2
Jul

Andreas J. Köstenberger on John 3:14-18

   Posted by: CalvinandCalvinism   in John 3:16

Köstenberger:

[3:14-15]

The allusion to Moses lifting up the serpent in the wilderness is plainly to Num. 21 :8-9, where God is shown to send poisonous snakes to judge rebellious Israel. When Moses intercedes for his people, God provides a way of salvation in the form of a raised bronze serpent, so that “when anyone was bitten by a snake and looked at the bronze snake, he lived.” But the primary analogy established in the present passage is not that of the raised bronze serpent and the lifted-up Son of Man; rather, Jesus likens the restoration of people’s physical lives as a result of looking at the bronze serpent to people’s reception of eternal life as a result of “looking” in faith at the Son of Man (d. 3:15-18; see Barrett 1978: 214; cf. Carson 1991: 202). Yet as in the case of wilderness Israel, the source of salvation ultimately is not a person’s faith, but the God in whom the faith is placed (d. Wis. 16:6-7). “Lifted up” (hypsothenai, hypsothenai) has a double meaning here (d. 8:28; 12:32,34), linking Jesus’ exaltation with his elevation on a cross (Ridderbos 1997: 136-37). The expression draws on Isa. 52: 13 LXX (hypsothesetai, hypsothesetai; see Dodd 1953: 247).

The phrase “everyone who believes” strikes a markedly universal note. Although looking at the bronze serpent in the wilderness restored life to believing Israelites, there are no such ethnic restrictions on believing in Jesus. Everyone who believes will, “in him” (Jesus; see additional note), receive eternal life (cf. 3: 16-18; see commentary at 1:4,9, 12).42 God sent Jesus to save not just Israel, but the entire world (3:17). Its insistence on the universality of the Christian message marks John’s Gospel off from sects such as the Qumran community or the large number of mystery religions, all of which saw salvation limited to a select few. At the same time, however, John’s Gospel does not teach universalism, that is, the notion that all will eventually be saved; rather, salvation is made contingent on believing “in him” (3: 16), that is, Jesus the Messiah (d. 20:30-31). This, then, is the answer to Nicodemus’s query in 3:9: these things (regeneration, entering the kingdom) can happen only through the “lifting up” of the Son of Man (Carson 1991: 202). The signs-based faith of 2:23 and 3:2 was founded on seeing Jesus in the flesh; the faith of 3:15 “is faith in the power of him who is powerless in the flesh and in the eyes of the flesh” (Ridderbos 1997: 137).

iii. The Evangelist’s Exposition (3:16-21)

3:16

What is the reason (gar [gar, for]) that God made eternal life available (Wallace 1996: 668)? It is his love for the world. This much-loved verse is the only place in John where God the Father is said to love the world (d. 1 John 4:9-10). The OT makes abundantly clear that God loves all that he has made, especially his people (e .g., Exod. 34:6-7; Deut. 7:7-8; Hos. 11:1-4,8-11). In these last days, God has demonstrated his love for the world through the gift of his one-of-a-kind Son. Significantly, God’s love extends not merely to Israel, but to “the world” (Morris 1995: 203; cf. Muller, ISBE 4: 1115; Guhrt, NIDNTT 1:525-26), that is, sinful humanity (Carson 1991: 205). Just as God’s love encompasses the entire world, so Jesus made atonement for the sins of the whole world (1 John 2:2).

In a major escalation from the giving of the law (d. John 1: 17; see Ridderbos 1997: 137), God gave his “one-of-a-kind Son” (see 1: 14, 18; cf. Rom. 8:32; Gal. 4:4). While the Greek introductory construction (houtos gar, for thus) stresses the intensity of God’s love (contra Kruse 2003: 113-14), the result clause, speaking of the giving of God’s monogenes huios (monogenes huios, one-of-a-kind Son), stresses the greatness of that gift (Carson 1991: 204). The next verse says that God “sent” his Son (3: 17); here, the term used is “gave” (Ridderbos 1997: 138 n. 108). This draws attention to the sacrifice involved for God the Father in sending his Son to save the world (Witherington 1995: 101). Surely, to see his son die in such a cruel fashion would break any father’s heart–much more so that of our heavenly Father. In a similar OT passage, Abraham was asked to give up his “one-of-a-kind son,” Isaac (Gen. 22; see R. Brown 1966: 147; Dahl 1969: 28). Unlike Jesus, however, Isaac was not offered up, but spared when God provided a substitute.

The stark alternatives in the following purpose clause (introduced by hina [hina, in order that]) are either to perish or to obtain eternal life (Barrett 1978: 216; Morris 1995: 204) . The term apollymi (apollymi, perish) occurs several times in this Gospel.46 In the present context, “perish” is the antithesis of “have eternal life.” Already in the OT, blessings for obedience correspond to curses for disobedience (Deut. 28-30). In John, likewise, there is no middle ground: believing in the Son (resulting in eternal life) or refusing to believe (resulting in destruction) are the only options. Since “perish” is contrasted with “eternal life,” it stands to reason that perishing is eternal as well. However, “perishing” does not mean annihilation in the sense of total destruction, but rather spending eternity apart from God and from Jesus Christ, in whom alone is life (1 :4).47 In John’s Gospel it is particularly Judas, the “son of perdition” (17: 12) and betrayer of Jesus Christ, who represents an example of those who are perishing.

3:17-18

Here, it is “God” who is said to have sent his Son (perhaps echoing terminology reflected also in Gal. 4:4); elsewhere in John it is “the Father.” The construction of 3: 17 is typical of the Fourth Evangelist, who has a penchant for explaining what he means by restating an idea in the negative (Bultmann 1971: 154 n. 1; Carson 1991: 206). The present verse stands in apparent contradiction with 5:27 and 9:39. However, the provision of “salvation for all who believe implies judgment for those who do not believe”; while “the purpose of Christ’s coming was redemptive, . . . when His saving work is rejected, judgment results. Even though judgment results from unbelief, condemnatory judgment was not the purpose of the incarnation” (Laney 1992: 82). Hence, the sense of krino (krino, judge) in the context of the present passage is strongly negative (“condemn”), whereas in 5:27 and 9:39 it is neutral (Carson 1991: 207).

Not believing in the God-sent Son is tantamount to self-condemnation; God is not to blame, but rather the unbeliever. Humans remain responsible agents; no one is compelled to believe. Unbelievers face “the necessity of escaping an already existing condemnation” (Borchert 1996: 185). Whereas the emphasis in 3:1-8 was on the necessity of spiritual rebirth, the focus in 3: 12-18 is on believing; thus, the themes of divine sovereignty and human responsibility are balanced (Ridderbos 1997: 140). The two verbs in the perfect tense in 3: 18, kekritai (kekritai, stands condemned) and me pepisteuken (me pepisteuken), has not believed), underscore the settled state of unbelievers’ condemnation and unbelief.

The OT makes clear that God would rather save than condemn (e.g., Ezek. 18:23). The Jews, however, believed that the coming Messiah would save Israel but judge the Gentiles.-l9 The Qumran sect even maintained that only its own members would be saved while the rest of the world would perish (10M 1 :5). The adherents of mystery religions likewise believed that only they were the initiated. Contrary to these expectations, John affirms that the coming of the Messiah manifested God’s saving will for all, not just the Jews or a select few. John 3: 18 contains echoes to terminology found in the prologue: the phrase “believe in the name” harks back to 1:12 (d. 2:23); “one-of-a-kind Son of God” echoes 1:14 and 1:18 (d. 3:16). Andreas J. Köstenberger, John (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Baker Academic, 2004), 128-131. [Greek transliterated; some reformatting; italics original; footnotes not included; and underlining mine.]

This entry was posted on Friday, July 2nd, 2010 at 7:19 am and is filed under John 3:16. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.

Comments are closed at this time.