This was in the comment box over at this Triablogue post:
G said, "All individuals would still be included. We need to suppress the next steps of logic so that you can say "all men", without reaching the more desired Calvinistic ending of "some men"."
Actually, it wouldn't. "All men without exception" would necessarily entail "all men without distinction" but not the other way around.
The word, "world," as it is often used in the Gospel and Epistles of John, has reference to quality, not quantity.
Sometimes it has reference to the evil nature of human society. John 3:16 does not mean that God had so much love that He loved every single last human being, but rather, it means that God had so much love that He loved humans (but not necessarily every single human) in spite of their sinfulness. The quantity of that group can only be determined by the context.
Sometimes (as in 1 John 2:2), it has reference to all people groups (a universal of qualities), i.e. both Jews and Gentiles, and is used to oppose the 1st century Jewish idea that God would only bless the Jews, Gentiles were sub-humans, and other assorted racist ideas.
Thus, God chooses men out of *every* (universal) tribe, tongue, people, and nation, but *not* *everyone in* every tribe, tongue, people, and nation.
It is all men without distinction (i.e. *some* from *every* people group), not all men without exception (i.e. *everyone in* every people group).