1 John 2:2

[YLTYLT]

PL,
In another thread you referenced a link in an explanation of this verse. Here is paragraph from it:

Concerning the possible usage of kosmos to mean all mankind without exception in the redemptive context of I John 2:2, let the reader observe that kosmos is used differently at least 21 out of 23 times elsewhere in the epistle. As a matter of fact, the identical term "whole world" is used in I John 5:19 where it cannot possibly mean all mankind absolutely. John writes: "we know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth in wickedness (in the wicked one)." Can this be true of the believer who is in Christ? Let the reader judge. If the term "whole world" in I John 2:2 means all mankind generically, it is an exceptional usage in the epistle (objectively, only in I John 2:2 and 4:14 could it possibly refer to all mankind without exception—two times out of 23 occurrences). Therefore, it is the writer's contention that the burden of proof rests upon those who interpret "whole world" generically to establish that the term means all mankind in any redemptive context, let alone I John 2:2. In the writer's research he has not found any writer who holds to an indefinite atonement attempting to do this; rather the term is always said to mean, in a "normal and unbiased approach," the whole world, meaning all mankind,15 both the elect and the non-elect.

(edited: mistake made here see later post for explanation)
Now I have a serious problem with the way he does his exegesis here.

He compares 1 John 2:2 to I John 5:19. But the greek word for "whole" in 1 John 2:2 is "holos", the greek word for "whole" in I John 5:19 is placed after the word "kosmos", where in 1 John 2:2 the phrase is "holos tou kosmos". So to do a comparison on these to show that they have the same meaning could be incorrect.

If that much research is going to be done, reference the original Greek.

Get a good Greek concordance - (I like Englishmens Greek Concordance) and an interlinear Greek and English New Testament. - (I like Berry's)

I am sure that the writers intentions were pure, but it looks as though he may have just trying to support his argument.

Do not follow men or men in movements. Men are capable of being wrong. Trust the Word.

Be like the Bereans, that check out every word that Paul preached. Check me out as well, I am a man and very capable of being wrong. But if I am it should be in the incorrectness of my source materials.(concordances and dictionaries) If you have an issue with my source materials please give a reason other than the doctrine (of which I am not aware) of the creators of the source. You cant use doctrine to define words. Use the meaning of words to define doctrine. Otherwise one gets into circular reasoning where the doctrine defines the word that supports the doctrine that defines the word that supports the doctrine..... and so on.

Silly, yes I know, but many religions are based on this same logic.


My next post will discuss how the phrase "holos tuo kosmos" is used in other parts of the bible.

(FYI I edited this post because of some additional reserach I had done and discovered I was mistaken on some of my previous comments, so if you read this previously, I apologize for the inaccuracies.

[Jac3510]

[edited]

I would contend, on top of this, that even if you accept the author's argument, which I think you've shot a pretty good hole in, we can still demonstrate the universal nature of kosmos in the verse as he asks. John says that Christ is our propitiation. There is nothing potential, and the fact that it says "our" tells us that John is referring believers, especially those reading his letter. But, he goes on to say, "but those of the whole world." In other words, "As Christ is our propitation, he is their propitation, too." The "our" is in clear contrast to "the whole world." Thus, John is clearly stating that Christ IS (not is potentially) the propitation for the whole world.

Thus, all sin has been atoned for.

[edited]

[Jac3510]

Haha, yes, you are right. This is why we have to double check arguments in all cases. I'm looking at this a bit closer, and I have to say that I'm a bit baffled by something here. 1 John 2:2 isn't all that difficult . . . but 5:19 is another story.

ο κοσμος ολος (ho kosmos holos)

This phrase occurs nowhere else in the NT. That's because it looks wrong. There are three "attributive positions" that you can use to describe a noun with an adjective. The first is the most common, is formed as Article-Adjective-Noun. The second position is common, too, and it is formed as Article-Noun-Article-Adjective. The third position, which is very rare, is Noun-Article-Adjective. What we have here, though, is Article-Noun-Adjective.

Now, my first guess is that this is actually an anarthrous (no article) phrase, and that the article is serving some other purpose. If this were the case, we would actually have a fairly standard Noun-Adjective set up, in which context determines translation.

And, as I look over 2:2, I'm seeing the same sort of thing. It doesn't fit the positional pattern, either. There, we have:

περι ολου του κοσμου (peri holou tou kosmou)

Again, no article preceding the adjective.

I'm going to run this by Dr. Arnett. The more I look, the more I'm convinced that we are dealing with an anarthrous adjective, and the article preceding the noun is serving some other purpose . . . maybe it's just for stylistic reasons. The Greek article is pretty flexible.

ANYWAY:

Because you bring this up, I'll supply my stock argument as it relates to this particular line of thought. Notice what the author says:

"Therefore, it is the writer's contention that the burden of proof rests upon those who interpret "whole world" generically to establish that the term means all mankind in any redemptive context, let alone I John 2:2."

However, we don't claim that "the whole world" refers to mankind generically, but rather the "rest of mankind." In general, but especially in Johanine thought, the "kosmos" refers to creation that is under Satan's power. It is the world system that is in rebellion to God. Thus, 1 John 5:19 is completely normal. ". . . the whole world ("kosmos") lies in the power of the evil one." Now, using the terminology in precisely the same way, we look to 1 John 2:2. "[He is the propitiation] . . . for the sins of the whole world ("kosmos")."

It seems to me that if the Calvinist wants to argue that "kosmos" refers to the elect, then he's got a LOT to prove, because I've not seen the word used that way. I could be wrong, and if I am, I invite someone to demonstrate it as such. But to take things a step further, in 1 John 2:2, for the Calvinist, the word isn't simply referring to the elect, but the elect of the rest of the world. So now we are referring to a sub-group within the group of the elect, and yet John is using a word with universal connotations!

I just don't see the position. I never have.

[YLTYLT]

Yes Jac,

Thats where I was planning on going next, that "the world" can actually refer to "non christians", especially in the verses that John uses in Revelation. But I won't bother explaining more, you did a sufficient job.

But I am anxious to hear what Dr. Arnett has to say about this.

[Jac3510]

Woha . . . I just looked up the references to "whole world" in Rev. You ought to take the time to do that write up, YLT. But thanks for the direction. Really good stuff.