Are there problems with
John 3:16?
By
Dallas
M. Roark, Ph.D.
In an article on John
3:16, Sami Zaatari does his best to raise some doubts and questions concerning
the meaning of the verse. (See here.)
He quotes the verse several times as follows from an article of mine in the
attempt to mock God’s love. Sami forgot to mention a reference to the article I
wrote and in which I quoted the verse. (I presume it is this
one.) Here is the verse: "God loved the people of this world so
much that he gave his only Son, so that everyone who has faith in him will have
eternal life and never really die." (John 3:16 CEV) However, Sami quotes
the King James Version which is 400 years old rather than modern translations
and he changes the translation deliberately as we shall see later.
Sami raises the question of truth in these
words:
This indeed is a huge step in one's life to
convert to the faith of Christianity, hence the step must not be blindly taken,
rather the one who is seeking the truth must first examine the evidence and
then see if it is the truth.
I am glad to agree with Sami on this statement.
However, I cannot help but wonder what kind of evidence Sami presents for
converting to Islam. What is the truth about Mohammed? Is the character of
Mohammed free of all sin and crimes? What is the truth about ethics in Islam? What
is the truth about the Qur’an in its many versions? Are these issues set forth
to the prospective convert? What is the truth about jihad against non-Muslims?
What is the truth about honor killings?
Sami begins:
For starters, there is nothing about universal
love in this verse; the verse is being general, and not specific. The verse
says for God loved the WORLD, it doesn't say God loved EVERYONE, or God loved
EVERYONE ON EARTH, rather it says God loves the world, a general claim, not a
specific claim which refutes the false myth that this verse proves that God
loves everybody.
Question: Are you from another
world or planet? Are you not included in this world? The verse declares such a
love for the world that whosoever believes – an act of personal commitment to
Jesus Christ – will have eternal life. What is the difference between universal
love and general love? Are there people who are in the world that are not
included in the statement, “God loves the world.” What people are not included
in “God loves the world”? If you admit that the verse is general, and not
specific, who then is excluded? This makes no sense. If you want a specific
application, the list would encompass the whole of mankind. Mankind and the
world are synonymous.
The dictionary (Webster’s Ninth New Collegiate
Dictionary) defines general as: “1, involving, applicable to, or affecting the
whole, 2, involving, relating to, or applicable to every member of a class,
kind, or group.” The term universal is defined as: “1. Including or
covering all or a whole collectively or distributively without limit or
exception.” If you have a general declaration of love for all, you don’t need a
specific declaration.
I suspect that real problem for Sami is that the
God of the Bible loves the world. The deity of the Qur’an only loves the
Muslims, the submitters. The fact that God loves and comes in the person of the
Son is humiliating to the Muslim mind. The fact is that Allah does not love the
world, but pronounces jihad against non-Muslims, either to submit to
dhimmitude, or convert to Islam, or be killed. This seems to me to be the
reason Sami wants a “specific” reference to the love of God – namely Allah
loves only Muslims who are obedient. The forgiveness of sinners is a difficult
concept for Muslims to grasp, but that is what John 3:16 is all about.
Sami is beating the air trying to come up with a
limited definition for John 3:16.
For an example Sami related the following;
For instance if I say I
love animals, it is a general claim, but it doesn't mean I like every specific
type of animal, such as a pig, I don't like pigs. Or if I say I love food,
which I indeed do, I love food very much, but I don't like lasagna! So as you can see, I am
being general in my claim, not specific. The same with this passage, when God
says he loves the world it is a general claim, not an absaloute (sic) and
specific claim that he loves us all.
Sami gives an exception
to his love of food, lasagna. But it is good to know that Sami is not God and
the verse does not give exceptions. Sami wants to make exceptions in the text,
but there are none. Over and over, the New Testament affirms God’s desire that
all people come to Him.
The Lord isn't slow
about keeping his promises, as some people think he is. In fact, God is patient,
because he wants everyone to turn from sin and no one to be lost.
(2 Peter 3:9 CEV)
There are no exceptions in which God rules out
the possibility of their being loved by Him. The terrible thing is that humans
reject His love and if His love is rejected there is no place for their future
other than away from God, in hell.
Sami then turns to
indictment:
Now as a truth seeker I
am compelled to ask my Christian missionary friends this question. Why have you
lied to me for so long? Why have you constantly used this verse as a proof that
God loves EVERYONE including ME when the verse doesn't teach that? How can I
trust anything you say now when you lie to me about this verse and give a false
meaning to myself and billions of others?
Sami, you have not
proven a lie! You have only presumed it. The World and Everyone in it are the same. You
are trying to distort the passage to make it seem wrong. The words about God
loving the World include everyone in it in all generations, even you!!! You
have been distorting Christianity all along and you have been mocking it and
fighting against it, and you do not understand it, and if you did you would
have become a follower of Christ a long time ago.
You are trying to build
a case on a foundation that does not exist. The so-called “lie” is in your mind, not in the
Scripture verse.
Sami turns then to an interesting maneuver.
Christians claim that
God sent his son for us. Yet since we have established the fact that the verse
is general, and not specific, it also means that Jesus was generally sent for
the world, and that he wasn't SPECIFICALLY sent for EVERYONE.
Sami, you are reasoning like a sausage. If the
verse is general and not specific then Jesus wassent for everyone.
Surprisingly, Sami
strays into theology,
What this means is that
this verse teaches LIMITED ATONEMENT, meaning the son was not sent to save us
all, but for some people only! So how can a Christian use this verse as a proof
for me when I might not be included in one of these saved persons?! As far as
I'm concerned I could be a human whom God doesn't like, and a person whom the
son was not sent for.
Sami omits so much of the story we have to fill
in some of the details. Let’s look first at the beginning of the Gospel of
John:
The true light that shines on everyone was
coming into the world. The Word was in the world, but no one knew him, though
God had made the world with his Word. He came into his own world, but his own
nation did not welcome him. Yet some people accepted him and put their faith in
him. So he gave them the right to be the children of God. They were not God's
children by nature or because of any human desires. God himself was the one who
made them his children. The Word became a human being and lived here with us.
We saw his true glory, the glory of the only Son of the Father. From him all
the kindness and all the truth of God have come down to us. (John 1:9-14 CEV)
The universal appeal of John’s gospel, both here
in chapter one, and in chapter 3 is based on God’s love and man’s response.
There is no limited atonement in these verses. The idea of a limited atonement
is a construct coming from John Calvin and others following him. Moreover, the
real issue is the response of people – will you believe and receive Christ as
Lord of your life? There is no distinction between a general claim of
God’s love and a specific claim of God’s love. God’s love is without
qualifications to anyone who will receive it.
There is hope for you,
Sami, as long as you are breathing. If you are damned it is your own doing, not
God’s desire. His love for you continues even when you are rebelling against
Him. “Whosoever will…” still includes you. Your problem is not a theological
debate about predestination and free will, but that you are mocking the Gospel
and actively distorting the meaning of simple and straight-forward statements
in the Bible. The invitation of this
verse includes you, and all Muslims, and all who seek to belittle it for
whatever reason. It is only your own rejection of God’s offer by which
you exclude yourself.
Sami then quotes a passage from Charles Spurgeon
who declared that “all” does not mean all.
I don’t think quoting Spurgeon is helping you.
For example, Sami quotes the use of the Greek word “pas” to show that it does
not include “all.” One example is that “all” Judea and Jerusalem went out to
hear John the Baptist. So it is concluded that really not all went, there were
lots of people did not go.
Spurgeon is right in saying that not everyone
went and it is a figure of speech used to imply a large number of people went,
but many did not. In contrast, there is a word of Jesus in which all certainly
means “all.” At the end of the gospel of Matthew we have these words:
Jesus came to them and said: I have been given
all authority in heaven and on earth! Go to the people of all nations
and make them my disciples. Baptize them in the name of the Father, the Son,
and the Holy Spirit, and teach them to do everything I have told you. I will be
with you always, even until the end of the world. (Matthew 28:18-20 CEV)
“The people of all
nations” leaves nobody out. Sami, you are not left out. The invitation to
become a disciple of Christ is still here. The word “make” in the verse is teaching,
enrolling, instructing, it is not a word of force or coercion.
The Gospel of Luke ends
with a similar charge:
Jesus “said to them, "This is what is
written: the Messiah must suffer and must rise from death three days later, and
in his name the message about repentance and the forgiveness of sins must be
preached to all nations, beginning in Jerusalem. You are witnesses of these
things. (Luke 24:46-48 GNB)
I think that the phrase, “all nations” is pretty
revealing.
Moreover, the missionary did not lie to you. You
merely picked up a particular theological expression and try to use it as a
weapon rather than studying the New Testament to see if what is said was true.
Moreover, you must put your trust in the New Testament, not anyone coming along
saying this or that.
Next Sami raises the
issue of God sending his Son…
Okay, I see many more problems now. God loves
some of so much so he sends his son?! Why didn't he send himself? The only
LOGICAL explanation and conclusion one can reach is that God is a coward. I
don't mean to sound offensive, but the fact is this, no Father sends his son to
do his hard and dangerous work for himself. A father doesn't put his son in
harm's way, but he takes the harm and pain of his son so his son doesn't have
to suffer.
First, we have to
correct the limited assumption that God love some of us only. That is not
faithful to the Scriptures. If you persist in this error you are headed for an
unloving God, a biased being who chooses favorites and rejects others. This is more like Allah
than the idea of God in the New Testament. In Islam no one knows what Allah is
going to do. Not so here.
Second, you must realize what you are asking. You
require God to come. If God came without the incarnation you and I would not
live. God is holy and his
holiness would kill us sinners. Moreover, the Infinite God would be so great that
you could not comprehend Him. God’s love is expressed in a way that we can
understand, being like us in a body, but being God in our presence.
Third, God did not come in his Infinity to keep
the world from dying. He is not a coward.
Fourth, the Apostle Paul
describes it as follows:
Anyone who belongs to
Christ is a new person. The past is forgotten, and everything is new. God has done it all!
He sent Christ to make peace between himself and us, and he has given us the
work of making peace between himself and others. What we mean is that
God was in Christ, offering peace and forgiveness to the people of this
world. And he has given us the work of sharing his message about peace. We were
sent to speak for Christ, and God is begging you to listen to our message. We
speak for Christ and sincerely ask you to make peace with God. (2 Corinthians
5:17-20 CEV)
So, the bottom line is that God was in Christ in
the most profound way even when we speak of the Son and the Father.
Perhaps you could ask the same question with
reference to Allah and Mohammed? Why did not Allah come instead of sending a
prophet? Is
Allah a coward? Can Allah really reveal himself, not just commands?
Sami moves on to the issue of “begotten” in the
verse.
Secondly, what is your
Bible trying to say when it says God has a BEGOTTEN son of God? If the term son of God
is not meant to be taken literally then why is a literal word of offspring
through sexual intercourse being used? There are 2 solutions to this, either
your God physically had sex with a lady to have Jesus, hence he is called
BEGOTTEN. Or someone lied and made this up, and if someone did lie, then your
book isn't from God, and it is all doubtful.
There is an interesting twist that has taken
place here. The translation that I used was the Contemporary English Version
and my original quote was from it. (See here.)
However, Sami introduced a different version,
probably the King James Version, to introduce the word “begotten” to suggest
that God had a consort for the birth of Jesus. Most modern translations do not
use the word “begotten” rather the phrase “unique” or “only” Son. The issue of
“begotten” is a red herring for Muslims and they use it to mislead people,
attempting to smear Christianity.
Although Sami can hardly be ignorant of the
various articles on this issue that we have had on Answering Islam for many
years (e.g, 1, 2), he is not interested in understanding the meaning of the verse
but only in abusing the formulation in an outdated translation for polemical
purposes.
It should be underlined that the Greek text has
not changed, nor been corrupted as Muslim claim, but our understanding of the
words have deepened and been clarified. There are
Reasons why monogenes should
not be translated as “only begotten”:
The word monogenes also appears elsewhere in the
New Testament:
By faith Abraham, when
God tested him, offered Isaac as a sacrifice. He who had received the promises
was about to sacrifice his one and only [monogenes] son, even though God had
said to him, "It is through Isaac that your offspring will be
reckoned." Abraham reasoned that God could raise the dead, and
figuratively speaking, he did receive Isaac back from death. — Hebrews 11:17-19
(NIV)
The same Greek word monogenes appears here
Hebrews 11 as in John 3:16. To say Isaac was Abraham’s only-begotten son would
make no sense since according to the Bible, Abraham begat Ishmael as well as
Isaac. But monogenes meaning "one of a kind", "one and
only", or "unique" would fit because Isaac was special and it
was through Isaac that Yahweh would bless the world, not through Ishmael.
Abraham's wife, Sarah, was too old to have a child but she nevertheless became
pregnant and bore Isaac.” (Source)
The reason that Jesus is unique, one of a kind,
is his message: “I am the way, the truth, and the life!” Jesus answered.
“Without me, no one can go to the Father.” (John 14:6 CEV) Whether Sami or you
or I go to heaven or hell it is up to us. God has already acted and dealt with
the humanly impenetrable barrier, our sin. The way is provided for all of us.
If you ignore the way, or insult the provider what is there left to be said?
Sami draws out his misunderstanding of the
issue:
Since there can't be any
lies in the Bible as Christians tell me, I am forced to come to the first
conclusion, that your God literally had sex to beget Jesus his son. This now
makes me ask, who did God sleep with? Mary? It must have been her since she is
the mother of Jesus, Catholics who are the majority of Christians call Mary the
mother of God. So Mary is the mother of Jesus, God is the father of Jesus,
Jesus is the begotten son, therefore we have God and Mary having sex to beget
Jesus, hence he is called the begotten son of God.
Did the Son of God exist before the birth of
Jesus? Absolutely! This involves the whole issue of the nature of God being
Trinitarian. God the Father has been a father from eternity. The
Son of God has been a son from eternity. Moreover, the Holy Spirit exists from eternity.
So how did the birth of Jesus take place? If Sami would read the Bible, rather than Muslim
propaganda, he would find the answer.
One month later God sent the angel Gabriel to
the town of Nazareth in Galilee with a message for a virgin named Mary. She was
engaged to Joseph from the family of King David. The angel greeted Mary and
said, "You are truly blessed! The Lord is with you." Mary was
confused by the angel's words and wondered what they meant. Then the angel told
Mary, "Don't be afraid! God is pleased with you, and you will have a son.
His name will be Jesus. He will be great and will be called the Son of God Most
High. The Lord God will make him king, as his ancestor David was. He will rule
the people of Israel forever, and his kingdom will never end." Mary asked
the angel, "How can this happen? I am not married!" The angel
answered, "The Holy Spirit will come down to you, and God's power will
come over you. So your child will be called the holy Son of God. Your relative Elizabeth
is also going to have a son, even though she is old. No one thought she could
ever have a baby, but in three months she will have a son. Nothing
is impossible for God!" Mary said, "I am the Lord's servant! Let it happen as you
have said." And the angel left her. (Luke 1:26-38 CEV)
It is ironic that Muslims believe that Allah can
say, “Be” and it happens, but in the case of Mary the word of the angel is
rejected. The power of the Spirit coming over her has nothing to do with
physical sex. It is the power of God in the virgin birth. It is strange that
the Qur’an affirms the virgin birth of Jesus, but Sami insults the
Qur’an and Christianity by implying God going to bed with Mary. The Qur’an
affirms the Virgin Birth of Jesus.
Moving along Sami has some unusual reasoning:
So if I accept the Son, meaning Jesus, and
sincerely believe in him, then I get eternal life! Now what if I don't accept
the FATHER? What happens? It seems nothing; I found a loop hole it seems! The
verse clearly says that I must believe IN THE SON to have eternal life, it
doesn't say I must believe in the son AND the father! It just says I must
accept the son!
On top of that, the
verse says nothing about the Holy Spirit; the verse doesn't say you must
believe in the Son AND the Father AND the Holy Spirit! So why do I need the
Father if I don't even have to accept him? I guess I should just disregard both him and the
Holy Spirit and just take the Son.
The story goes around that Mark Twain was once
reading the Bible and the reason for his reading was he was looking for loop
holes. Sami seems to be looking for loop holes as well. But the answer to his
question is found in the Gospel of John.
"I am the way, the truth, and the
life!" Jesus answered. "Without me, no one can go to the Father. If
you had known me, you would have known the Father. But from now on, you do know
him, and you have seen him." Philip said, "Lord, show us the Father.
That is all we need." Jesus replied: "Philip, I have been with you
for a long time. Don't you know who I am? If you have seen me, you have
seen the Father. How can you ask me to show you the Father?
Don't you believe that I
am one with the Father and that the Father is one with me? What I say isn't
said on my own. The Father who lives in me does these things. Have faith in me
when I say that the Father is one with me and that I am one with the Father. Or
else have faith in me simply because of the things I do. I tell you for certain
that if you have faith in me, you will do the same things that I am doing. You
will do even greater things, now that I am going back to the Father. Ask me,
and I will do whatever you ask. This way the Son will bring honor to the
Father." (John 14:6-13)
Then I will ask the Father to send you the Holy
Spirit who will help you and always be with you. The Spirit will show you what
is true. The people of this world cannot accept the Spirit, because they don't
see or know him. But you know the Spirit, who is with you and will keep on
living in you. I won't leave you like orphans. I will come back to you. In a little
while the people of this world won't be able to see me, but you will see me.
And because I live, you will live. Then you will know that I am one with the
Father. You will know that you are one with me, and I am one with you. If you
love me, you will do what I have said, and my Father will love you. I will also
love you and show you what I am like. The other Judas, not Judas Iscariot, then
spoke up and asked, "Lord, what do you mean by saying that you will show
us what you are like, but you will not show the people of this world?" Jesus
replied: If anyone loves me, they will obey me. Then my Father will love them, and we will come
to them and live in them. But anyone who doesn't love me, won't obey me. What
they have heard me say doesn't really come from me, but from the Father who
sent me. I have told you these things while I am still with you. But the Holy
Spirit will come and help you, because the Father will send the Spirit to take
my place. The Spirit will teach you everything and will remind you of what I
said while I was with you.” (John 14:16-26 CEV)
Sami would probably want to raise the usual
Muslim reply that the Holy Spirit refers to Mohammed. However, the Holy Spirit
was to be given to the disciples of Jesus and the record of Acts shows the reality
of that promise. The Holy Spirit was not delayed for 600 years to the
time of Mohammed. Such a conclusion is senseless.
So, in the words of a
song, you can’t have one without the other. You can’t reject the Father and
have the Son, nor can you reject the Son and have the Father.
In reality I wonder how many Muslim men think
about Allah at all. The emphasis on martyrdom and the reward of 72 virgins
raises questions about the real nature of Allah and really knowing him. Is
there any regard for Allah at all? Is it a matter of doing what is thought to
be his will in hopes of the virgins?
Sami concludes:
So I have read and examined John 3:16, I have
seen no truth in it, nothing special, nothing that made me say wow this is the
truth! All I saw was confusion, insults, and mockery to God. If this is meant
to be THE verse for Christianity, then I really don't know what to say
And Allah Knows Best!
This is not a correct
observation. Sami, you distorted the issue. And the mockery came only from your
side. You quoted an old version of the verse creating a false objection. You created false
distinctions between general and specific allowing that general does not cover
all. You
made a mockery of God by deliberately ignoring the Christian Gospels in your
charges. You even mock the Qur’an
in the process.
Your conclusion, “And
Allah knows best!” reminds me of a phrase that occurs over again in The
Life of Mohammed by Ibn Ishaq. A story is narrated and then there is a
conclusion relating to its accuracy, “But God knows what the truth is.” In this case, Sami has
raised questions and given his answers, but God knows what the truth is and it
does not seem to be what Sami is proposing.
One last comment about
God’s love. Love requires a response. If a man tells a woman he loves her he is
anticipating a response, i.e. that she responds to his love. In their responses
to each other there is a commitment to one another. God’s love also requires a
response. God loves you, will you respond to Him?
John 3:16 is followed by
some serious implications:
God did not send his Son into the world to
condemn its people. He sent him to save them! No one who has faith in God's Son
will be condemned. But everyone who doesn't have faith in him has already been
condemned for not having faith in God's only Son. The light has come into the
world, and people who do evil things are judged guilty because they love the
dark more than the light. People who do evil hate the light and won't come to
the light, because it clearly shows what they have done. But everyone who lives
by the truth will come to the light, because they want others to know that God
is really the one doing what they do. (John 3:17-21CEV)
Nevertheless, Sami, I do pray for you almost
daily. My prayer is that you have an experience with Jesus Christ, the Son of
God, the beloved of the Father, that you know now his gift of everlasting life.
IHS
