Simeon:

THE END FOR WHICH GOD SENT HIS SON.

John iii. 17. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.

AN expectation generally prevailed among the Jews that their Messiah would interpose on behalf of their nation alone, and bring all other kingdoms into subjection to them. Our Lord took frequent occasions to rectify this mistake, and to show, that he was to be the Savior, not of one people? only, but of the whole world. In this discourse with Nicodemus, he introduces this important subject in such a way as to inform his mind, without shocking his prejudices. Having explained to him the nature and necessity of regeneration, and shown him, by reference to a well known type, the way of salvation, he declares, that the whole world, Gentiles as well as Jews, were to participate the benefits of his coming; and that God, in sending him into the world, had as much respect to the welfare of the benighted heathens as of his chosen and peculiar people. To elucidate the words before us, we shall show,

I. That, supposing God to send his Son into the world, it was far more probable that he should send him to condemn the world than to save it–

That God should ever send his Son into the world at all is such a mystery as must for ever fill the whole universe with amazement. But supposing him to make known his determination to do so, the probability certainly was that it should be for our destruction rather than our salvation–

1. Consider what was the state of the world at the time he did send his Son–

[Had he seen the greater part of mankind lamenting their fall, wishing earnestly that some way could be devised for their recovery, and struggling, but with unsuccessful efforts, to get free from sin, we might have supposed that God would exercise mercy towards us, and open a way for our restoration through the sacrifice of his Son. But when the whole mass of mankind were up in arms against him, when not one of the whole human race (except a few whose hearts he himself had touched) desired reconciliation with him; yea, when all were utterly averse from it, and desired nothing so much as to live in sin with impunity, and wished for no better heaven than the unrestrained indulgence of their lusts; for what end could God send his Son, but to execute upon them the vengeance they deserved?]

Read the rest of this entry »

Simeon:

THE LOVE OF GOD IN GIVING HIS SON FOR MAN.

John iii. 16. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

THE doctrine of our reconciliation with God through the death of his Son, is calculated to impress our minds with a deep sense of the love of Christ in undertaking for us; but, if not cautiously stated, it may give us very erroneous conceptions respecting the Father. If, for instance, we imagine that the Father needed the mediation of his Son to render him propitious, then we must ascribe all the glory of our salvation to the Son, and consider the Father merely as acquiescing in the Son’s wishes, and showing mercy to us for his sake. But the whole plan of our salvation originated with the Father: the very gift of a Savior was the fruit of the Father’s love; and therefore, in contemplating the wonders of Redemption, we must trace them to their proper source, the love of God the Father.

To this view of things we are led by the text; in elucidating which, we shall not form any particular arrangement, but simply take the several expressions contained in it, and use them as so many mirrors to reflect light upon one central point, the love of God the Father in sending his only-begotten Son to die for us.

Consider then, first, the Giver–

[If man confer a benefit upon his fellow-creature, we are not surprised; because there is no man so elevated, but he may need the assistance of his inferiors; nor is there any man so depressed, but he may, at some period or other, have it in his power to requite a kindness. But “God” is totally independent of us; “our goodness extends not to him,”¹ “it is no profit to him that we are righteous,”² he would have been equally happy and glorious, though no creature had ever been formed; and he would remain so, if every creature in the universe were annihilated. How wonderful, then, was it, that he should condescend to look on us; yea, that he should take such an interest in our affairs, as to supply, at a most incalculable price, our pressing necessities! Even in this first view of his love we are lost with wonder.]

Read the rest of this entry »

Griffin:

SERMON 11.
THE BRAZEN SERPENT.
John iii. 14, 15.

And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish but have eternal life.

Jesus and his salvation were the substance of all the ancient shadows, the end of all the Mosaic rites, and the burden of every prophet’s song. They were the favorite theme of the Old Testament and the New. They are the subject of the highest songs of the upper world. They bring the purest joy to hearts on earth broken for sin.

There are few types of happier influence to illustrate the Gospel remedy and the manner of its application than the brazen serpent. When the Hebrews provoked God in the wilderness, he sent among them fiery serpents of a most deadly bite; so called either from their color, or from the heat and thirst occasioned by the wound. They were

probably of the species of the “fiery flying serpents” mentioned by Isaiah. It is supposed that they hovered in swarms over the camp and suddenly darted upon their prey; none of the congregation being able while on their march, and few being able in their encampments, to defend themselves against the fell attack. What a scene of distress was here! Hundreds lying dead in the camp; hundreds more writhing in torture and crying in vain for relief; every one trembling for himself; now a child and then a wife and then a brother crying out under the tormenting bite; and swarms of the enemy still hovering over the camp. What could they do? They hasted away to Moses and said with tears, “We have sinned, for we have spoken against the Lord and against thee. Pray unto the Lord that he take away the serpents from us.” And Moses prayed for the people, and the Lord said to him,” Make thee a fiery serpent, [that is, the image of a fiery serpent,] and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass that every one that is bitten, when he looks upon it shall live. And Moses made a serpent of brass and put it upon a pole, [so that it could be seen from every part of the camp:] and it came to pass that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass he lived.” Glorious emblem of him who was “lifted up that whosoever, believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.”

This brazen serpent was preserved with great veneration seven hundred years, until it had become so much the object of idolatrous worship, that Hezekiah broke it in pieces about a century before the Babylonish captivity. Let us trace a little more particularly the resemblance between this type and the anti-type.

Read the rest of this entry »

Ford:

For proof hereof, I appeal to John 3:16, “God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believes on him, should not perish.” Here’s enough said, to show, That God is not wanting to me, but that they are wanting to themselves. There’s provision made such, and so much, as none can perish, but they who refuse to make use of it. Whosoever believes on him, shall have everlasting life. What can be said or done more on God’s part? What constructions are made of this Scripture are many, I shall not mention, but shall give the sense of Calvin upon it. “The Love of God here testified,” (says he) “respects Humanum genus, mankind; and a note of universality is added, to invite all promiscuously to the partaking of this life, and to cut off all excuse, observe that, from such as believe not.” “For this purpose,” (says he) “the word [WORLD is used, to show, that though there be nothing in the world worthy of God’s love and favor, yet to show himself gracious to the whole world, he calls all without exception to the faith of Christ.” Indeed he says too, “That life eternal is offered unto all, so as notwithstanding faith is not of all.” And in this he confesses, the special grace of God to some particular persons.

Let it also be considered, That the word [WORLD] cannot rationally be taken in any other sense. For in the next verse, it is meant of the world, whereof some are saved, and some perish, (as Reverend Davenant observes) and that they who perish, perish only because they believe not on the Son of God. I shall not debate, what advantage the coming of Christ into the world brought to such, as make no use, reap no benefit by it. Certainly it states the question beyond all dispute, That as faith only saves, so unbelief only condemns, which is all I have to prove. For there’s not the least hint of any defect on Gods part, but all the fault is said on man alone, in not believing on the Son of God sent into the world, not to condemn, but to save it. And here let Calvin speak what he thought in this case: Certium quidem e, non omnes ex Christi morte fructum percipere: Sed hoc ideo fit, quia eos impedit sua incredulitas. In Ep. ad Heb. cap. 9. v. 27. “It is only by Infidelity, that all are not partakers of the benefits of Christ’s death.”

Thomas Ford, Autokatakritos, or, The Sinner Condemned of Himself (London: Printed for Edward Brewster, and are to be sold by Giles Widowes, at the Maiden-head, over against the Half-Moon, in Aldersgate-street, near Jewen-street, 1668), 46-47. [Some spelling modernized; italics original; square bracketed inserts original; and underlining mine.]