約翰福音三章16節与人選擇上帝的能力John3:16 and Man’s Ability to Choose God

作者: R.C. Sproul  譯者:  Maria Marta

https://www.ligonier.org/blog/mans-ability-choose-god/

https://www.facebook.com/maria.marta.142/posts/2116879558409961

具有諷刺意味的是，在同一章，且在相同的背景下，我們的主教導，重生甚至對「見神的國」是絕對必要的，更不用說選擇上帝了，非改革宗觀點認為，他們找到最重要的經文依據，證明墮落的人仍保留一個選擇基督之能力的小島。此經文依據就是約翰福音三章16節︰「神愛世人，甚至將他的獨生子賜給他們，叫一切信的，不至滅亡，反得永生。」

這節著名的經文對「關於墮落之人有能力選擇基督」有何教導呢？答案很簡單：沒有。非改革宗人士所用的論據是，經文教導世上所有的人都有能力接受或拒絕基督。然而，仔細查看經文就會發現，它並沒有作出此類教導。聖經的教導是，凡信基督的人都會得救。凡作了A (相信)的，就會得B (永生)。經文沒有，決沒有說誰會相信。它並沒有提及墮落之人與生俱來的道德能力。改革宗人士和非改革宗人士都衷心同意所有相信的人都會得救。但是在對誰有能力相信的問題上存在嚴重分歧。

有些人可能回答: 「好吧。雖然經文沒有明確教導墮落之人未被重生之前就有能力選擇基督，但它確實暗示了這一點。」我甚至不願意承認這節經文有這樣的暗示。然而，即使它暗示了，也不會對辯論產生任何影響。為什麼不會呢？我們的釋經的原則是，從聖經推斷出來的暗示必須始終服從於聖經的明確教導。我們絕對、絕對、絕對不能逆轉，將聖經的明確教導置於聖經可能有的暗示之下。改革宗和非改革宗思想家共用這一原則。

如果約翰福音三章16節暗示墮落之人普遍具有選擇基督的與生俱來的能力，那麼這個暗示就會被耶穌明確、相反的教導抹去。聖經向我們表明耶穌明確無誤的教導是：沒有人有能力來到耶穌面前，除非上帝作工，即吸引他，賜給他這種能力。

墮落的人是屬肉體的。屬肉體的人不能做任何討上帝喜悅的事。保羅說︰「因為以肉體為念就是與神為仇，既不服從　神的律法，也的確不能夠服從； 屬肉體的人不能得神的喜悅。」（羅八7-8；《聖經新譯本》）

那麼，我們問：「誰是『屬肉體』的人呢？」 保羅接著說︰「如果神的靈住在你們心裡，你們就不屬肉體，乃屬聖靈了。人若沒有基督的靈，就不是屬基督的。」（羅八9）  這裏的關鍵字是「如果」。屬肉體的人與非屬肉體的人的分別是有聖靈內住。非重生的人沒有一個有聖靈內住。屬肉體的人是未重生的人。除非他們重生在先，即，從聖靈而生，否則他們就不能遵守上帝的律法，也就不能討上帝的喜悅。

上帝命令我們信靠基督。祂喜悅那些選擇基督的人。如果未重生的人能夠選擇基督，那麽他們至少可以服從上帝的其中一項命令，至少能夠做些討上帝的喜悅的事。如果是這樣，那麽使徒在這裏堅持說「那些屬肉體的人既不能服從上帝，也不能討上帝的喜悅」便是個錯誤。

我們的結論是，墮落之人仍然可以自由選擇他所渴望的，但因為他欲望是邪惡的，所以他才缺乏來到基督面前的道德能力。只要他仍然屬肉體，未重生，他就絕對不會選擇基督。他不能選擇基督，正是因為他不能違背自己的意志行事。他不渴望基督。他不會選擇他不渴望的東西。他嚴重墮落，達到一個地步，唯獨上帝有效的恩典在他心中作工，才能使他相信。

本文摘錄自史鮑爾 (R.C. Sproul)博士所著的《蒙上帝揀選》Chosen by God一書。

This excerpt is taken from Chosen by God by R.C. Sproul.

——

比較原譯文：

摘自《認識預定論》第三章，黃吳期馨／郭瑞英譯（校園書房出版社），p37-55

https://www.ligonier.org/blog/mans-ability-choose-god/

It is ironic that in the same chapter, indeed in the same context, in which our Lord teaches the utter necessity of rebirth to even see the kingdom, let alone choose it, non-Reformed views find one of their main proof texts to argue that fallen man retains a small island of ability to choose Christ. It is John 3:16: “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.”

滑稽的是，就在同一章，甚至就在這段耶穌對尼哥底母談論重生是見到神的國，選擇的必要條件的經文中，非改革宗的人也找出了一個能夠支持他們認為墮落的人仍然有選擇基督之能力的證據。那就是約翰福音三章16節︰「神愛世人，甚至將他的獨生子賜給他們，叫一切信的，不至滅亡，反得永生。」

What does this famous verse teach about fallen man’s ability to choose Christ? The answer, simply, is nothing. The argument used by non-Reformed people is that the text teaches that everybody in the world has it in their power to accept or reject Christ. A careful look at the text reveals, however, that it teaches nothing of the kind. What the text teaches is that everyone who believes in Christ will be saved. Whoever does A (believes) will receive B (everlasting life). The text says nothing, absolutely nothing, about who will ever believe. It says nothing about fallen man’s natural moral ability. Reformed people and non-Reformed people both heartily agree that all who believe will be saved. They heartily disagree about who has the ability to believe.

這句著名的經文，對於墮落的人對選擇基督之能力有什麼教訓呢？答案是沒有。非改革宗的人認為，這段經文是說，在世界上每個人憑他自己的力量，能夠選擇或拒絕基督。然而我們若仔細讀一下這段經文，就會發現並非如此。它乃是告訴我們，凡相信基督的人，必然得救，凡作了甲（相信）的人，就會得乙（永生）；這經文完全沒有說誰會相信，也沒有論到墮落的人的天然道德能力。改革宗與非改革宗信徒都一致同意︰凡相信者必然得救；但是在對於誰有能力相信這點上，看法卻完全不一樣。

Some may reply, “All right. The text does not explicitly teach that fallen men have the ability to choose Christ without being reborn first, but it certainly implies that.” I am not willing to grant that the text even implies such a thing. However, even if it did it would make no difference in the debate. Why not? Our rule of interpreting Scripture is that implications drawn from the Scripture must always be subordinate to the explicit teaching of Scripture. We must never, never, never reverse this to subordinate the explicit teaching of Scripture to possible implications drawn from Scripture. This rule is shared by both Reformed and non-Reformed thinkers.

 有人可能會回答說︰「好吧，聖經雖然沒有明說墮落的人不先重生仍有能力選擇基督，至少暗示了這一點！」我實在不認為這段經文甚至有這樣的暗示，而且就算如此，對我們的辯論也無影響。為什麼呢？我們對解經的法則乃是，任何經文所暗示的教訓，必須服在聖經清楚的教訓之下，我們絕對不能弄反了，反將聖經清楚的教導服在可能有的暗示之下，這也是改革宗和非改革宗思想家一致同意的法則。

If John 3:16 implied a universal natural human ability of fallen men to choose Christ, then that implication would be wiped out by Jesus’ explicit teaching to the contrary. We have already shown that Jesus explicitly and unambiguously taught that no man has the ability to come to him without God doing something to give him that ability, namely drawing him. 暗示擦掉

如果約翰福音三章16節，暗示了墮落的人類仍有一般性的天然能力來揀選基督，那麼這個暗示就會讓耶穌明明相反的教訓給廢去了。耶穌已清楚明白地指出，若不是神先作些事來吸引人，使人有這能力的話，就沒有人會來就。

Fallen man is flesh. In the flesh he can do nothing to please God. Paul declares, “The fleshly mind is enmity against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be. So then, those who are in the flesh cannot please God” (Rom. 8:7, 8).

墮落的人是屬肉體的，在肉體中，人不能做任何討神喜悅的事。保羅宣告說︰「原來體貼肉體的，就是與神為仇；因為不服神的律法，也是不能服，而且屬肉體的人不能得神的喜歡。」（羅八7~8）

We ask, then, “Who are those who are ‘in the flesh’?” Paul goes on to declare: “But you are not in the flesh but in the Spirit, if indeed the Spirit of God dwells in you” (Rom. 8:9). The crucial word here is if. What distinguishes those who are in the flesh from those who are not is the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. No one who is not reborn is indwelt by God the Holy Spirit. People who are in the flesh have not been reborn. Unless they are first reborn, born of the Holy Spirit, they cannot be subject to the law of God. They cannot please God.

那麼，「誰是『在肉體的』人呢？」保羅接著說︰「如果神的靈住在你們心裏，你們就不屬肉體，乃屬聖靈了。人若沒有基督的靈，就不是屬基督的。」（羅八9）這裏的關鍵字是「如果」；意即將在肉體中的人和不在肉體中的人區分開來，就是聖靈的內住。沒有重生的人就沒有聖靈的內住，在肉體中的人還沒有得到重生的，除非他們先得到重生，從聖靈而生，他們就不能服在神的律下，也不能討神的喜悅。

God commands us to believe in Christ. He is pleased by those who choose Christ. If unregenerate people could choose Christ, then they could be subject to at least one of God’s commands and they could at least do something that is pleasing to God. If that is so, then the apostle has erred here in insisting that those who are in the flesh can neither be subject to God nor please him.

神要求我們相信基督，喜悅凡揀選基督的人；如果未重生的人能夠揀選基督的話，那麼他們已經能夠服從神的命令，他們也至少已經能夠做某些討神喜悅的事了。那麼，使徒堅持在肉體中的人不能服從神也不能討神喜悅的說法，就是大錯特錯了。

We conclude that fallen man is still free to choose what he desires, but because his desires are only wicked he lacks the moral ability to come to Christ. As long as he remains in the flesh, unregenerate, he will never choose Christ. He cannot choose Christ precisely because he cannot act against his own will. He has no desire for Christ. He cannot choose what he does not desire. His fall is great. It is so great that only the effectual grace of God working in his heart can bring him to faith.

我們的結論是，墮落的人仍然有選擇他所喜好的自由。但是因為他的喜好是惡的，他就沒有自己來就基督的道德能力。一個屬肉體，尚未重生的人，是不會選擇基督的；因為他不能違反他自己的意願，他不可能揀選基督。他不渴慕基督，他不可能揀選他不渴慕的東西，他墮落的很深，深到一個地步，只有神的恩典在他心中作工，才有可能使他相信。

救贖歷史的「達陣區」經文The Redemptive-Historical EndZone Verse

作者：Nicholas T. Batzig  譯者：駱鴻銘

https://feedingonchrist.com/6989-2/

https://www.facebook.com/peddrluo/posts/10156856970109653?__xts__[0]=68.ARCL6Fm_CHCEAAxrpyC2pSkxza8HwMLt1WYIJtOfKanSNSaM0kFVhYy0fvErCgADnu91s_xjlC8bWBvABBm7PlK-NT4VjFC1u0CUKPEYx_2pqg3YlOKFOHg69057YRNopd18ZId4w7LA&__tn__=-R

對於約翰福音三章16節，有許多人提出了眾多的解釋。我們可以用一種懷舊的心情，將這節經文稱為「達陣區」的經文。下這樣的結論可以說是安全的，因為西方世界大部分宣認自己是基督徒的人，都是有意或無意地與亞米念陣營結盟的。他們堅持認為，這節眾人所愛的經文是在教導我們，神愛每個人，每個個體；因此，父差遣子來，是為每個人、所有的人而死。然而，即使在改革宗神學家當中，對於在這節經文當中，我們的主所說的「世人/世界」（world）這個詞的意思，也提供了各式各樣的解釋。

Legion have been the proposed explanations of John 3:16–what we may nostalgically call, “the end-zone verse.” It is safe to conclude that the better part of professing Christians in the Western world have consciously or unconsciously aligned themselves with the Arminian camp–insisting that this much beloved verse teaches us that God loves each and every individual; and, that, therefore, the Father sent the Son to die for each and every one. Yet, even within the Reformed tradition theologians have offered a variety of explanations concerning the meaning of the word “world” in our Lord’s statement.

上個世代的偉大普林斯頓神學家華腓德（B. B. Warfield）解釋了採用這種看法的人所遇見的主要難題。他寫到：

B.B. Warfield, the great Princetonian theologian of a previous generation, explained what he saw as a large part of the hang up for so many who have adopted this view when he wrote:

「雖然這聽起來很奇怪，沒有錯，有許多——或許是大多數人——用這個偉大的宣告來餵養他們靈魂的人，似乎訓練自己這樣認為，當這節經文出現在他們的耳朵時，至少是在第一刻，他們想到的不是『神的愛』有多偉大——多麼長闊高深，而是『世人（世界）』有多偉大。」

“Strange as it may sound, it is true, that many—perhaps the majority—of those who feed their souls on this great declaration, seem to have trained themselves to think, when it falls upon their ears, in the first instance at least, not so much of how great—how immeasurably great—God’s love is, but rather of how great the world is.”

改革宗神學家針對亞米念主義者的立場，當然已經提出了許多有力的反駁。約翰歐文在他的巨著《基督的死吞滅了死亡》（The Death of Death in the Death of Christ）中，解釋了神學家所謂的「特定救贖（particular redemption）」或「有限贖罪（limited atonement）」（即：神的兒子只為選民捨命）。他寫到：

The Arminian position has, of course, has been solidly refuted by the Reformed. John Owen, in his prodigious work The Death of Death in the Death of Christ, explained the biblical rationale for what theologians have called particular redemption or limited atonement (i.e. the teaching that the Son of God only laid down his life for the elect). He wrote:

「祂用自己的血所買來的是『教會』（徒廿28）；基督所愛，並為之捨命的，要藉著道將之洗淨，成為聖潔，可以獻給自己，作個榮耀的教會的，是祂的『教會』（弗五25～27）。祂為之捨命的，是祂的『羊』（約十15）；要顯在神面前的，也是『我們』（來九24）。在聖經裏，沒有提到中保的工作是為了其他人。看看祂的道成肉身。是因為『兒女』，才既同有血肉之體（來二14）；主耶穌說，是『為他們的緣故』（他們是指：『你所賜給我的人』，約十七24），而不是為所有世人的緣故，祂將『自己分別為聖』（約十七19）；也就是說，使自己成為貢物，那是祂當時手中的工作。看看祂的復活：『耶穌被交給人，是為我們的過犯；復活，是為叫我們稱義』（羅四25）」。看看祂的升天：祂說，『我去』『我父的家裏』『是為你們預備地方』（約十四2）。看看祂永遠的代求。祂能『拯救到底』的，不是那些『靠著祂進到神面前的人』嗎（來七25）？聖經完全沒有提到這個中保工作是為了全部的世人……祂用清楚的話否認作全人類的中保。祂說，我『不為世人祈求，卻為你所賜給我的人祈求』（約十七9）。」（註1）

“It was his ‘church’ which he ‘redeemed with his own blood,’ Acts 20:28; his ‘church’ that ‘he loved and gave himself for it, that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, that he might present it to himself a glorious church,’ Eph. 5:25–27. They were his ‘sheep’ he ‘laid down his life for,’ John 10:15; and ‘appears in heaven for us,’ Heb. 9:24. Not one word of mediating for any other in the Scripture. Look upon his incarnation. It was ‘because the children were partakers of flesh and blood,’ chap. 2:14; not because all the world were so…’For their sakes,’ saith he, (‘those whom You have given me,’) ‘do I sanctify myself,’ John 17:19; that is, to be an oblation, which was the work he had then in hand. Look upon his resurrection: ‘He was delivered for our offenses, and was raised again for our justification,’ Rom. 4:25. Look upon his ascension: ‘I go,’ saith he, ‘to my Father and your Father, and that to prepare a place for you,’ John 14:2. Look upon his perpetuated intercession. Is it not to ‘save to the uttermost them that come unto God by him?’ Heb. 7:25. Not one word of this general mediation for all…he denies in plain terms to mediate for all: ‘I pray not,” saith he, “for the world, but for them which thou hast given me,’ John 17:9.”1

當主耶穌以毫不含糊的字眼說明祂來捨命，是要「作多人的贖價」（可十45），祂的身體和血是為「多人」捨的，使罪得赦，就總結了這個觀念。再加上，舊約先知和使徒清楚教導，神已經指定一些人遭永恆的遺棄（箴十六4；羅九22；彼前二8）。如此，使徒約翰在寫這節經文時的意思，是指神拯救了每個人、一切曾經活過的人或將來一切會活著的人，就是匪夷所思的。

Jesus summarized this idea when he stated in no uncertain terms that he came to give his life “a ransom for many” (Mark 10:45) and that his body and blood were given “for many” for the remission of sin. Add to this, the fact that the OT prophets and the Apostles clearly teach that God has appointed some to eternal perdition (Prov. 16:4; Romans 9:22; 1 Peter 2:8). It is unthinkable that the Apostle John would then mean that God savingly loves each and every person who has every lived or who will ever live.

許多人為了回應那些支持亞米念主義者對約翰福音三章16節的解讀，都主張說，約翰在這裏所考慮到的只是選民。他們的邏輯是：若耶穌只為選民而死，那麼神所愛的就只有選民。因此，既然約翰福音三章16節說，「神愛世人，甚至將祂的獨生子賜給他們……」那麼，我們就必須下結論說，「世人」必定是「選民」的縮寫。對我來說，這似乎是一個在邏輯上說得通，但卻是對經文的一種短視的解讀。

Many, in reaction to those who espouse an Arminian reading of John 3:16, have suggested that John only has the elect in view. The logic runs thus: If Jesus only died for the elect, then it is only the elect God loves. Therefore, since John 3:16 says, “God so loved the world that he gave His only begotten Son…” then we must conclude that the world is shorthand for the elect. This, it seems to me is a logically tenable yet textually shortsighted reading.

那麼，我們應該如何理解約翰福音三章16節的「世人」（世界）呢？在新約聖經裏，「κόσμος (kosmos)」這個詞有好幾種用法。聖經的作者有時候用它來通指「宇宙」（見徒十七24），有時候是指這個物理世界（約十三1；弗一4），有時候是指這個墮落的世界體系及其住民（約十二31，十五18；羅三6；約壹五19），有時候是在救贖歷史意義上的萬民[nations]（約一29，六33；林後五19；約壹二2）。最後的這個說法似乎是最接近約翰福音三章16節前後文的意思。這和那些堅持將它解讀為是指「無一例外的世人」（the world without exception）的人有稍許的不同。應當說，這裏所考慮的，是「沒有分別的世人」（the world without distinction）。這不必然是在教導，耶穌只為選民而死（儘管這和這節經文所教導的，在邏輯上當然是有關的），而是教導父賜下耶穌，是為了要拯救在萬民中一切會信祂的人。神所愛的是萬民，祂也為他們賜下祂的獨生子，作為救恩的途徑。

What then are we to make of the language of the world in John 3:16? There are many ways in which the word κόσμος (kosmos) is used in the NT. The authors of Scripture sometimes use it to refer to the Universe in general (see Acts 17:24), sometimes of the physical world (John 13:1; Eph. 1:4), sometimes of the fallen world system and its inhabitants (John 12:31; 15:18; Romans 3:6; 1 John 5:19), sometimes of the nations in a redemptive historical sense (John 1:29; 6:33; 2 Cor. 5:19; 1 John 2:2). It is this latter sense that seems to most closely fit the context of John 3:16. This distinguishes it a bit from those who insist on interpreting it as meaning “the world without exception.” Rather, it is “the world without distinction” that is in view. It is not necessarily teaching that Jesus only died for the elect (though that is certainly logically tied to what it is teaching); rather, it is teaching that Jesus was given by the Father for the salvation of all those among the nations who would come to believe in him. It is the nations that God has loved and for whom He has given His Son as a way of salvation.

耶穌是用杆子上的銅蛇這個預表，來介紹這節經文的，這是從民數記二十一章4～9節取出來的。耶穌知道，這是祂要在十字架上成就之工作的一個預表，因此用銅蛇的故事來教導尼哥底母，舊約和新約的救贖有一種連續性。本質上，耶穌在約翰福音三章15～16節是在教導以下的救贖歷史真理：正如神愛以色列，以至於祂賜給他們一條因信得救的道路（藉著仰望杆子上的銅蛇），同樣，神也愛萬民，並為凡以信心仰望基督並祂釘十字架的人，提供了一條因信得救的道路。藉著這個過渡，也就是從杆子上的銅蛇到十字架上的愛子，以凸顯出救贖歷史的一種轉移與應驗。對我來說，這就是理解救主在約翰福音三章16節的「世人」最好的方法。這個用法和使徒約翰在約翰壹書二章2節的用法，有同樣的含義，他在那裏寫到：「祂為我們（即有信心的猶太人）的罪作了挽回祭，不是單為我們的罪，也是為普天下人的罪（即：來自萬民的信徒）。」在這層意義上，我們可以說，在這兩處經文裏的「世人」，和聖經的教導是一致的。聖經教導，在整個「新約」（New Covenant）時代，神要在萬民中救贖祂的選民，其焦點放在福音無條件的邀約（free offer of the Gospel）。在考慮這節經文的教導時，我再也找不到其他更忠於經文的解讀了。事實上，它完美地通過了球門的門柱，避開了兩邊的錯誤。

Jesus introduces this verse with the typology of the serpent on the pole–which he drew out of Numbers 21:4-9. Knowing that this was a type of the work that he would accomplish on the cross, Jesus taught Nicodemus about the continuity of redemption in the Old and New Testament by appeal to the bronze serpent. In essence, Jesus taught the following redemptive-historical truth in John 3:15-16: Just as God loved Israel so that he offered them a way of salvation by faith (by means of looking at the serpent on the pole) so God has loved the nations and offers a way of salvation by faith to everyone who will look believingly on Christ and him crucified. There is a redemptive-historical shift and fulfillment highlighted in the transition from the serpent on the pole to the Son on the cross. This, it seems to me, is the best way to understand the Savior’s use of the word world in John 3:16. It is used there in the same sense in which the Apostle John used it in 1 John 2:2, when he wrote: “He himself is the propitiation for our (i.e. believingJews) sins, and not for ours only but also for the whole world (i.e. believers from among the nations). In this sense, we can say that world in these two places are in keeping with the Scripture’s teaching on the redemption of the elect from among the nations throughout all of the New Covenant era–only with a focus on the free offer of the Gospel. I find no more textually faithful reading to adopt when considering the teaching of this verse. It fact, it sails perfectly through the goal posts, avoiding error on both sides.

註1：Owen, J. (n.d.). The works of John Owen. (W. H. Goold, Ed.) (Vol. 10, pp. 189–190). Edinburgh: T&T Clark.

約翰福音三章16節中的「世人」是什麽意思?WhatDoes “World” Mean in John 3:16?

作者: John Tweeddale   譯者:   Maria Marta  

http://www.ligonier.org/blog/what-does-world-mean-john-316/

https://plus.google.com/u/0/106695469993489516884/posts/PqAJpKhnk91

對約翰福音三章16節經文其中一個最令人驚詫的曲解是,   我們被告知上帝愛「世人」（world）。我們可能會受到誘惑試探，認為上帝要愛很多的世人。畢竟，世人的這些方面有什麽不值得欣賞：城市風光、農田耕地、精致佳肴、後院燒烤、古典交響樂、民間歌謠、文藝復興時期的繪畫、幼兒園的塗鴉等？我們所認識的世界充滿特色、魅力、機會、與歡呼。問題是，盡管世界是美好、有趣、與美麗，但它充斥著罪人。自從亞當和夏娃在伊甸園裡違背上帝以來，世界已變成荒地。無論世界看起來是多麽的精彩，它也不配得上帝的救贖之愛。

明白世人是多麽不配得上帝的愛，是約翰福音三章16節的關鍵。只有這樣明白，我們才會為上帝所賜的意想不到的禮物感恩。許多年前，著名神學家華菲德（Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield）明確地闡述了這一點。在《上帝無法測度的愛》這篇證道中，華菲德為了探索上帝的愛的深度，他對約翰福音三章16節中「世人/世界」（希臘文Kosmos）一詞的含義作了詳細的查考。

這段經文中的「世人」是什麽意思？根據華菲德的見解，有四種可能的答案。

首先，許多人認為「世人」是指所有的人毫無例外。換句話說，當約翰三章16節說，上帝愛世人，其意思是指上帝愛每一個人，從最卑賤到最偉大，均等地愛每一個人。邏輯是這樣的：上帝愛每一個人；耶穌基督為每一個人而死；因此，每一個人都得可能得救。然而，這種觀點似乎暗示，上帝的愛是無能為力的，耶穌基督的死是徒勞無益的。不然，這一立場的自然結論是，每一個人實際上都得救，而不僅僅是可能得救。倘若上帝愛每一個人，耶穌基督為每一個人而死，上帝的愛不是無能為力的，耶穌基督的死不是徒勞無益的，那麽唯一能得出的結論是：每一個人都確實得到救恩。然而，這種觀點與聖經關於上帝審判的教導相矛盾，正如緊鄰的上下文，約翰福音三章17-21節所表明的。

第二，其他人认为「世人」是指所有的人没有分别。这种答案强调上帝爱一类型或一个族群以上的人。基督在十字架上被钉死，不仅是为了犹太人，也是为了外邦人。上帝的愛非但不受國界限制，而且延伸致各邦國、各支派、各文化、各方言、与各民族。对此，所有上帝的子民--------包括亚米念主义者和加尔文主义者--------都衷心地说「阿們」。虽然这种观点无疑是对的，亦符合约翰福音大脉络之下关于「上帝的孩子」的全球性身份认同（例如，约一9–13；四42），但它并没有完全捕捉到约翰三章16节所特意描绘的「上帝如此地愛」（God so loved）与「世人」（the world）之间的震撼性比较。

第三，一種被改革宗神學家廣泛接受的，與先前的答案有細微差別的觀點認為：約翰福音三章16節的「世人」是指選民。在整本約翰福音中，耶穌強調祂的恩典的特殊性。支持的經文包括：「凡是父賜給我的人，必到我這裡來」（六37）；「我是好牧人，我認識我的羊，我的羊也認識我……我為羊捨命」（十14–15）；「你們若屬於這世界，世人必定愛屬自己的；但因為你們不屬於世界，而是我從世界中揀選了你們，所以世人就恨你們」（十五9）；「我為他們求；我不為世人求，而是為你賜給我的人求，因為他們是你的」（十七19）等等。關鍵是，上帝的子民從一個不信的世界裡被揀選出來。再次重申，這種觀點表達了強調聖經的揀選教義的重要性，與其說約翰福音三章16節中「世人」一詞的重點在於上帝子民的身份認同，倒不如說它更在於上帝的愛的本質。

這就引導我們進入最後的答案。一個確鑿理由能使人相信「世人」是指上帝的愛的質量。華菲德令人信服地說明：

「在這兒與其說[世人]是一個表達範圍的詞語，倒不如說它是一個表達強度的詞語。其主要的含義是倫理上的，因為上帝愛世人，當祂賜下祂的兒子，使用這一詞的關鍵點並非要表明，世界是如此廣大，以致於它需要大量的愛去完全擁抱它；而是要表明這個世界是如此糟糕，以致於它絕對需要一種偉大的愛去愛它，更多的愛去愛它。」

「世人」代表罪惡的人性，不配得上帝的拯救之愛。在上帝的愛以外，世人處在在上帝的審判之下。但在基督裡，信徒經歷上帝奇妙、救贖、與永無止境的愛。約翰三章16節不是關於世人的偉大，乃是關於上帝的偉大的經文。

Dr. John W. Tweeddale is academic dean and professor of theology at Reformation Bible College. This post was originally published in Tabletalk magazine.

What Does “World” Mean in John 3:16?

FROM John Tweeddale

One of the most surprising twists of John 3:16 is that we are told God loves the world. We might be tempted to think that there is much about the world for God to love. After all, what’s not to admire about cityscapes and farmlands, fine cuisine and backyard barbecues, classical symphonies and folk ballads, Renaissance paintings and kindergarten squiggles? The world we know is filled with texture, intrigue, opportunity, and cheer. The problem is that for all that is good and interesting and beautiful about the world, it is overrun with sinners. Ever since Adam and Eve rebelled against God in the garden, the world has become a wasteland. No matter how wonderful the world may appear, it is not worthy of God’s redeeming love.

Understanding how undeserving the world is of God’s love is the key to John 3:16. Only then will we appreciate the unexpected gift that God gives. This point was well made many years ago by the esteemed theologian Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield. In his sermon “God’s Immeasurable Love,” Warfield probes the meaning of the term “world” (Greek kosmos) in John 3:16 in order to plumb the depths of God’s love.

What is the meaning of “world” in this passage? Drawing from the insights of Warfield, there are four possible answers.

In the first place, many people believe that “world” means all people without exception. In other words, when John 3:16 says that God loves the world, it means that He loves every person, head for head, equally. The logic goes something like this: God loves every person; Christ died for every person; therefore, salvation is possible for every person. However, this view seems to suggest that God’s love is impotent and Christ’s death is ineffectual. Otherwise, the natural conclusion of this position would be that every person is actually saved rather than just potentially saved. If God loves every person, and Christ died for every person, and God’s love is not impotent, and Christ’s death is not ineffectual, then the only conclusion one can draw is that salvation has been secured for every person. Yet this viewpoint contradicts the Bible’s teaching on God’s judgment as is evidenced by the immediate context in John 3:17–21.

Second, others argue that “world” means all people without distinction. This option emphasizes that God loves more than one type of person or ethnic group. The death of Christ on the cross was not only for Jews but also for Gentiles. The love of God is not confined to national boundaries but extends to all kinds of nations, tribes, cultures, tongues, and peoples. To this, all God’s people––Arminian and Calvinist alike––say a hearty “Amen.” While this view has the benefit of being undoubtedly right and fits within the larger context of John’s gospel concerning the global identity of the “children of God” (e.g., John 1:9–13; 4:42), it doesn’t quite capture the jolting contrast between “God so loved” and “the world” that John 3:16 deliberately draws.

Third, a popular nuance of the previous option among Reformed theologians is to argue that “world” in John 3:16 refers to the elect. Throughout John’s gospel, Jesus emphasizes the particularity of His grace. “All that the Father gives me will come to me” (6:37). “I am the good shepherd. I know my own and my own know me….I lay down my life for the sheep” (10:14–18). “If you were of the world, the world would love you as its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, therefore the world hates you” (15:9). “I am praying for them. I am not praying for the world but for those whom you have given me, for they are yours” (17:9). And so on. The point is that God’s people are chosen from an unbelieving world. Again, this view strikes an important note by underscoring the biblical doctrine of election, but the focus of the term “world” in John 3:16 is not so much on the identity of God’s people but on the nature of God’s love.

This leads us to the final option. A solid case can be made for believing that “world” refers to the quality of God’s love. Warfield convincingly states:

[World] is not here a term of extension so much as a term of intensity. Its primary connotation is ethical, and the point of its employment is not to suggest that the world is so big that it takes a great deal of love to embrace it all, but that the world is so bad that it takes a great kind of love to love it at all, and much more to love it as God has loved it when he gave his Son for it.

The world represents sinful humanity and is not worthy of God’s saving love. Apart from the love of God, the world stands under God’s condemnation. But in Christ, believers experience God’s surprising, redeeming, and never-ending love. John 3:16 is not about the greatness of the world but about the greatness of God.

Dr. John W. Tweeddale is academic dean and professor of theology at Reformation Bible College. This post was originally published in Tabletalk magazine.

約翰福音三章16節中的「so」

摘錄自：

《字字珠璣──細讀約翰福音》 Let’s Study John ，P.78

作者: 馬克．強斯頓（Mark Johnston）譯者: 林千俐

改革宗出版社 , 台北，2015年

http://www.crtsbooks.net/product/letsstudyjohn.aspx

https://plus.google.com/u/0/106695469993489516884/posts/FnSZs1tfqhQ

聖經中最為人知的經文，莫過於約翰所說的：「神愛世人，甚至將他的獨生子賜給他們，叫一切信他的不致滅亡，反得永生。」（約三16）這就是耶穌必須忍受痛苦的原因--------上帝對世人無法言喻的大愛。這節經文有一個小字「如此」（so ) 【譯註：和合本沒有翻出來，英文標準本聖經 [ESV］譯成「因為上帝如此地愛世人........ 」】, 代表上帝的愛大到一個程度，使祂採取這樣的行動。難怪馬丁路德有充分理由說：「這句經文是整本聖經的縮影！」