I see. I am not completely free of presuppositions like you are...or was I wrong because I used the phrase "I think?" Well how does anyone reason or arrive at any conclusions unless they think? You do too whether or not you append the words "I think" to your remarks. As for my having positions that are in opposition to Calvinism that should be obvious to everyone. When I quoted Calvin's Commentary on John 3:16 I did it because I was surprised to see him admit that "world" meant "humanity" Maybe it was Calvin's commentary that was facile.
So unlike all the rest of us you know "the full counsel of scripture" Well, you can have that title if you want it but we will all remember that you awarded it to yourself. I would never make such a claim for myself. You clearly think I am just firing off answers off the cuff. If you think that you are totally wrong. I try to give what other people say some consideration before answering them. I also try to word my own responses carefully. You just do not like it because you hold a differing opinion.
[/FONT] Sigh.
To determine what "John had in mind" a careful study of the word “world” in John’s writings will reveal the word to be often used to refer not to the planet or all its inhabitants, but to the system of fallen human culture, with its values, morals, and ethics as a whole. "World" is that which is totally opposed to God and all that belongs to Him. It is almost always associated with the side of darkness in the Johannine duality, wherein people are characterized in John’s writings as being either “of God” or “of the world” (see John's clear application along these lines in John 8:23; 15:19; 17:6,14,16; 18:36; 1 John 2:16; 4:5). Those who have been born of God are taken out of that spiritual sphere, though not out of the geographical place or physical population that is concurrent with it (John 13:1; 17:15).
AMR