Exegesis "That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life."—John 3:15 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life."—John 3:16 "For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved."—John 3:17 --> is thought to have written the verse himself John 3:16 has been termed as "the golden text of the Bible", "the gospel in a nutshell", and "everyman's text". One of the verses pivotal to the
Johannine theology, it concerns God's motive for sending Jesus. In Christianity, it is thought that believing in Jesus grants eternal life to the believer. Eternal life is a dominant theme throughout John's entire Gospel, and its first appearance in the Gospel is in this verse. Theologian
Larry Hurtado sees the verse as reflecting Jesus' importance in Christianity. The
Methodist minister
C. K. Barrett wrote, "Mention of ... the eternal life given ... to believers ... suggests ... the general setting of the work of Christ in the love and judgement of God." The verse (which has parallels with John 3:15 and John 3:17) has been used by some to support
Christian universalism, a view that all humans will eventually be saved by God. However,
Anglican bishop
N. T. Wright has argued against this, saying that the "position is quite clear: God in His great love has made one way of salvation for all men without exception. Those who refuse this way have no alternative left to them. And accepting the way of salvation, for
John as for
Paul, is bound up with faith in Jesus Christ."
Purpose Theologians have assumed the verse's purpose to be that of strengthening the faith of Christians rather than as an evangelical tool. This is because John 3:16 does not contain commands of vital
sacraments (such as
repentance and
baptism). In the words of theologian
David Pawson, it is problematic to use a verse in evangelism that does not tell the hearers "how to respond in proper detail ... that you get a simple decision which is not enough for a real change in life ... It is not dealing with a gospel situation and outward evangelistic thrust". Instead, the emphasis of the verse is toward continuing belief for Christians.
Christian commentary John 3:16 has been popular for theology comments. In evangelist
Andreas J. Köstenberger's opinion, the verse summarizes central teachings in
Christianity that are to put beliefs in Jesus, and "there is no middle ground: believing in the Son (resulting in eternal life) or refusing to believe (resulting in destruction) are the only options." Christian philosopher
William Lane Craig said the verse denotes salvation through Jesus only. According to theologian Paul T. Butler: "God, motivated by infinite love, sent His only son ... not to condemn but to save everyone who believes in His Son ... This text shows God loving us, not for His sake alone, but for our sakes." Biblical scholar
F. F. Bruce interpreted John 3:16 that God has a limitless and universal love to all humans. Barrett noted that the salvation would only be advantageous whenever there is a belief in Jesus.
Calvinist theologian
D. A. Carson said the verse "makes it clear that, as applied to human beings, the love of God is not the consequence of their loveliness but of the sublime truth that 'God is love'." Theologian
Robert E. Webber described it as "an invitation to embrace a sweeping story that encompassed the whole of history". Bible commentator
J. Ramsey Michaels wrote: "God's intent is a saving intent, and the scope of his salvation is worldwide. His love for the whole human race expressed itself in the giving of his only Son [who would] die on the cross."
Bruce Vawter, a
Catholic priest, stated: "The only explanation that we shall ever have of the gift of eternal life made possible for us in the redemption achieved in Christ is the incredible love of God for the world."
Anglican priest
Leon Morris compared the idea of God's universal love with
God's exclusive love to Jews, which is frequently mentioned in the
Old Testament. He then concluded that "it is a distinctively Christian idea that God's love is wide enough to embrace all mankind. His love is not confined to any national group or any spiritual elite. It is a love which proceeds from the fact that He is love."
Presbyterian pastor Lamar Williamson found that John 3:16 emphasises the significance of Jesus in Christianity as God the Son. Catholic theologian Neal M. Flanagan said that the verse is pivotal to the
Johannine theology.
Status as Jesus' words Beginning in , the conversation becomes Jesus' monologue. Because ancient Bible copies do not use quotation marks for dialogues, biblical scholars have disputed on where Jesus and Nicodemus' conversation ends. Speculations that John 3:16 is the personal commentary of an evangelist (traditionally named
John the Evangelist) have arisen, but it remains controversial. Pawson said it is unusual for Jesus to speak from the third-person perspective, or to repeat or expand on what he had said. Jesus never referred to himself as the "
only begotten Son" but as the "
Son of Man". The only begotten son is what the evangelist calls Jesus in
John 1. Theologian
Robert E. Van Voorst has commented that it is not important to know if John 3:16 is Jesus's words, and that words not spoken by Jesus are no less true than those that are.
Wording John 3:16's wording is deemed by Bible commentators to be straightforward, concise, and authoritative. The verse is only 25 words long in the King James Version. First, the verse begins with
for to link with prior verse.
God here is understood to be
God the Father, the first person in the
Trinity. The word
so—similar to
thus—shows a comparison from John 3:15. This is not a quantity but was mistranslated as such in most modern translations (for instance, in the
Amplified Bible). Many scholars said the word should be placed near the beginning to keep the original meaning, as was in
Koine Greek, the original Bible language: ''''Thus for loved God the world that the Son the only begotten, He gave so that everyone believing in Him not should perish but should have life eternal. The next word is
loved, known in Greek as
agape. This concept does not have an equal word in English, but it can be translated as the selfless, nonsexual love of God for human and of human for God. While some theologians have argued that
world refers to only Israel, other theologians have generally agreed that it means the entire human race, showing God's unlimited and universal love for both believers and unbelievers. Pawson suggested there should be a better alternative to
world, because he thought it connotes an immoral meaning. Sharing similar sentiments, Harris remarked, "Often in this Gospel there are ominous, negative ideas attaching to the term. The world is evil and needs a saviour." The verb
gave, in past tense, does not have a clear subject; Pawson assumed that the word refers to the prior
world. The word
whosoever refers to believers, specified by "believeth in Him". Whether the objective pronoun
Him refers to Jesus or God the Father is debated; general consensus among the analysts is more inclined to the former. The word
perish is interpreted by theologians as
annihilation, though it is unclear if the word refers the perishing of death or the
Last Judgement. Köstenberger stated
perish meant living eternally in God's absence, and Pawson stated it as "a state of ruin or utter uselessness". The meaning of
everlasting has been controversial. Theologian
Marianne Thompson said it does not mean solely "unending: it is qualitatively different from mortal life in the present world, because it participates in the blessings of the coming age, including being with God, who is living and eternal ... such life is characterized by fullness and abundance"; though according to the New Testament professor
Merrill C. Tenney the word refers to imperishability.
"Only begotten" The Gospel of John uses lexically and syntactically unsophisticated language, and has a significant number of theologically laden phrases that have become an important part of Christianity. John 3:16 also contains the designation for Jesus as the "only begotten", a key Christological title in the pre-modern versions of the English Bible, which has almost completely disappeared from most contemporary translations. to his mother
Mary. Dale Moody of the
Journal of Biblical Literature offered two alternatives for John 3:16: "Only one of his kind" (from ''
[monos
, one] and [genos'', kind]), or "his 'unique' son". The author Paul Borthwick wrote "only begotten Son" signifies that Jesus possesses "every artibute of pure Godhood"; Pawson, however, argued that the phrase stated Jesus is not everlasting. Theologian
Pheme Perkins believed the phrase "He gave His only begotten Son" could be a reference to
his later crucifixion, an opinion shared by
Murray J. Harris and
Robert E. Van Voorst.
Muslim commentary The validity of Jesus' status as the "only begotten son" of God, as described in John 3:16, has been disputed by Muslim scholars especially, who deny the
Trinity and consider such concepts as a denial of
tawhid (oneness of God).
Gombe State University's Yakubu Modibbo and
University of Maiduguri's Dani Mamman claimed other verses from the Bible that, they believed, are an affirmation of other "begotten sons" of God, and thus contradict Jesus' words or John's commentary;
Psalms 2:7 for example, which reads, "I will tell of the decree: The Lord said to me, 'You are my Son; today I have begotten you'." However, the Christian apologist A. Yousef Al-Katib wrote that it is actually a reference to the coming son of God, who in Christian theology is identified as Jesus; he also wrote of
Acts 13:33 that quotes the verse to prove Jesus' divine sonship. == Influences ==