John 3:16-21

“For this is the way God loved the world: He gave his one and only Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish but have eternal life. For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world should be saved through him. The one who believes in him is not condemned. The one who does not believe has been condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the one and only Son of God. Now this is the basis for judging: that the light has come into the world and people loved the darkness rather than the light, because their deeds were evil. For everyone who does evil deeds hates the light and does not come to the light, so that their deeds will not be exposed. But the one who practices the truth comes to the light, so that it may be plainly evident that his deeds have been done in God.”

— ‭‭John‬ ‭3‬:‭16‬-‭21‬‬ 

There’s debate over where Jesus stops talking and John or the author begins explaining. I think v 16 is as good a guess as any but Jesus could go all the way through v 21. Or v 18…now this is the basis. Most of these verses certainly sound like something Jesus would say, but I’m sure scholars would nitpick exact wording here and there.

“In this way” is a huge translation issue in the verse, and this is correct. Versions that have “so loved” confuse people that this is about magnitude or quantity of love. God wasn’t filled with so much emotion that He had no choice…at least that’s not what John 3:16 is saying. It says God loved the world in this way: He gave His son. Similar to Romans 5:8. God demonstrates His love in that Christ died for us.

One and only.  Begotten is also mistranslation based on misunderstanding of Greek words and spelling. One and only is better but since believers are also children, I prefer the emphasis on Jesus as unique son. One of a kind. 

So that is purpose or result. Everyone who believes. Not the time for a predestination debate, and it wouldn’t really matter. Even in the most strict Calvinist belief system belief is necessary. So this is still true. Everyone who believes will gain life. (See more about the phrases that John equates with “believing” in my paper on John 6, 13, 15. Belief is definitely not a one time thing for John.)

Debate over the word perish. Annihilationists do have good arguments. I’m just not there, and I can’t base a belief system on what a word might mean. I would need to do more synchronic word studies for it and then look at how it’s used contextually. 

The real emphasis here is the good not the bad. Believers gain life and won’t perish. They won’t be condemned. It’s as if the assumption is these are what’s to be expected as standard. But believers are exempt and gain something else entirely.

World is also an odd word for John. The world should be saved. I can’t buy universalism either. Is this only the people on the earth or this more of the cosmos than we give John credit for? Maybe not since his other uses focus on people, and the chapter talks about belief, but the relationship between Jesus death being “for” all/the world and at the same time “applied” to believers has always been fuzzy to me.

What makes this more difficult is John’s apparent two uses of “world” even in this passage. God loved the world. But then the light came to the “world,” but “people” did not receive it. So world is not people here, just like “his own places” is not “his own people” in John 1:12. We have to be very careful and nuanced as we work through John because he loves double meanings, and he loves to use pronouns/adjectives where a noun would be helpful.

And since most people love to debate predestination and limited atonement and stuff like that (I’ve grown away from such passions), perhaps the best conclusion (if there is such a thing) is to take the author for what he says. So John emphasizes believing and personal choice throughout his gospel. People stand condemned (here) because they are not believing Jesus is God. But absolutely, once you dig into John, you find verses like “No one comes to the Father unless the Spirit draws him.” This is why I find no thrill in the debates anymore. Sovereignty wins the day for me, but people must still believe. Does that make it absolutely free will? Sure.

John consistently says the only criteria for judgment or life is belief in Jesus as son of God. Even his epistles will echo statements like this.

Good and evil deeds also sound like 1 John 3 or even 3 John where John is talking about supporting traveling teachers. I don’t think that example applies here but it’s similar language. The weird thing is that all we see in Jesus’ ministry is “sinners” coming to Jesus. I thought they hated the light. They got exposed time and time again.

John is known for that phrase “practicing good” and “practicing evil” from 1 John 3. Once confronted with truth, we have the choice to repent/confess and turn to “light” or we can continue to practice evil and hide. I’m guessing John’s themes are that those sinners in the gospels came to Jesus because they sought true healing.

But it’s deeper than that, perhaps because for John (again) he’s usually focused on one of two things: loving one another, or as we have already see in this passage, confessing Jesus as God. And both of these things lead to seeking “holiness.”

So doing good is probably related to understanding the truth about Jesus first. Then we can live in the community He has called us to.