Tuesday, December 04, 2007

McMahon on John 3:16

Pastor McMahon's article (here) provides a great starting place for understanding some of the key Reformed discussions on John 3:16.


Of particular interest to some of my readers I excerpt this paragraph from the linked article:

The Westminster Assembly also has some contentions concerning the idea of the word “world” due to the theological positions of the Amyraldians in their meetings (such as Davenant). Rutherford, Seaman, and Gillespie contended for the word “world” as meaning “the elect” and presented the idea to the Assembly and the Assembly accepted their proposition concerning God loving the “world” as God loving the “elect”. This was noted in detail in their Minutes.[37] The consensus of the Assembly was to abandon the Amyraldian notion that God loves all men generally[38] and moved forward with the meaning of John 3:16 as particular for the elect only.
to the Glory of God, at

3 comments:

  1. Seth McBeeTuesday, December 04, 2007 10:13:00 PM

    TF:
    I scanned the article but it would seem as though Pastor McMahon would take it that God so loved the world of the elect and says, which I would disagree with, but he says,

    I admit that my interpretation of John 3:16 is no novel one invented on my own, but one almost uniformly given by the Reformers and Puri­tans, and many others since them

    So, you would disagree with him correct; that the world is created order and not world of elect.

    ReplyDelete
  2. TurretinfanTuesday, December 04, 2007 10:27:00 PM

    No, I'd agree with McMahon. That's why I linked his article here.

    The literal sense (the created order / universe) is one thing, and the figurative usage is another thing (world of the elect (more Owen-esque), world generally, etc.).

    I would agree with McMahon, when he quoted Pink, who said: "The fact is that “the world” is used in a general way."

    It still seems you are grappling with that literal/figurative distinction.

    I think I may have to break my amalgamated comments into something more handy.

    -Turretinfan

    ReplyDelete
  3. AnonymousWednesday, December 05, 2007 2:42:00 AM

    TF

    if for no one else, please, for my sake, they are ganging up on me over there!

    Amalgamate, huh? :)

    ReplyDelete

Comment Guidelines:

1. Thanks for posting a comment. Without you, this blog would not be interactive.

2. Please be polite. That doesn't mean you have to use kid gloves, but please try not to flame others, even if they are heretics, infidels, or worse.

3. If you insult me, I'm more likely to delete your comment than if you butter me up. After all, I'm human. I prefer praise to insults. If you prefer insults, there's something wrong with you.

4. Please be concise. The comment box is not your blog. Your blog is your blog. If you have a really long comment, post it on your blog and post a short summary of it here.

5. Please don't just spam. It's one thing to be concise, it's another thing to simply use the comment box to advertise.

6. Please note, by commenting here, you are relinquishing your (C) in your comments to me.

7. Remember that you will give an account on judgment day for your words, including those typed in comment boxes. Try to write so you will not be ashamed if it is read back before the entire world.

8. Stay on topic. If your comment has nothing to do with the post, email it to me (my email can be obtained through my blogger profile), or simply don't post it.

9. Don't post as "Anonymous." If you are going to post anonymously, at least use some kind of recognizable "handle," so we can tell you apart from all the other anonymous folks. (This is moot at the moment, since recent abuse has forced me to turn off "anonymous" commenting.)

10. Do unto others as you would have them do unto you; and abstain from doing to others what you would not wish upon yourself.