The Unbelieving Pharisees of John 10

[1689Dave]

John 10 shows that Jesus did not die for the Pharisees in his audience and that is why they did not believe.

“I am the good shepherd: the good shepherd giveth his life for the sheep.” John 10:11 (KJV 1900)

“But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.” John 10:26 (KJV 1900)

So, the reason the Pharisees did not believe, is because Jesus did not die for them.

 

[atpollard]

I think we are branching deep into speculation here when we tie verses together to claim WHY God did or did not do something. I lean towards the words of Corrie Ten Boon in such matters: “God does as He pleases, and He does it right well.”

That said, I see no harm in speculation as long as one acknowledges that it is speculation and not DIVINE FACT.

 

[atpollard]

So, the reason the Pharisees did not believe, is because Jesus did not die for them.

I would suggest the same result (Jesus did not die for ”not my sheep”) however I believe a different chain of cause and effect. You suggest the following order of cause and effect:

1. Jesus did not die for them
2. therefore, they did not believe.

I would suggest that within John 10, we have verse 29 telling us that the Father has given His sheep to Jesus and those that are not His sheep are not His sheep because the Father did not give them to him. So the order of cause and effect that I would advocate is more like:

1. Father gives to them to the Son or not.
2. Jesus dies for those that the Father has given Him
3. they believe because of the Father.

Support for initial belief coming from the Father rather than the Death of the Son on the Cross comes from back in John 6 where verses tell us that “no one comes to [Jesus] unless the father draws them” and “everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to [Jesus]. It is from this that I draw my speculation that “belief” begins with the teaching and drawing of the Father (through the agency of the Holy Spirit).

Applying what we know (the Father draws and teaches those that come - also known as Jesus’ sheep, whom the Father gave Him) to those “not of My sheep” (who do not believe BECAUSE they are not of His sheep), I suggest that the lack of belief comes from the fact that the Father did not draw them and they did not hear and learn from the Father. So the cause-effect chain would be closer to:

1. The Father did not draw and they did not hear and learn (see Romans 1:18-32 for an example).
2. They did not believe (because they were not His sheep)
3. Jesus did not die for them (Jesus died to save, not to “not save”), the Good Shepherd laid down his life for His sheep.

Unbelief is the natural state of man. God does not need to DO anything to MAKE men unbelievers … we do that naturally with no help needed. God must intervene to enable anyone to believe and avoid the natural conclusion of fallen man that NONE WOULD BE SAVED.

“There is none righteous, no, not one;
There is none who understands;
There is none who seeks after God.”

“… the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed.

 

[1689Dave]

I would suggest the same result (Jesus did not die for ”not my sheep”) however I believe a different chain of cause and effect. You suggest the following order of cause and effect:

1. Jesus did not die for them
2. therefore, they did not believe.

I would suggest that within John 10, we have verse 29 telling us that the Father has given His sheep to Jesus and those that are not His sheep are not His sheep because the Father did not give them to him. So the order of cause and effect that I would advocate is more like:

1. Father gives to them to the Son or not.
2. Jesus dies for those that the Father has given Him
3. they believe because of the Father.

Support for initial belief coming from the Father rather than the Death of the Son on the Cross comes from back in John 6 where verses tell us that “no one comes to [Jesus] unless the father draws them” and “everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to [Jesus]. It is from this that I draw my speculation that “belief” begins with the teaching and drawing of the Father (through the agency of the Holy Spirit).

Applying what we know (the Father draws and teaches those that come - also known as Jesus’ sheep, whom the Father gave Him) to those “not of My sheep” (who do not believe BECAUSE they are not of His sheep), I suggest that the lack of belief comes from the fact that the Father did not draw them and they did not hear and learn from the Father. So the cause-effect chain would be closer to:

1. The Father did not draw and they did not hear and learn (see Romans 1:18-32 for an example).
2. They did not believe (because they were not His sheep)
3. Jesus did not die for them (Jesus died to save, not to “not save”), the Good Shepherd laid down his life for His sheep.

Unbelief is the natural state of man. God does not need to DO anything to MAKE men unbelievers … we do that naturally with no help needed. God must intervene to enable anyone to believe and avoid the natural conclusion of fallen man that NONE WOULD BE SAVED.

“There is none righteous, no, not one;
There is none who understands;
There is none who seeks after God.”

“… the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed.

It says elsewhere that God hardened their hearts so they could not believe. This would be the same as Jesus telling them they could not believe it because he did not die for them.

Plus it says he died for the church. Certainly, these were not the church.

 

[Josiah]

“But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep.” John 10:26 (KJV 1900)

@MoreCoffee

John 10:26 is about faith. As Dave proved.

Yes, most would agree that God only gives faith to His Elect. But the issue here is faith - not whether Jesus died for all (as the Bible so often, verbatim states) but rather faith.

Jesus compares those with faith with sheep, those without with goats.

Yes, when God gives faith to some, He is giving them to Jesus. Because we become his, we become His Body, when we have faith.

I would suggest the same result (Jesus did not die for ”not my sheep”) however I believe a different chain of cause and effect. You suggest the following order of cause and effect:

1. Jesus did not die for them

Just quote the verse in John 10 that states, "Jesus did not die for them"

John 10:26 doesn't even mention "die".

I would suggest that within John 10, we have verse 29

Yes, John 10:29 does exist, your suggesting is good.

Here is the verse, "My father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the father's hand. I and the father are one."

Now, underline the words "Jesus did not die or them."

The context here is not the death of Jesus but the presence of faith. As you noted by placing this in the context of John 10:26. It's not even about His death! But what is entirely missing here (and in the Bible) is your horrible, anti-John Calvin claim that Jesus did not die for all (as the Bible so often, so obviously, verbatim, flat-out, in black-and-white STATES) but rather all those are wrong and Jesus did NOT die for all but ONLY, EXCLUSIVELY, SOLELY for some unknown few.

Dave, you are completely confusing your apologetics here, this is a verse some anti-Calvinists use to support OSAS, not that Jesus did not die for all but only, exclusively, solely for some few.

Jesus dies for those that the Father has given Him

The verse nowhere states that. As you know. The word "die" in fact never even appears in this entire chapter, no once.

Sure, He did die for those the Father gave Him, but it doesn't say He died ONLY for them (in fact, it doesn't say He died for even them).

You need to ADD a word to the text that's not there... the word your entire invention wholly and complete depends on. But it's not there. Those of us not blinded but actually can see know it's not there.

So, employed is a silly logical fallacy. One illustrated by this: "Ford makes Mustangs ergo Ford ONLY makes Mustangs." Even my 4 year old can see the fallacy there, the absurdity of that. It's what you do when we read passages like "Jesus died for the elect" or "Jesus died for Christians." Same complete lack of logic. And of course it flies in the face of all those many places where the Bible STATES - right there in black and white - THE EXACT OPPOSITE of your view.

they believe because of the Father.

Yup. No dispute on this end. This chapter is about FAITH, not the Cross of Jesus.

No where does Jesus state here (or anywhere) that He will NOT die for all but ONLY, EXCLUSIVELY, SOLELY for some unknown few.

John 6 where verses tell us that “no one comes to [Jesus] unless the father draws them” and “everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to [Jesus].

Yup. Everyone here fully accepts that. John 6 is also about faith. Not a word there about Jesus did NOT die for all but ONLY, SOLELY, EXCLUSIVELY for some unknown few.

1. Jesus did not die for them

The Bible never says that.

The Bible says the exact opposite. Here are just a few of those Scriptures:

Hebrews 2:9 But we see him who for a little while was made lower than the angels, namely Jesus, crowned with glory and honor because of the suffering of death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone.

2 Corinthians 5:14 For the love of Christ controls us, because we have concluded this: that one has died for all

2 Corinthians 5:15 And he died for all

1 Timothy 2:6 Who gave himself as a ransom for all.

There are many more.

the Good Shepherd laid down his life for His sheep.

Of course, no one disputes that, that's verbatim what the Bible states. But it does not state, "ONLY" for them. The absolutely essential word for this new doctrine to be true and all those Scriptures that state the opposite to be false is that word "ONLY." That is the dogma, "ONLY" for some few.



.

 

[1689Dave]

John 10:26 is about faith. As you prove.

Yes, most would agree that God only gives faith to His Elect.






Just quote the verse in John 10 that states, "Jesus did not die for them" Or admit you are making a false claim.

John 10:26 doesn't even mention "die". Surely you can read.






Here is the verse, "My father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the father's hand. I and the father are one."

Now, underline the words "Jesus did not die or them."

The context here is not the death of Jesus but the presence of faith. As you noted by placing this in the context of John 10:26. It's not even about His death! But what is entirely missing here (and in the Bible) is your horrible, anti-John Calvin claim that Jesus did not die for all (as the Bible so often, so obviously, verbatim, flat-out, in black-and-white STATES) but rather all those are wrong and Jesus did NOT die for all but ONLY, EXCLUSIVELY, SOLELY for some unknown few.





Well, the verse doesn't state that, but I have no problem there. Jesus did die for the Elect. But that's OUR position, YOUR horrible invention is that He died ONLY, EXCLUSIVELY, SOLELY for some unknown few.

You need to ADD a word to the text that's not there... the word your entire invention wholly and complete depends on. But it's not there. Those of us not blinded but actually can see know it's not there.

So, you just employ a silly logical fallacy. One illustrated by this: "Ford makes Mustangs ergo Ford ONLY makes Mustangs." Even my 4 year old can see the fallacy there, the absurdity of that. It's what you do when we read passages like "Jesus died for the elect" or "Jesus died for Christians." Same complete lack of logic. And of course it flies in the face of all those many places where the Bible STATES - right there in black and white - THE EXACT OPPOSITE of your view.





Yup. No dispute on this end. This chapter is about FAITH, not the Cross of Jesus.

No where does Jesus state here (or anywhere) that He will NOT die for all but ONLY, EXCLUSIVELY, SOLELY for some unknown few.






Yup. Everyone here fully accepts that. John 6 is also about faith. Not a word there about Jesus did NOT die for all but ONLY, SOLELY, EXCLUSIVELY for some unknown few.




Bible so states.





Bible so states.




The Bible never says that.

The Bible says the exact opposite.





Of course, no one disputes that, that's verbatim what the Bible states. But it does not state, "ONLY" for them. The absolutely essential word for this new doctrine to be true and all those Scriptures that state the opposite to be false is that word "ONLY." That is the dogma, "ONLY" for some few.



.

Save your wind. It only tells me you use smoke screens to avoid simple truths.

 

[atpollard]

Just quote the verse in John 10 that states, "Jesus did not die for them"

Semantics? Really?

Did Jesus (the Good Shepherd) ”lay down his life for his sheep”? (John 10:11)
Were those that were “not of my sheep”, his sheep? (John 10:26)

You do the math.

 

[atpollard]

Yes, John 10:29 does exist, your suggesting is good.

Here is the verse, "My father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the father's hand. I and the father are one."

Now, underline the words "Jesus did not die or them."

Is a dishonest partial quotation of my post to misrepresent my point how you really want to engage in dialogue with another Christian?

Here is my quote:

I would suggest that within John 10, we have verse 29 telling us that the Father has given His sheep to Jesus

Can you read John 10:29 and claim to disagree with the point that I actually made: “the Father has given His sheep to Jesus”?

You are employing the same “debate bully” tactics that you criticize 1689Dave for. There is no honest discussion from different opinions to be gained from that sort of dishonest rhetoric. Don’t bother responding to me until you want to engage in honest discussion.

 

[atpollard]

Jesus did NOT die for all but ONLY, EXCLUSIVELY, SOLELY for some unknown few.

Not “some unknown few” … His sheep (John 10:11).
Please stop deliberately misrepresenting the opposing position.

 

[Lamb]

Semantics? Really?

Did Jesus (the Good Shepherd) ”lay down his life for his sheep”? (John 10:11)
Were those that were “not of my sheep”, his sheep? (John 10:26)

You do the math.

So you admit you're "reading between the lines" instead of admitting that it's not explicitly said by Jesus that He didn't die for all?

 

[1689Dave]

So you admit you're "reading between the lines" instead of admitting that it's not explicitly said by Jesus that He didn't die for all?

What about "God so loved the world that he killed everyone on the planet except Noah whom he saved by grace, also his little family"? God does not change.

“The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: Thou hatest all workers of iniquity.” Psalm 5:5 (KJV 1900)

John 3:16 does not mean people as the world. They are all born workers of iniquity God hates,

 

[Lamb]

What about "God so loved the world that he killed everyone on the planet except Noah whom he saved by grace, also his little family"? God does not change.

“The foolish shall not stand in thy sight: Thou hatest all workers of iniquity.” Psalm 5:5 (KJV 1900)

John 3:16 does not mean people as the world. They are all born workers of iniquity God hates,

Jesus hadn't died on the cross at that time of Noah...

So let's take a look at what happens with Noah and God since you brought it up.

God gave the promise of a Savior in Genesis at the fall of Adam and Eve. Men, by grace through faith, believed in the Savior to come for the forgiveness of their sins. But man, as he does because he is sinful, kept turning away from God. God's plan was to keep His line pure so that the Savior would be born from the faithful. In the days of Noah, there were men who rejected the promise of the Savior even though that promise was given to all. Since they rejected that promise, they were killed by the flood waters.

 

[1689Dave]

Jesus hadn't died on the cross at that time of Noah...

So let's take a look at what happens with Noah and God since you brought it up.

God gave the promise of a Savior in Genesis at the fall of Adam and Eve. Men, by grace through faith, believed in the Savior to come for the forgiveness of their sins. But man, as he does because he is sinful, kept turning away from God. God's plan was to keep His line pure so that the Savior would be born from the faithful. In the days of Noah, there were men who rejected the promise of the Savior even though that promise was given to all. Since they rejected that promise, they were killed by the flood waters.

Jesus is the lamb (no pun intended) slain from the foundation of the world. Salvation is eternal. That is all of the saved have always been saved in God's plan which, being perfect, cannot change. Jesus says believers HAVE eternal life.

 

[atpollard]

So you admit you're "reading between the lines" instead of admitting that it's not explicitly said by Jesus that He didn't die for all?

Is it explicitly stated by Jesus that he is God?
Does that make Jesus “not God”?

 

[atpollard]

So you admit you're "reading between the lines" instead of admitting that it's not explicitly said by Jesus that He didn't die for all?

PS. You did not answer my questions.
Are you listening, or just waiting to speak?

 

[Albion]

Save your wind. It only tells me you use smoke screens to avoid simple truths.

...and you're the guy whose entire focus as a make-believe Christian is living according to the Sermon on the Mount! Not belief in Christ as God, not observing the Sacraments Our Lord commissioned, Nothing except what Jesus taught in the Sermon on the Mount.

Try reading it again and then get back to us with the part that says true believers are to relate to other people with the self-righteous and insulting manner that you specialize in.

 

[Albion]

Is it explicitly stated by Jesus that he is God?

Yes.

Does that make Jesus “not God”?

I don't see how it would.

 

[Josiah]

Yes.

I don't see how it would.

I think our friends point MIGHT be a tad stronger IF we had at least 4 Scriptures that VERBATIM, word-for-word, statements of "Jesus was not God." Then we had one Scripture that COULD (seriously twisted) be INTERPRETED to IMPLY that maybe, perhaps Jesus is God but not one Christian so interpreted it for over 1500 years and a Council Council had declared that Jesus IS God. THEN, well.... maybe it could be debated if He is or is not God.

We kind of have that situation here. We have many Scriptures that verbatim, flat-out, in black and white words my four year old can read that STATE (not imply, not could be twisted to mean but state) Jesus died for all ... for everyone... not just Christians but all ... etc. And he thinks there is one verse - in the context of faith not the death of Christ - that he thinks COULD, perhaps, maybe, be twisted to mean Jesus did not die for SOME Pharisees but not one person known to us so "interpreted" this to "imply" this for over 1500 years.... all the Church Fathers believed all the verses that say Jesus died for all... a Church Council declared that Jesus died for all, John Calvin taught that Jesus died for all..... So, I guess we could see which interpretation is stronger. Frankly, I lean toward going with numerous verbatim, literal, word-for-word STATEMENTS that the Fathers, the Councils and every Christian known to man accepted as such for over 1500 years than with one verse that someone feels COULD possibly, perhaps, maybe, IMPLY something that contradicts that. But that's me.



.

 

[Albion]

We kind of have that situation here. We have many Scriptures that verbatim, flat-out, in black and white words my four year old can read that STATE (not imply, not could be twisted to mean but state) Jesus died for all ... for everyone... not just Christians but all ... etc. And he thinks there is one verse - in the context of faith not the death of Christ - that he thinks COULD, perhaps, maybe, be twisted to mean Jesus did not die for SOME Pharisees but not one person known to us so "interpreted" this to "imply" this for over 1500 years.

That's true. What you describe is also very much in the style that most people call "cherry-picking" the Scripture. It's considered to be an automatically invalid approach to Bible study.

... all the Church Fathers believed all the verses that say Jesus died for all... a Church Council declared that Jesus died for all, John Calvin taught that Jesus died for all..... So, I guess we could see which interpretation is stronger. Frankly, I lean toward going with numerous verbatim, literal, word-for-word STATEMENTS that the Fathers, the Councils and every Christian known to man accepted as such for over 1500 years than with one verse that someone feels COULD possibly, perhaps, maybe, IMPLY something that contradicts that. But that's me..

 

[atpollard]

Yes.

In what verse does Jesus state “I am God”?