slightly to make a point while simultaneously not changing the sense of the passage? Suppose I said in my fourth version:
God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son so that those who believe in Him will not perish but have everlasting life. God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world but to save [those in] the world [who believe in him]. This kind of rendering fixes all five problems without changing the sense of the passage. This rendering shows how the term "world" is actually qualified in scripture. Jesus came to save all the"whoevers", all the "anyones" and all the "everyones" who trust in Christ The "world" being spoken of is limited to the world of believers, i.e. the elect -- just like it was in 1Jn 2:2
And we can see this very clearly in the next passage which clinches this interpretation!
John 3:18-20
18 "There is no judgment awaiting those who trust him. BUT those who do not trust him have already been judged for not believing in the only Son of God. 19 Their judgment is based on this fact: The light from heaven came into the world, but they loved the darkness more than the light, for their actions were evil. 20 They hate the light because they want to sin in the darkness. They stay away from the light for fear their sins will be exposed and they will be punished.
NLT
There's no judgment for those in v.18a because they were elected unto salvation. It was for these people alone that Christ laid down his life -- that he came to actually save.
Verse 18b begins, however, begins with "but", clearly indicating another important contrast -- this time between those in 18a. And these lovers of the darkness have already been judged, i.e. long before Jesus' arrival to Israel! These are the ones God did not elect unto salvation in eternity; therefore, he left them alone to their own utterly sinful devices, which was God's judgment upon them by his eternal decree! (Recall Ishmael and Esau in Romans 9?) This is how Jesus could say they have already been judged. And Jesus was not sent into the world to amend or annul that judgment or to judge them a second time! (But this should not be mistaken for the final judgment, for that comes at the end of the age, at which time Jesus will judge all, and all unbelievers "will be punished".) Essentially, the lovers of darkness were given over to a reprobate mind which is why they hated the light (Recall Romans 1?). These lovers of darkness, being contrasted with those who trust Christ (v.18a) are not included in the world that God so loved or the world that Jesus was sent to save. This is how Jesus could say that he did not come to judge the world since the "world" he spoke of was the world of God's elect saints.
Therefore, the larger context of Jn 3:16 teaches us that when Jesus spoke of the world that his Father so loved and for which he was sent to actually save, he did so in a limited sense -- that world consisting of the Father's elect. That world never included the people spoken of in 3:18b-20. This is how Jesus could say that he came to actually save the world that his Father so loved. So, like John 17, Christ actually saved the "world" in a qualitative sense since his atonement was limited to all the elect throughout the world; but God never intended for Jesus to save the "world" in a quantitative (distributive) sense.
It's so obvious to those whom God has opened their eyes to see.
Where did God send Jesus?
into the WORLD to Save it.
What world was Jesus sent to?
the Earth.
So God sent Jesus into the Earth to save it.
Anyone "NOT BLIND" clearly see's the WORLD is the WHOLE ENTIRE PANET.
And the key is where did God send Jesus and why did God send Jesus there...
Where did God send Jesus?
into the WORLD to Save it.
What world was Jesus sent to?
the Earth.
So God sent Jesus into the Earth to save it.
Anyone "NOT BLIND" clearly see's the WORLD is the WHOLE ENTIRE PANET.
And the key is where did God send Jesus and why did God send Jesus there...
-
2
- Show all
Right! The world is the "whole entire planet...AND every single person in it! So, God fully intended for Jesus to save each and every person on this planet. And yet...Jesus's mission has been an epic failure! After all, didn't Jesus himself say that "all things are possible with God" (Mk 10:27)? So how come each and every person in the world hasn't come to believe on Christ? Oh wait....I know why. I can answer that question. Jn 17:9 tells us why.
Dang! If only Jesus would have cooperated with his Father. If God"s view of salvation is individuals freely choosing out of gratitude to switch their allegiance away from serving and pursuing their obsessions to serving and pursuing God and Jesus Christ, and God does everything necessary for each person to make that informed choice before judgment day, then whether it is a remnant, or a majority, or all, who end up freely choosing Christ as Lord, it is a successful fulfilment of John 3:16-17. Fulfilment of John 3:16-17 does not depend on all the world becoming saved.
Here's another passage that is fatal to NR soteriology:
1 John 5:19
19 We know [positively] that we are of God, and the whole world [around us] is under the power of the evil one.
AMP
Many more modern translations have rendered this passage as it reads above by adding for clarification purposes "under the power of " or "under the control of" or in some translations both these variations.
The more literal translations below render the text in this fashion:
1 John 5:19
19 we have known that of God we are, and the whole world in the evil doth lie;
YLT
And,
1 John 5:19
19 We know that we are of God, and the whole world lies in the wicked [one].
Darby
It's interesting that in the AMP translation, the translators added the phrase in brackets "[around us]". I think they sensed that if they didn't add this phrase for clarification, the text would read as a contradiction! So they nuanced the translation to suggest a distinction between those in v.19a and those in 19b. And they were right for doing this. For how could the apostle write that his first century messianic Jewish audience and himself are "of God" while simultaneously saying in the same breath that the "whole world" lies in the power of the evil one? In fact, John would have also flat out contradicted what he wrote earlier in this epistle such as the verse immediately preceding this one!
1 John 5:18
18 We know that everyone who has been born of God does not keep on sinning, but he who was born of God protects him, and the evil one does not touch him.
ESV
So, if NR folks are correct in saying that the term "world" (especially the phrase "whole world") is always used in the distributive sense to mean each and every person on the planet or the "entire creation", then their understanding of v.19 would flat out contradict v.18. Clearly, John in v.19 was referring to the "whole world" in a limited sense according to BLB's 8th definition that I posted in 2092. In other words, in this passage he was referring to only the ungodly world "around us", which is the only way we can avoid this contradiction. After all, how could John say in one breath in v.18 that those born of God do not continue in sin, but rather God protects such people and the evil one does not touch them; yet in the very next breath in v.19 tell us that [nonetheless] the "whole world" (each and every one of us) is still under the power of the evil one, or under the contol of the evil one, or we born again Christians lie in the evil one, or we lie in the wicked one, along with all ungodly enemies of God?
The contradictions to NR soteriology are legion! I'm always incredibly amazed how so many cannot see this truth. It's actually downright frightening as it speaks volumes to the condition of the human heart; and this inability to see this this brings many relevant passages to mind.
1 John 5:19
19 We know [positively] that we are of God, and the whole world [around us] is under the power of the evil one.
AMP
Many more modern translations have rendered this passage as it reads above by adding for clarification purposes "under the power of " or "under the control of" or in some translations both these variations.
The more literal translations below render the text in this fashion:
1 John 5:19
19 we have known that of God we are, and the whole world in the evil doth lie;
YLT
And,
1 John 5:19
19 We know that we are of God, and the whole world lies in the wicked [one].
Darby
It's interesting that in the AMP translation, the translators added the phrase in brackets "[around us]". I think they sensed that if they didn't add this phrase for clarification, the text would read as a contradiction! So they nuanced the translation to suggest a distinction between those in v.19a and those in 19b. And they were right for doing this. For how could the apostle write that his first century messianic Jewish audience and himself are "of God" while simultaneously saying in the same breath that the "whole world" lies in the power of the evil one? In fact, John would have also flat out contradicted what he wrote earlier in this epistle such as the verse immediately preceding this one!
1 John 5:18
18 We know that everyone who has been born of God does not keep on sinning, but he who was born of God protects him, and the evil one does not touch him.
ESV
So, if NR folks are correct in saying that the term "world" (especially the phrase "whole world") is always used in the distributive sense to mean each and every person on the planet or the "entire creation", then their understanding of v.19 would flat out contradict v.18. Clearly, John in v.19 was referring to the "whole world" in a limited sense according to BLB's 8th definition that I posted in 2092. In other words, in this passage he was referring to only the ungodly world "around us", which is the only way we can avoid this contradiction. After all, how could John say in one breath in v.18 that those born of God do not continue in sin, but rather God protects such people and the evil one does not touch them; yet in the very next breath in v.19 tell us that [nonetheless] the "whole world" (each and every one of us) is still under the power of the evil one, or under the contol of the evil one, or we born again Christians lie in the evil one, or we lie in the wicked one, along with all ungodly enemies of God?
The contradictions to NR soteriology are legion! I'm always incredibly amazed how so many cannot see this truth. It's actually downright frightening as it speaks volumes to the condition of the human heart; and this inability to see this this brings many relevant passages to mind.
That is absolutely correct. It only depends on the elect who are "IN" the world (but not OF it) to participate in God's great and awesome salvation. However, God effectually saves only those he predestined in eternity to become his sons and daughters. He did everything necessary for them, just as he did with Cornelius in Acts 10! He took Cornelious out of Judaism and put him into his Kingdom.
Right! The world is the "whole entire planet...AND every single person in it! So, God fully intended for Jesus to save each and every person on this planet. And yet...Jesus's mission has been an epic failure! After all, didn't Jesus himself say that "all things are possible with God" (Mk 10:27)? So how come each and every person in the world hasn't come to believe on Christ? Oh wait....I know why. I can answer that question. Jn 17:9 tells us why. Dang! If only Jesus would have cooperated with his Father.
Dang! If only Jesus would have cooperated with his Father.
I already shown you we have studies where almost 6 billion people have factually heard the Gospel of Christ but less than half (47%) have claimed to accept it became believers. The other percentage (53%) rejected it. People can choose to believe or reject it. Doesn't mean God failed. It just proves God gave "free will." And it does not diminish the fact God died for those who rejected Him. If anything, it proves they will be the ones who God will BLOT OUT of His BOOK.
-
1
- Show all
