Born Again (38)

John 3:16 (D)

There are many other examples in the Bible, but we will look at just one more. Just a few verses after John 3:16, we find the following, "He testifies to what he has seen and heard, but no one accepts his testimony" (3:32). No one, the verse says, accepts Christ's testimony. This time, if we were to interpret Scripture as our opponents do, then we would have to conclude that "no one" in all of human history has believed or will ever believe in Christ. There has never been and never will be a Christian in all of human history.

And if "no one" must mean every human person without restriction and without exception, then it must mean that even as he writes this verse the apostle John himself has not accepted Christ's testimony. It is indeed strange, then, how he repeatedly encourages his readers to believe a testimony that he has rejected. Moreover, the way that our opponents would interpret this verse – that is, if we imitate their treatment of John 3:16 – would make John 3:32 contradict John 12:19. The former would make world evangelization futile, but the latter would say that the mission has already been accomplished.

If I were to ignore the context of everything that you say and take every universal term that you use as if it refers to every human person in all of history, I would make nonsense of your part of the conversation, and communication would break down. In addition, you could rightly accuse me of blatant disrespect for your speech and your person. You might even think that I am doing it on purpose to mock you or to annoy you.

Likewise, our opponents assume that "world" in John 3:16 must mean all human persons in all of history, and they accuse us of refusing to accept the verse just as it is written, but they are the ones who exhibit contempt for God and Scripture. In essence, they accept only one word from the text, and then assume the meaning that they desire for it without any regard for the context. On the other hand, we urge intelligence in interpretation, respect for the text, and reverence toward God by observing the context of the verse, including how all such universal terms are used throughout the writings of John, as well as the main theological concerns of the apostle.

The controversy that we are dealing with has to do with the biblical doctrines of divine election and definite atonement. Because I have addressed these doctrines elsewhere in great detail, I will not discuss them here. I am mentioning this just to point out that the verse neither proves nor disproves these doctrines. Even if the verse has some relevance to these doctrines, the focus is on something else.

John is counteracting the idea that salvation is exclusively or even mainly reserved for the Jews, or the natural descendents of Abraham. He has labored to build up this point from the very beginning, and throughout his Gospel there are comments, discourses, miracles, and other episodes to repeatedly reinforce the teaching. John 3:16 neither affirms nor denies that Christ has come to die for every individual. The question is settled in many places in Scripture, but not here. Whatever side we are on, if this has become our focus when studying the verse, then we have missed one of its main concerns.

John is stressing the transracial, transcultural, and transnational nature of salvation in Christ (1:13, 4:4-42, 8:31-47, 10:16). Along with the other New Testament writers, John is eager to announce that those who would receive eternal life will consist of "a great multitude that no one could count, from every nation, tribe, people and language" (Revelation 7:9). I am deeply indignant that anyone must be diverted from reflecting on this aspect of the good news because of the incompetent, dishonest, and irreverent abuses that our opponents constantly inflict on this and other biblical passages.

(to be continued)