Morris and Gill on Jn 1:29.

Jesus was sacrificed for the world, that is, for the entire human family in all ages.  This is abundantly clear.  All are bought, but all do not acknowledge the purchase.[1]  This is supportive of Baxter’s soteriology as of that held by DML-J.  For the sinner to receive the benefits of the redemption purchased by Christ, God requires of him faith in Jesus Christ and repentance that leads to life.  Wesley concurs with the above, adding that the sins taken away are the sins of all mankind.[2]  Sin and the world are of equal extent, argues Wesley.  Even the elect prior to conversion are full of sin, so “sin and the world are (truly) of equal extent.” 

Gill’s exegesis (or is it eisegesis?) makes “the world” equal “the elect,” but on what grounds he does this are not given.  It is a purely gratuitous exercise, and dishonest, as Machen would say.  By the “sin of the world,” is not meant the sin, or sins of every individual person in the world, says Gill.[3].  So according to this exegesis “the sin of the world” does not mean “the sin of the world” after all.  Had John said this in 1:29, confusion in understanding basic English would not have occurred.  We would have been clear that the world, as we understand it, was not meant. 

Leon Morris understands the Cross in its comprehensiveness.[4]  John is referring to the totality of the world’s sin, rather than to a number of individual acts.  Individual acts are carried out by individuals, therefore, John is not referring to individuals either.  His reference is to “the sin of the world” in its totality.  Christ’s death on the Cross is “completely adequate for the needs of all men.”[5] 

---

[1]    The Fourfold Gospel (n.d., n.p.).

[2]    Wesley’s Notes on the NT.

[3]    Gill,

[4]    Morris, 1972:148.

[5]    Ibid.