Calvinism and John 3:16

Welcome to Have You Not Read, a podcast seeking to answer questions from the text of Scripture for the honor of Christ and the edification of the

Saints. Before we dig into our topic, we humbly ask you to rate, review, and share the podcast.

Thank you. Thank you for joining us for Have You Not Read. With me are Michael Durham, David Kassin, and Chris Giesler.

We have a question that's been on the queue for a while and we thought we'd take a shot at it tonight. It reads, what's the

Calvinist understanding of John 3 .16, the favorite go -to for angry

Arminians? So that's the question, but we have someone in studio that has met a non -angry

Arminian, and so we thought we might start with that anecdote. Yeah, this is,

I'm glad, I'm glad that angry Arminians will use John 3 .16, but also irenic

Arminians also will use John 3 .16. That means warm and fuzzy. Yeah. Peaceable.

Peaceable. Yeah. Winsome. Winsome. That's a good, that's always a good word. Winsome Arminians also like John 3 .16.

Well, you can find YouTube videos of more

Arminian or freewill proponents who will quite literally jump up and down.

They will scream into the camera screen with their audience and scream the word, whosoever.

Not every fellow believer who is more of the Arminian bent or the freewill bent thinks that Calvinism is a heresy.

Some do, and you can find videos of that as well. My recent interaction was on a plane.

I was sitting next to this couple. It was a pastor, probably mid -20s, nice guy.

His wife was on his left at the window, and I was in the aisle, and I was just reading, minding my own business, not trying to bother anybody.

But when you're in uniform, oftentimes passengers will talk with you and just, you know, strike up conversation, and he did.

He was just a very, very friendly guy, and we just kind of kept going back and forth, and we were talking about this off mic.

Within a few minutes of talking with someone, how many times have you guys thought to yourself,

I wonder if this person's a Christian. They just are saying there's just, there's something.

There's something there. There's a spirit there. Things that they said. My wife has done this several times, where she's been talking with someone that said, wait a minute, are you a

Christian? Like, yeah. Are you? Yeah. And it's just interesting. I had mentioned something about loving, you know, where we live, and we're transplants to Oklahoma, and we love it here.

I had mentioned, oh, we love where we live. We love our church. We have made some good friends, and then he kind of keyed in on that and says, oh, where do you go to church?

Well, where do you go to church? We just were having a nice interaction, and we started asking each other about each other's backgrounds.

And I have a Reformed streak in me, although I can't call myself a classical

Reformed Baptist in the strict sense. I have many of those leanings, and you know,

I showed in my confession that I keep in my Bible to 1644 is something that I enjoy.

I actually have a copy with me right now. It's actually in my Bible. I refer to it every so often.

It's just something that I enjoy. And he said, well, I'm more on the

Arminian side, and he wanted to discuss that. And I talked about the sovereignty of God.

I went through Ephesians 1. He gave some of his verses, and as we were just kind of going back and forth about the gospel itself, he made the comment and said, well, look, whosoever means whosoever.

And he thought that was just a coup de gras. He thought that was truly the nail in the coffin.

And that gave me an opportunity to talk about what that word means.

What was the Greek word behind whosoever? We would translate it has, and that became a fun discussion.

But we got to read all of John 3 .16 together. And although we reached different conclusions, his patience, his kindness, his willingness to listen encouraged me to do the same.

This guy was a pastor. He is truly a pastor, loves people. And we were on this plane,

I think a total of three hours. We probably talked about two and a half of that. And the time flew by.

So it was a wonderful time of fellowship. He and his wife were just lovely people. But those are questions that you are going to get asked every so often.

So when someone says whosoever, that means whosoever means whosoever. So I'd like us to dive into the text.

What does that word mean in context? Where else is it used in Scripture? And as I said before, if you really want to know what a verse means, look at the verses before it and after it.

Read the whole chapter. Put it in context. What is it really saying? Yeah, that's good.

The term whosoever has a compelling ring to it and a bit of a tradition behind it, especially with its prominence there in one of the most, if not the most famous verse in the

Bible. But of course, how often has this verse been rendered in the King James on billboards, bumper stickers, gospel tracks, and even in hymns and songs.

When you first brought up this story about this interaction with this young pastor and the focus on the term whoever or whosoever,

I couldn't help but reflect on an older spiritual that was often sung in Baptist churches a long time ago.

And it was one that we sang at the church where I became a Christian and was baptized at a very young age.

And the tagline goes, whosoever surely meaneth me.

And of course, meaneth is a wonderful King James word. I'm not sure if meaneth is actually in the

King James, but it certainly is of the King's English. But we would sing that whosoever surely meaneth me.

And the warmth of that truth is certainly not what we're trying to deny.

We are not trying to deny that somebody, a Christian, a fellow believer, looking at John 3 .16

and seeing this, for God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have everlasting life.

We are not saying, now hold on there, just because you believe in Jesus doesn't mean that you get eternal life, which is sometimes the first thing that a non -Calvinist think that Calvinists are saying.

The old spiritual whosoever surely meaneth me can be warmly, and that tagline can really be endorsed by Calvinists and Arminians saying,

I believe in Jesus even though I'm not of whatever class or group.

Surely this means that because I am believing in Jesus, I too have eternal life in him.

And that warm affirmation is not in question. That's not what we're discussing and talking about.

So, David, you spent a good amount of time with him, and it seemed to...

Where did the disagreement, do you think, principally, where did that fall in your discussion?

When he said whosoever, that was the kind of culminating part of his argument as I went through Ephesians 1, or I went through other areas, or I went through different chapters in John 6.

We talked about being drawn by the Father. We talked about the sheep. Why do you not believe?

He says, well, he says, you do not believe because you're not my sheep. That's what it says. It does not say, you're not my sheep because you don't believe.

The causing factor of someone's belief is being one of those sheep. Those are the things that I was discussing with him.

And then he said, well, since we're in John... And again, this interaction was about, I think it was maybe about four or five months ago.

I'm trying to remember. But when we talked about the gospel and actually sharing the gospel with people, he said, whosoever means whosoever.

That was his final blow. And I really think that what he meant, he implied by whosoever means anyone can, is whoever, whosoever.

You share the gospel with anyone and everyone. So whoever believes, that means everyone could possibly believe.

That was the implication of whosoever means whosoever. Yeah. And I think in these discussions, we had talked about this.

A lot of times it can boil down to word usage and definition and things like that.

But then even beyond that, even in the English language, when the

King James was written, whosoever was not used in the way that modern readers read it now.

It meant, like when we'll get to definitions of pos, it was more that.

And it's not talking about this decision or anything like that. It has this kind of overarching whoever, and it's conditional, which we'll get into.

So you can talk about the different words, but I think, like you said, going through the context of the passage as an argument.

So even if you stumble over this word, if the passage is an argument of Jesus saying something specific, you're going to have a harder time getting around that.

Absolutely. If your theology turns upon a particular definition of one word, you're on very shaky ground.

It's only used that way, and God only has to say something once for it to be important. But if he uses a word repeatedly throughout the scriptures, different contexts, then you can kind of get a sense of what that word means.

So in this case, pos is, if you use strong concordance, it comes out as G3956.

That's the root word. Now, there are multiple definitions that could be associated with this.

All, any, every, many, thoroughly, whosoever, whatsoever, or the whole.

My response to him was, this word is used throughout the scriptures. You could translate it every or whole.

And he kind of looked at me quizzically and said, well, like pos cosmos, the whole world. We could pull out

Colossians 1 .1 .6, and it says it's used the whole world, pos.

And he was just kind of, it was interesting. He was just kind of listening. I think he didn't expect me to pull that stuff out.

Or maybe in his discipleship, the emphasis on the original language hasn't been primary.

Possibly. But in that, it's important. It's like, hey, what did the

Holy Spirit intend with this human author, bearing him along, superintending the truth of this word, pos?

John is writing this down, faithful record of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

So this is an important word. I'm in agreement, and I rejoice in this word as much as you do.

What does it mean? And so it's good to point to the original languages, not because they trump.

It's not something where you pull out the original language and say, well, you know what, the English word there is totally wrong, and I'm going to give you this

Greek word. It's not that. However, sometimes

English words may take a life of their own, given a backlog of traditional use.

Perhaps a great deal of discipleship and teaching has so shifted the semantic focus of that word that, in your mind, it has lost some contact with the original.

Yeah, it would be historically an anachronism. To use a modern definition of a word that was translated, of a

Greek word that was translated a couple hundred years ago, definitions change, and a word can have multiple definitions, depending on what the context is.

We have to acknowledge that. I just think another example of that is be baptized for the remission of sins, and you could take those four, and you could say, well, wanted for murder.

You're not hiring them to assassinate someone. You're wanting them for something that in the past, worse is a young bachelor who's wanted for a wife.

They want the wife for a specific purpose. And there's good examples of, in that particular example from Acts 2 .38,

there's examples of, also in Luke and Acts, the Greek word behind that, ais, being translated in that way, being baptized on account of, or because of.

Now, that's not the most common way that that Greek word is used, but it is used that way. And the question is, okay, well, are the

English translators getting that word right or not? Well, you just give an example of the word for, and if you go back and, you can just see that the

English translators, you just go back and read their own writings, like the men who translated the King James, the men who translated the

ESV, you go back and look at what they write, and they use the word for in a variety of ways.

And its flexibility matches the flexibility of the Greek word ais. So, it's a great word to put there.

And this brings us back to something that has been long observed in New Testament scholarship, particularly, but biblical scholarship broadly, that what you've already said, trying to hinge everything on one word can be very destabilizing.

You really do need to read the context. You really need to see what's going on in the whole. And so, when you're looking at this term, ais, or whosoever, the significance of this word is not necessarily always being read in the context of the chapter or the section of this

Gospel of John, or even in the context of the whole Gospel of John. It's being read in a different context, a doctrinal context, a polemic context, in which whosoever is an important debating battleground with regards to whether or not limited atonement is real and biblical, is irresistible grace true or false, is unconditional election true or false.

And so, the word whosoever then takes on a massive amount of significance as a refutation of doctrines of grace or the

Calvinist doctrines of salvation to the five points of Calvinism. And so, whosoever becomes significant in that context.

I think that's truly what he meant, that whosoever means whosoever, therefore, it's a refutation of the five points that you hold to so dearly.

Exactly. And so, in this case, it's... Tongue -in -cheek, of course. Well, there's also an underlying argument being made.

Yes, yes, yes, you have these well -articulated expressions of a system of theology, but with one simple biblical word, we completely undermine all of that.

So, don't you see that you're not being biblical? And there's an attraction to that.

I would say that the instinct, I would always hesitate to try and dull that instinct.

I want people going to the scriptures first and primary and holding all systems of theology and doctrine accountable to the word of God.

I am all about that. I'm totally for that. But this is where in that one word is not going to stand up on its own.

If you really are going to go to the Bible to make sure that what you believe is biblical, that's where we've been saying you've got to see how the word is being used in the surrounding context and put it together in the cogent meaning of what the author is saying.

So, for example, different words in verse 16 really pop up.

For instance, for God so loved the world, and so and love and world are all significant, he gave his only begotten

Son. And there's going to be a lot of agreement. And why did you have so much unity with this young man?

Because we both worship Christ and we were brothers. You had the same Savior. So, there's lots of things in here to rejoice in the love of God and the only begotten

Son of God that indeed we are saved by faith. And I'm sure he would say by faith alone.

I mean... He would. Yeah. So, whoever believes in him... Faith networks. He was all about it.

Yeah. Should not perish, but have everlasting life. And we rejoice that we are saved from every specter of death and we have all the fullness of eternal life in our

Savior Jesus Christ. Lots to agree about here and we rejoice in. Of course, the two words really pop out, or three words, the word so, the word world, and the word, as we said, whosoever.

Those are the three words that really pop out. And the first one is often taken as emphatic.

And of course, we'd love to put exclamation points behind the many attributes and graces of God.

He is holy, holy, holy. God is love, as John says in his letter, 1

John. We affirm these things. When it says for God so loved the world, this is an example of where the word so in common parlance is used for emphasis, exclamation point.

I'm so tired. Yeah. Yeah. I'm so tired of this misunderstanding about the word so.

But if you just back up a couple of verses, verse 14, and as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the

Son of Man be lifted up. This word, you go back and again, in the original, it's being used to describe manner, in this manner.

And I do believe the Holman Christian Standard Bible, when it first came out,

I think it was 2012. When it first came out, it actually translated

John 3, 16 in this way. In this way,

God loved the world. Dropped the word so altogether. Translated the word as it's intended to be received and read.

So there's that word. Now, David, you've talked about the Greek word behind the word whosoever as pos, meaning all, every.

And the example that we found in Colossians 1, 6, the gospel has gone to all the world.

What did Paul mean by that? It says the whole world.

So it means for all of the world. It's used other places where sometimes it's translated everyone.

I mean, I did a quick search, and it's just in Romans. It says, you know, verse 1, 16, everybody knows this one, for I'm not ashamed of the gospel, for it is the power of God for salvation to everyone who believes, to the

Jew first and also to the Greek. So I think you can take John 3, 16, and you can do the same thing.

That everyone who believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. It's the exact same thing that Paul is saying here.

You know, the word, if you want to know what a word means in Scripture, look to see where else it is used, and you just kind of get a flavor of what that word is kind of intended, although depending on the context, it can have slightly different connotations.

But I mean, it just means all that you're talking about, you know? I've been told that all means all, and that's all that it means.

Yes. Yes. But if you read it, it's conditional, all what?

Yeah, all of something. All of something. All of something, all of the world, or, you know, verse 18, for the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men.

It's every single time, it has a condition or something that qualifies it. What are you talking about?

Everything of what? Everyone who is this, all this.

Mm -hmm. So, in this case, it's attached to a participle, which is the word believes.

Now, that whosoever, I think it's a fine translation.

It gets at the idea that all the ones believing in him do not perish, shall not perish, will not perish, but have everlasting life.

So, the whosoever is conditional in the sense that it's attached to believing.

Mm -hmm. And I don't think there's going to be a whole lot of disagreement about that.

Right. No, no disagreement. When you're talking about this verse, so rather than it being on election,

I don't see this speaking either way, the Armenian, or it's not talking about the choosing or believing, rather, it seems like it's talking about if you believe, then you have eternal life.

That's more security of the believer, rather than talking about election. This is a great example.

It doesn't exactly disprove his position. It's just not talking about that. Yeah. That's a very good point.

This is a good example of why data is not evidence. When you bracket data with a question and an answer, now you have evidence.

Maybe the question and answer are poor, and so you have bad evidence. Okay. But if you bracket

John 3, 16 with a question and an answer that goes like this, say, what is

John talking about in the context about eternal life, given Jesus' conversation with Nicodemus?

What are the prospects of salvation for anyone, given what he just said to Nicodemus? Because Nicodemus is the most educated, very religious man, and he's trying to figure out, how do

I enter my mother's womb a second time and be born again? Jesus said, well, this is the work of the

Holy Spirit, Nicodemus. Aren't you the teacher of Israel? Don't you know these things? In the context, you could ask the question about John 3, 16 to say, what marvelous truth is being brought home here, given what

Nicodemus and Jesus have been discussing, and given the issues of sin in man, especially because of the following verses.

And that's a great question. I think you come out with a solid answer. But if you ask a different question, and you say, given the claims that Jesus didn't die for everybody, how does

John 3, 16 disprove that? Okay. Well, then you have your answer, whosoever. The term whosoever disproves the claims of Calvinists about the limited atonement of Christ.

If you frame the question that way. So, it's about how you frame the question. And very often, what you were having was fellowship, and it was not a formal debate, it was casual in a sense, but it was serious and also in a sense.

But in those types of conversations, when that topic comes up, very often, the habit is to reach for verses that are data points to bring into view, given the current discussion.

And the current discussion is very often abstracted into doctrinal claims, because, hey, we're not really doing a

Bible study right now. We're just encountering somebody who has different doctrinal system than I do, and we're talking about those things.

And very often, scriptures are brought to bear in that context. And so, they are framed by those questions and answers that sometimes may be missing the context.

Not always, but it's more likely that it will happen in those types of scenarios.

So, good reflection is when you go through a series, a conversation like that, it is good to reflect on what was said, why did they bring up this verse?

Did I bring up verses that maybe I was using out of context? And to just kind of meditate and reflect on that.

So, the concern then about John 3 .16

is that an angry Arminian or a peaceable

Arminian or somebody else will go to John 3 .16 and say, doesn't this just simply on the face of it disprove limited atonement?

Doesn't this disprove that? Because as David, you pointed out, he was basically saying, you kind of boiled it down to a nutshell, that he was saying, everyone can.

That was his implication. Whosoever means that anyone and everyone can believe and be saved.

Well, what doctrine backstops that? It is the idea that Jesus Christ died on the cross for everybody, for all of our sins, without exception.

And the only thing that keeps his atonement from being effectual for them, saving them from hell, is their decision about that, and that is expressed by faith.

It's wrapped up in a nice package. So, when he said, whosoever means whosoever, he implied all of that.

That everyone has the capacity to believe, the opportunity to believe in one way or another, and Christ made provision for all of them to believe, but they still have to believe.

That's why it says, whosoever. And that's a whole lot to put into that word.

And I think if you just look to see where else it is used in the New Testament, it doesn't say all that.

Yeah, I find, in a sense, when you go and look at the other instances, what you're doing, in a sense, is you're disenchanting his use and understanding of that word whosoever.

We don't want everyone to be disenchanted with the Bible. The term all is a wonderful word.

And as a Calvinist, I rejoice in the word all. The word all is a beautiful word, and I love it when it shows up in the

Bible, and I lean into it and rejoice in what it has to say, because we are reminded time and time again, especially in regards to salvation, that this is talking about all without distinction.

It's not all without exception, and that is clear by,

I'm sure, David, of course, you shared with him from John 6, John 10, Ephesians 1. There's a lot of different places that demonstrate that Jesus Christ did not die for all without exception, but that he died for all without distinction.

What's interesting is that our reading of this text, and I'm going to read it again, it says, "...for

God so loved the world that he gave his only Son, that whosoever," or whoever, or everyone, or all who believe in him, "...should

not perish, but have eternal life." So, everyone who believes will not perish and have eternal life.

So, I think that's a better reading of the text than the enchanted word whosoever.

It just means everyone who believes will have eternal life. That doesn't prove my position, and it doesn't disprove his position.

It's not addressing that issue. It just isn't. Correct. So, if we look at the rest of the text, how does this fit into the argument, into the flow of conversation that Jesus is having with Nicodemus?

Yeah. So, if you back up to the beginning, you have a man who is very educated.

Nicodemus is described by Jesus as the teacher of Israel. You might imagine everyone looking at Nicodemus as the go -to guy, the

Bible -answer man, the double doctorate. He had the PhD and the Doctorate of Divinity, which was where we get the acronym

Fuddy Duddy from. PhD, DD, Fuddy Duddy. And that's Nicodemus. He had it all.

But Jesus tells him, unless you're born again, you can't even see the kingdom of God, which is a very strong thing to say since Nicodemus is living in Jerusalem and can see the temple and see the priests and sacrifices, see the smoke rise every morning, every evening from the temple, living in the promised land, looking at the fig trees, surveying the mountains, the very same geological formations that Abraham saw.

What Jesus just said to Nicodemus is stunning. Unless you're born again, you can't even see the kingdom of God.

Nicodemus, I think, understands that Jesus is coming at him with a metaphor and so he plays along. You know, what am

I going to do? Enter my mother's womb a second time and be born again? But this is a great opportunity because Jesus says, verse 5,

John 3, most assuredly I say to you, unless one is born of water and the spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

That which is born of the flesh is flesh and that which is born of the spirit is spirit. So this is not of the flesh, but of the spirit.

And he says, do not marvel that I said to you, you must be born again. Verse 8, very key, the wind blows where it wishes and you hear the sound of it, but they cannot tell where it comes from and where it goes.

So was everyone who was born of the spirit. Nicodemus was just saying, look, what do

I do? You're saying I can't see the kingdom of God unless I'm born again. So what do I do to be born again? And Jesus says, no, that's what the spirit does,

Nicodemus. That's what the spirit does. Now for the readers of the gospel of John, this is not brand new information.

It's personalized. It's full of new color and punch and verve, but this is not new information because we already have that in chapter one, right?

We kind of start off that way. In chapter one, we hear about the son of God, that he is the word who was with God and who was

God from the very beginning and all things were made through him. Nothing was made apart from him. He made it all. And he has all the life that men need.

And he is the light of the world. This is all good news. And when the light of the world comes into those who are in darkness, you'd think that everybody would say, hooray, here's the light.

We're so tired of this stinking darkness. However, he comes to his own, but his own does not receive him.

Verse 11. He came into the world. The world was made through him, but the world did not know him.

Verse 10. Now verse 12, but as many as received him, to them he gave the right to become children of God.

The joyous idea of adoption. Notice only those who receive

Christ are the children of God. God's chosen people are found in Christ.

Children of God, only those who receive Christ are children of God, not just if you're born in Abraham.

Big news, verse 12, to those who believe in his name. This clarifies what it means to receive him.

As many as received him, to them he gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in his name. So this clarifies how to receive

Christ is to believe in his name. Now, verse 13. Who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

So this theme comes early, and we're getting an expanded, intensified understanding of that in chapter 3.

And the gentle rebuke that Jesus gives to Nicodemus is saying, are you the teacher of Israel and you don't know these things?

So he's referring to something even earlier. So John is saying, this is not new information.

And Jesus is telling Nicodemus, this is also not new information. When he says, truly, truly,

I say to you, unless one is born of water and the spirit cannot see the kingdom. It's debatable where that comes from, but what makes sense is that this comes out of Ezekiel 36, which says,

I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleanness and from all your idols.

And I will cleanse you, and I will give you a new heart and a new spirit. I will put it within you, and I will remove from the heart of stone from your flesh and give you a heart of flesh.

Saying that, Nicodemus, you should know that this is something that God does.

This is the spirit that is going in you. He's washing you with that water, which is the spirit.

He's giving you a new heart, which is regeneration. This is something that God does in you.

And actually, he doesn't start off with John 3 .16. You need to believe he starts off with John 5.

John 3 .5, you have to be born of water and the spirit, and you can't enter the kingdom of God.

The wind blows where it wishes. You hear it sound, but you do not know where it comes from, where it goes.

So, it is everyone who is born of the spirit. This is the third person of the

Trinity, absolutely sovereign, and the Holy Spirit blows where he wishes.

The will of God. Absolutely. Born of the will of God, not the will of man, not the will of the flesh, not of blood, not by your heredity, not by your genealogy, not by the will of man or the flesh.

The will of God is the will of God expressed by the power of the Holy Spirit. So, we cannot come to this passage that says, whosoever believes, and then put all the emphasis on individual expression of will by man, as if that's the point that's being made.

It's not the point being made. And why do we know that? Because very often the argument is, well, see,

John 3 .16 disproves irresistible grace, limited atonement, unconditional election.

Why? Because it says, see, it's each own person, individual's decision.

Sorry, that whole idea has already been dealt with in chapter one, when it says that those who receive him are those who believe in him.

That's verse 12. Verse 13 clarifies, meaning they were born of God, not of the will of man.

This is not saying that man's will is entirely missing, absent in the process of conversion, but this is saying that receiving

Christ and believing in him is part and parcel with this being born of God.

So, it's not just this mere exercise of the will of man.

In fact, the will of man is excluded from the source of this salvation.

It's the will of God. And this is, I think, brought forward even earlier than Ezekiel in Deuteronomy 10 .18,

as Moses is preaching to this second generation, giving them the law a second time, talking to them about the problem that they're facing.

He says to them in Deuteronomy 10 .16, therefore, circumcise the foreskin of your heart and be stiff -necked no longer.

It's like, the problem is your heart. It's like, you guys can follow all of these different legal standards, but the problem is your heart's not right, which

Ezekiel is talking about as well. But they can't. And this is made clear through the rest of the exposition, which is called

Deuteronomy, this big long sermon that Moses gives. Chapter 30, verse 6, here's the promise, and the

Lord your God will circumcise your heart. So, I think this circles back around to a concern that your conversation partner, the peaceable

Arminian had, is that if there is to be an honest gospel presentation to sinners, and that if we were to compel them to do something, then there must be honest to goodness, they must be able to do this.

So, if we say, you need to repent of your sins and believe, then they must have full capacity to do this.

That goes back to the Augustinian. His prayer was, command what you will and grant what you command, something to that extent.

And Pelagius was like, no, if he commands something, then we have the ability to do it. And so, you have that big debate.

There's a presupposition there. Right, right. And so, but we have a lot of example of God commanding people to do things that they could not do, but him having every right to do so, because that is what should be expected of them, given the design that he has made us in his image, and for him to command people to worship no other

God and have no other God before you, worship him alone, worship him supremely, love the

Lord your God with all your heart, soul, mind, and strength. He said that to people that could not do it. Right?

Yeah. Like, they couldn't, but that doesn't mean that that wasn't right. That is, that was the standard, that is a standard of righteousness that was correct.

The standard is still the standard. It's still the standard. And because Jesus Christ is the supreme manifestation of the righteousness of God, and he is the image of the invisible

God, everything for us depends on us being in union with him, repent, believe in Christ.

But this is not something that presumes I have full capacity and ability to put myself into full spiritual union with Christ.

I have all spiritual power to unite myself to Christ by faith.

No, that's not what that command presumes. I remember when

I was, two funny little stories, this whole controversy between Calvinists and Arminians was a little bit hot in the county where I pastored for seven years back in Tennessee.

And I got in a world of trouble early on in my first few months being there because a

Calvinist visited our church. He was a renowned Calvinist and had been part of a church split. They split because of Calvinism.

And he came to visit because someone told him that I was a Calvinist and he wanted to come hear me preach. Well, he showed up, he was recognized by somebody else as being one of those

Calvinists that split a church. What a jerk. Yeah. So, I got in hot water from early on because it's like, oh, you come here to split our church too?

It was a tense situation. But anyway, going through it, trying to find ways to be at peace with one another and be at unity in Christ.

But we began to allow and encourage men in the church to read, do scripture readings as part of the order of service.

And there's one gentleman who was extremely suspicious of everything Calvinist because he loved

Jesus, great brother, but the Calvinist thing really irked him at the time. And we invited him to read.

John, it was his turn to read. It was on the schedule. I didn't do it on purpose, but he was supposed to read

John chapter one. Sovereignty of God. Right. Verses six through 13.

He read verses six through 12 and stood there for about three seconds, reading ahead in verse 13.

Didn't read verse 13 and just stopped. It was in the bulletin, read through first.

Couldn't read verse 13. Couldn't read it. He just could not bring himself to read it. It was so bothersome.

So that was one story. It was like, that was kind of funny to me, but we let it pass. The other story was when

I would go up to the town just north of us, where they actually had a fairly good diner.

And I would go up there and hang out with some of the Baptist pastors in the area. We were supposed to have a breakfast every week on a

Tuesday. And I was sitting with them. And this particular occasion, it was only the two old timers and me.

And these were the old timers who weren't currently pastoring, but they were there kind of as the guys who, they always called these guys as the interims.

If there was a vacancy, no pastor, they would come in. They would be the interims. They were always doing pulp with supply.

They'd just been in the county for so long. And so we sat there and I'm just eating my breakfast and they're talking back and forth and just affirming some basic truths.

Salvation is by faith alone. It's not by works. Nope. Nothing you can do is only by faith, only by faith.

That's right. And then one of them says, where does the faith come from? And they both looked at each other.

They said, God, boom, these guys are the farthest thing from Calvinists you'll ever meet.

But if they're, but if they're not in debate mode, they're not in debate mode. They have no problem just affirming

God's all powerful and salvation too. And that's good. Isn't that good? Yeah. Faith comes from God.

That's the only place. They affirm that faith was a gift from God. Yeah, absolutely. It's a gift from God. Wow. And it's like,

I'm not saying anything. I'm the token Calvinist in the whole county.

I'm not saying anything. They're just sitting there just recognizing some basic truths.

So in this case, it's good to remember that even if we get into a friendly debate, hopefully not an angry debate, but conversations about this, there's actually,

I think, behind the veil of debate, a lot of agreement. Yes.

I think there's a lot of agreement. There's still a lot of unity about affirming the goodness of God, the robust providence of God, the grace of God on all these matters.

But there still is, I think, a heightened concern about saying things that sound like, well,

Jesus didn't die for all sinners. And even if someone wanted to be saved, if he didn't die for them, they're not going to get saved, which is kind of a straw man of the position.

But what's the motivation behind that? It was usually so that people says, we want you to get out and share the gospel with anyone and everyone.

I think the intent is that you spread that seed over every soil everywhere because you don't know what kind it is.

Right. Yeah. And do so with full confidence. I look at you and I don't know what you've done or where you come from, but I want you to be fully confident that Jesus is the great

Savior, even though you're a great sinner and you need to look to him to be saved. And I can do this with full confidence and present

Christ to you in this way and compel you to repent and believe and mean it that I can do that, which

I would totally agree with. Yeah. Well, when you're saying things, like you're using the

Bible, you're going through it, and it's saying things about God. And then we go out to try to evangelize.

We want to say the same things that the Bible says about God, but it doesn't mean we have the same knowledge that God has.

I confirm God is all -knowing. God is all -powerful. God has a will. I don't know it.

So when I go out and evangelize, I don't have those things. So I'm not going to act like, well, because I know only some will be saved.

God has his plan to only save some. I'm only going to cry halfway. No, that's not because then you read other parts of the

Bible and there are commands to go and tell, right? So we don't have that knowledge.

And I think when you're talking about these systems and people have heard, oh, this is what

Armenians believe, and this is what Calvinists believe. If you're in the discussion, well, okay, acknowledge there is a system, but you're also talking to a person, and you don't know how much of that system they affirm.

You don't know how much of the Bible they know or don't know. And if you can just talk Bible, context, dig into the words, then that's going to be far more productive than trying to pit your systems against one another.

That's a fair point. That's actually a really good point. I think what's ironic about this chapter is it doesn't really read to me evangelistic as much as it does, as it reads, this is the character of those in the kingdom and those who are not.

Let's describe those who are in the kingdom, because that appears to be what

Jesus is telling Nicodemus. Now, I think Maggie made a really good point that John 1 says, well, who is born?

Well, those who are born by the will of God. So, it kind of sets God up as, this is what he is doing.

And when Jesus is addressing Nicodemus, in verse 8 in this chapter, the

Spirit moves as he wishes. Verse 13, it's the Son of man that descends from heaven.

16, God is the one who sends that Son, and all who believe in that Son have eternal life.

Verse 18, believe in the only Son of God. Verse 21, these works have been carried out in God.

Versus those who are workers of iniquity and unrighteousness, he's describing the kind of people that God creates or recreates by the power of the

Spirit, believing in the Son who has been sent by God the Father. It is the triune

God, all working together to take out of this mass of unrighteous humanity, these are the ones who are seeing the kingdom.

And if there's a nail in the coffin, even though it's John the Baptist, in the next couple of verses, he actually says in verse 27, a person cannot receive even one thing unless it is given to him from heaven.

So, I think that this chapter really gives the character of the two kinds of people.

Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe is condemned already. You know, this is the judgment.

The light has come into the world. People love darkness rather than light because their works are evil. Everyone who does wicked things hates the light, but whoever does what is true comes to the light.

He's describing the two kinds of people, and this chapter, I think, is just saying this is what

God does. This is what God does in people, and if you believe, you do have eternal life.

And it says, okay, well, isn't that something that you do? It says, well, or does that mean that everyone can?

Well, it's really not addressing those questions. It's just saying those who do believe have eternal life, and any of those works, anything that follows, all this good character, this sanctification, this change in their life is wrought by God.

You can't take any credit for it whatsoever. I think that's the point of the chapter.

Yeah. And as with much of the rest of the New Testament, the big question behind the scene, of course, is not the

Arminian Calvinist debate. No. Right. The red herring oftentimes. Yeah. The big question behind the scenes is how is

God bringing about his promises in their fulfillment? What can we expect in terms of these promised deliverances, this promised salvation?

So, when it says that God so loved the world, again, like whosoever gets enchanted with this idea of individual liberty,

I have free will to do whatever I want with my will. I'm responsible for God to choose right things so I can be saved.

That word gets enchanted that way, but that's not what it meant in the context, especially given what we've just said, but also the term world.

When we read the word world, the modern take on John 3 .16

immediately invokes, okay, here are the nomads in the

Gobi Desert. Here are the tribesmen in deepest Congo. Here are the goat herders in the

Andes. Here are even wilder people in Seattle. So, the world, right?

So, we're to envision, and I'm not saying that that's not part of what John 3 .16

is about, but that's not the primary notion that John's original hearers are getting from this, okay?

When we read the word world in the context of the New Testament, given

Jesus' arrival on the scene, what is the world? The world is

Jew and Gentile. The world is God had made this promise to Abraham that in his seed, all the nations would be blessed.

All the families of the earth would be blessed, and there are Jews and there are Gentiles. God has been working out his redemptive history centered in a place called

Jerusalem, manifesting some things about himself in a temple where he has set his name, that is meant to be a house of prayer for all nations.

And the entire world, thus, is being thought of in terms of God as creator, he's made his creation, man has fallen in sin, but God has revealed himself in redemptive purposes by means of covenants.

And these covenants are expressed as God has a mouth to the nations called Israel. Now, Israel is in need of salvation, and so are the nations.

The whole world's in need of salvation, which is why in chapter one, Jesus comes to the world he created.

He's the word of God. The whole world is fashioned by the word of God. Here he comes. Yes, in terms of the two by two that Noah brought onto the ark, but also all the dynamics of how the world works, entirely created by God and Jesus Christ, who is the word.

So, he comes to his own zone, did not receive him. He comes as the light of the world. He comes as the significance of everything that has been said and done by God thus far.

He comes into the world as the light. And this is why when you read in the text, for God loved the world in this way, that he gave his only begotten son, but whoever

Jew or Gentile believes in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

For God did not send his son to condemn the world. Jesus didn't come into the world as it was to say everything that God has been doing in terms of Jew and Gentile and temple and revelation is awful.

Nope. That's not what he came to do. Notice, but that the world through him might be saved.

Because he's the whole point. He's the whole point. The Jew would say, come to the temple if you want to be saved.

Everybody come to the temple to be saved, right? But Jesus is coming. He's the one who's coming.

So, he's the one who is the savior. The whole world finds salvation in him. He's the fulfillment.

Oh, by the way, chapter two of John, Jesus says, I'm the temple, right?

He just said, I'm the temple. In the chapter one, Jesus says to Nathaniel, you'll see the angels of God ascending and descending upon the son of man.

I'm Jacob's ladder. So, everything that God had been doing to shape the world into the way it was,

Jew, Gentile, God's redemptive promises being revealed through Israel to the nations, the entire matrix of how the world was,

Jesus comes as the light of that world. He comes as the meaning of it, the fulfillment of it, the savior for all of them.

He's Jacob's ladder. He's the temple. He comes as the fulfillment of the old covenant promises. So, that's what it means when

God loved the world. He loved the world in this way. God was not against how he had fashioned things.

He was leading up to the culmination of that in his son. And so,

I think this is the best way to read this, because it becomes clear, okay,

God did not send his son into the world to condemn the world. This doesn't mean that there is no condemnation at all, because what's the threat of verse 16?

Perishing. Someone's getting condemned. Those who don't believe in him are condemned. That's not

God condemning the world that he had crafted. That's him condemning the sinners who reject the whole point of what everything

God has been doing, which is Jesus Christ. So, the condemnation is that the light has come to the world. Men, let the darkness, rather than the light, because it would be for evil.

So, there is condemnation, but it's for those who reject Christ, and that would be

Jew or Gentile. Yeah. I think what you were mentioning in John 1, where it talks about John 1 is the how, it's through the spirit, and then 3 is the condition.

In John 1, you had mentioned verse 12 and 13, but as many as received him, to them he gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in his name.

But then he addresses Jew and Gentile. Those who are born not of blood, because that would have been

Jews. We're the bloodline of Abraham. We have Abraham as our father. Nor of the will of the flesh in general.

And then he does, not of the will of mankind, man, but it's of God.

So, he names the two groups. He names mankind in general, and he says, it comes from the spirit.

And this gets to what David was saying about the character of chapter 3. Chapter 3 is showing who's who, right?

Because before, who's who was Jew or Gentile. But now, who's who is who believes in Christ, who doesn't believe in Christ, and what does that look like in real time, in real life?

Which, by the way, is also the whole theme of 1 John, clarifying that, right?

The authentic Christian experience, what does it mean to be the real people of God is in terms of who

Christ is and our faith in him and his transformation in our lives. JS Yeah.

So, I think that just about wraps it up. I had one last question. John 3 .16,

is that John's commentary on Jesus's words, or is that still... No, that can be a question for another time, another can of worms.

CB I hope that... I know we talked about a lot of different topics, but there's not going to be a quick answer to someone who gives you, well, whosoever means whosoever, because there's a lot that comes along with that.

There's a lot of presuppositions, there's a lot of just baggage that they bring with that.

And yes, you can go into some of the Greek, how pas is used in other areas, but if you can read through all of John 3,

I think that's a good answer. If you can go John 1, John 2, John 3, and then say, this is where it fits into, this is the change that Jesus is bringing.

This is the description of who's in Christ and who's not in Christ. And the movement of the

Spirit, the plan of the Father, the Son accomplishing it, talking about this, all pointing really to what

God does. And that should give us reason to praise, give glory to Him, and say that, okay,

I think the main character of this story is not Dave. I don't think that I'm the main character here.

The main character is the person and work of Christ who reflects the glory of the

Father, and the Spirit proceeds from both the Father and the Son. I mean, it's all working, the triune

God works in concert. And I think if we keep that, that is the main thing, the main thing, then some of these questions about what that particular word means start to fade.

And I think you'll find, as I did with this young pastor, how much agreement we have.

And the wonderful story that we've been given, and what

Christ has done on our behalf. And although we might disagree, I'm not saying wrangle about words, but we might disagree on some points,

I could see His heart for His flock. I could see His heart for me and for those around.

And I give great thanks to God for putting that pastoral spirit in this young man, and he shared it with me.

And I am very grateful to have met him, and to have discussed those things.

But if you do have this question come up, we would recommend reading John 1 -3 as a response.

Yeah. So, I think that wraps up that question. Let's move on to recommendations. Michael? Well, my recommendation is,

I've been reading a trilogy on World War II in the Pacific by Ian Cole. I'm two volumes in, so his last volume covers the last year.

But I've been reading through it and just appreciating insights into things that were happening now,

I guess, my goodness, 60 years ago, plus. And how do people think and how do they live?

No, 80 years ago, 80 years plus ago. Yeah. And just thinking about those things, learning a lot, but appreciating some of the lessons, looking at for the current debate, seeing how a bunch of American nationalists were fighting a bunch of Japanese nationalists.

But how Japanese nationalists, their problem wasn't that they were nationalists, is that they were part of a cult. And they did awful, horrible things to one another and to other people because of their cult.

And one of the best things that ever happened to them was they got defeated really bad.

I mean, that was a good thing. That was a good thing. And now we have missionaries there.

Yeah, exactly. And opportunity for the gospel abounds. So, on the other side of things, also just kind of the way that Ian Cole tells a story about leadership, various men in leadership and their stewardship for good or for ill in those areas.

And I'm really appreciating the leadership lessons from Nimitz and just the kind of things that happened and how to view things.

I'm really enjoying it. And I think you can... These are very popular books. I think you can find them at your library without too much trouble.

So... David, listen to a number of podcasts. And if you are going to listen to another podcast, in addition to ours, one is called

Theology for the Church. And it has a bunch of different guests and things like that. This host just does a good job.

His name is Caleb. And he was interviewing David Mathis. David Mathis is on staff with Desiring God.

And the interview was about a theology of exercise. And David Mathis actually wrote a book called

A Little Theology of Exercise and referenced it. It's in the show notes, if you ever pull up that podcast.

And I enjoyed listening to this. And it made me want to go work out.

Part of my job is I do a lot of sitting. It's kind of sedentary. And you come out of it exhausted, but you're sitting a lot.

It's important to stand up. We joke about, oh, I'm just trying to fight blood clots. But I think we joke about it because we're scared of it.

So, one of my recommendations is to check out that podcast and see what you think.

But the body that you've been given is a tool to be used. And if you are in a job where you do a lot of sitting or computer work, it's important to make sure you augment that with your exercise, your gym time.

Now, if you're a farmer and you're working outside all the time, then you're probably good.

But if you're like me and you sit in front of a screen a lot, then taking care of your body so that it can do the things that God has called you to do is,

I think, a worthwhile pursuit. I think Paul says the discipline, bodily discipline is of some benefit.

It's not the focus, but it does help. And it certainly made me want to go back to the gym.

So that's my recommendation for this week. Given the topic tonight and the freedom to choose, my recommendation is not related at all.

Actually, Milton Friedman, and there's the free to choose network.

Yes. He has some wonderful stuff in there, but that's a lot on economics, like school choice, how the government relates to public school and things like that.

And it's a lot of older clips, but they're just straightforward and to the points. Some of my favorite are where he's talking to,

I think it was like a lecture of his and then the question and answers. And they're just snippets of these college students that sound like socialists or, or, you know, the welfare state, go, go, go.

And he just answers them straightforward. And, you know, there's no animosity there. He's just like, it doesn't work.

It doesn't work. And this is why I really enjoy this, but I find myself after watching those imitating him.

And so if you, if you watch these, you have to be careful or you'll start talking without opening your mouth and speaking through your teeth, because that's just the way that he speaks and it gets in your head.

But I recommend Milton Friedman and specifically the channel on YouTube called

Free To Choose. Yeah. Let's move on to what we are thankful for.

– I'm thankful for the, for the Lord answering prayers that you, and the encouragements of, of our

Lord in the scriptures to go to our heavenly father with whatever needs we have and to approach the asking as children would approach a father and asking for those needs to be met.

And so to do so without shame and to do so with persistence and to do so with expectation of good that, and to do so and receive assurance by the doing of it.

To say, I have given this to my father. I have brought this need to him. And so it's right that I feel far more confident now than I did before, because I know he heard me and I know he does good and I know that he loves me.

And just to see the answers to prayer and in a variety of ways.

And so I'm just, I'm just thankful for those answered prayers and the lessons that come with it.

– Very good. David, as I was driving in, you know, to do the recording tonight,

I was reflecting on, it's been a while since I've been able to be in here.

So I'm just thankful for the, the time that I was able to be in town and that not only you guys could be here,

I am continually thankful for our engineer and our producer and our tech support and, you know, just the one who really helps us put all this together.

So incredibly grateful to Joel as well. – That's right.

I was looking at you, Joel. – I'm thankful for the men here at church.

And just to see what God is doing in building different things. We know they all have their family lives, they all have their jobs, they all have things going on.

And then we get here and we talk about those things, we pray about those things. But then there's what the men are doing for each other outside of Wednesday and Sunday.

The conversations that you know are happening, the aid that the men are doing for the people in the church, the care, the calls, the checking up on, and then just forward thinking on what can we do for our children?

What are things we can build more camaraderie and push each other harder in different areas?

And there's no sense of legalism, like we don't measure up, we don't do these things. It's just, hey, let's do stuff together.

Let's hang out and do stuff that glorifies God and benefits us in different ways, whether that's exercising together or book studies together or whatever it is.

And so I'm just very grateful for what we have here and it all comes from God. So very thankful for it.

– And that wraps it up for today. We are very thankful for our listeners and hope you will join us again as we meet to answer common questions and objections with Have You Not Read?