John 8:43-44

Either because we don't want to admit the truth, or because we can't hear

Thanks Pastor,

Chris

 

Here is the reason I do not understand the passage in the way you are explaining it. "Cannot" can be used for absolute prohibition (as you are taking it here) but it can also be used for circumstantial prohibition. In some contexts, a prohibition may not be absolute, but may be because of a certain circumstance. I believe that John is clear that there is a particular circumstance which makes it impossible for these people to believe. That circumstance is the fact that Jesus had not yet been "lifted up" on the cross. Once Jesus was lifted up, all men were able to understand and believe. Note that in the same context, earlier in verse 28, Jesus says to these same people "When you have lifted up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he, and that I do nothing on my own authority, but speak just as the Father taught me." There is abundant testimony in scripture that there were people who rejected Christ during his pre-cross lifetime, but accepted him after his resurrection. Prior to his death, God circumstantially limited their ability to believe so that God's sovereing plan would come to pass. Afterward, when that plan was accomplished, God removed that circumstantial restriction and allowed them to understand and believe.

 

I put this post up in resopnse to Pastor Larry's accusation however it either got missed or just plain ignored..here it is again.

John 8:43 tells us that certain ones "cannot hear" (a word of ability) the word of Christ.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In this passage it is the unbelieveing Jew being addressed twice as "ye" that are under Jesus's consideration. They could not hear Christ's word not just because they were, like all of the unregenerate (acts 26:18) (eph 2:2), of their father the devil and not of God, But because the did the lusts of their father and did not believe Christ when he told them the truth (john 8:45,46)

Not only was their "inablity" conditional, it was also not permanent, for Jesus had said earlier that because they were from "beneath" (jn.8:23), they would die in their sins and not be able to go where he was going (jn.8;21) Yet, they would only die in their sins IF THEY DID NOT BELIEVE (jn.8:24)

what is even more amuzing to me is that Calvinsit can't seem to make up their minds as to what is going on.( confusion in te ranks)..

Calvinist D.A. Carson makes this statement

"Jesus does not say they fail to grasp his message because they can not follow his spoken word, his idiom, but that they fail to understand his idiom precisely because they cannot "hear" his message. The jews remain responsible for their own "Cannot" whichm far from resulting from divine fiat, is determined by their own desire (theolusin) to perform the Lust ( tas epithymias) of the devil ( 8.44) this "Cannot" this slavery to sin(8.340 itself stems from personal sin" (D.A. carson, Divine Sovereignty and Human Responsibility (Atlanta knox press 1981) pg.166)

 

In my post above that was a quote from Pastor Larry on the subject at hand..I failed to note that before i posted.
*********************

"Look unto me and be saved, All the ends of the earth: for I am God, and there is none else (isa. 45:22)

"And saying, The time is fufilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand repent ye and believe the gospel ( Mark 1:15)

"And the times of this ignorance God winked at: but now cammandeth all men everywhere to repent" ( acts 17:30)

And this is the Commandment, that we should believe on the mane of his Son Jesus Christ..." (1 jn. 3:23)

"And the spirit and the Bride say come. And let him that heareth say Come. And let him that is athirst come. And WHOSOEVER WILL, let him take of the water of life freely ( rev. 22:17)

'Come unto me all ye that labour and are heavy laden and I will give you rest" (mat. 11;28)

"In the last day, the great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying If any man thisrt let him come unto me, and drink. (jn.7;37)

If total Inabiliy is true they wat are we to make of these verses?? Is God just mocking his creation? Would God present salvation to a man knowing that the man could never even will to recieve it? The God Of the Bible is not the god of Calvinism. God himself even gives the genuineness of his intentions: " I have not spoken in secret, i a dark place of the earth: I said bot unto the seed of jacob, Seek me in vain: I the Lord speak rightousness, i declare things that are right" (isa. 45:9)

Even Erasmus recognised this in a debate against Luther over free will:

"If it is not in the power of every man to keep what is commanded, all the exhortations in the scriptures, ans all the promises, threats, expostulations, reproofs,adjurations, blessings, curses, and hosts of precepts, are of necessity useless" ( Desiderius erasmus, quoted in Luther, pg 171)

 

In the Bible it is clear that the possibilty exists that a man could believe under a given set of circumstances:

"Those by the way side are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their hearts, LEST THEY SHOULD BELIEVE and be saved. (Luke 8:12)

"and will ye not come to me, that ye might have life" (Jn.5:40)

"Forbidding us to speak unto the gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins alway: for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost" (1 thes. 2:16)

These verses don't mean that under a given set of circumstances man will always believe. But they do show that there is a possibility. And if there exisits even the slightest possibility that a man could believe, the doctrine of total Inability falls by the wayside.

 

Hello Pastor:
A little one on one seems fair enough. You have not managed to slow down Shilo yet. Rather than complicating the matter, i was waiting for your response to him.

 

I agree with you pastor. Some presuppositions sure are leading us astray. Start reading and reconciling beginning at verse 31. That should help a lot...

 

No, it is a categorical statement that a particular group of men could not do something. If it applies to all men, then no one could have been saved. And the question remains, were all of these men in this group forever unable to believe, or did some of them believe later after Jesus' resurrection? Verse 28 (which you did not address) seems to indicate that it did become possible later.

Of course the lifting up is not the basis for belief at this point. Of course some believed at this point. The question remains: Did some who "did not understand" and "could not believe" at this point later believe? If the answer to that question is "no", then you are correct Pastor Larry. If the answer to that question is "yes", then there is a serious flaw in your reasoning, for that would mean that their inability was circumstancial and not absolute.

Yes, it does!

 

Pastor Larry..my points are precisly on the subject and to the point at hand. Just because you don't like and can't handle the truth isn't my problem. I noticed that when people make vaild points that do actually show flawss in your theology and reasoning you put them down.. very Calvinistic of you..

As far as regeneration in the old testament you have nothing to stand on. As I said before noone was regenerated and noone was quickend..to say they were is to say they were saved born again by the Blood of Christ which isn't so.

For you to say that people were saved the same way in the old as well as in the new testament is just ignorant.

That isn't the subject here though so instead of going off on yet another tangent lets stay on subject.

 

That is a deceptive thing to say Pastor Larry!! of course you are arguing against "whosoever will" Whosoever to someone who didn't know about the Calvinist doctrine would read that as anyone willing to come to christ can.

Your Total inabilty goes completly against that. The Bible says whosoever will let him come..You and your philosophical doctrine says NOT TRUE. man doens't have the ability to go to God..yet the Bible says different as i pointed out.

so this isn't a non-issue as you would like to think and say it is..lets try to be honest here.

That is a lie as well. You most certainly do argue that it argue that it stems from their own problems..you argued that in your explination of john 8:43,44!

You see the word "cannot" and jump on that like it means inability..But Jesus didn't say they had the "inability" to right themselves..he said all they would have to do is Believe in 8:31 and they would get the truth.. it's not becaue they have the "inability" they have the Ability or Jesus would't have made the staement..Their personal sin is keeping them from hearing what he is saying.. So yes you are arguing agaist what you say you aren't.

as far as those who did believe they didn't have the Holy spirit come on them so they could believe..Your system says the Holy spirit must FIRST come upon unsaved man before he can believe..however that isn't happening here in the Gospel of john seeings how the Holy Spirit has not been given yet. Yet another inconsistancy in your Calvinist philosophy.

 

The 10 commandments ( the Law) God gave to the Jew were certainly impossible to keep..that is why they had to make sacrafices to attone for their sin. which I might add is yet more proof of unregenerate man being able to go to god for attonement. Anyway you have no argument here either..the Bible says the Law was a schoolmaster to lead us to Chirst. (Gal.3:24)

what you are saying is that
God gave the commandments knowing they can't kept ..so they could eventually lead us to realize that we were depraved and without hope and could not keep the law..( becaue the carnal mind is emnity aginst God..neither can we keep the commandments)

All this would show us our need for a saviour, for Christ..yet when we saw our need we STILL couldn't recieve him..even though God in so many places Commanded that we seek him and his salvation!!

this is totaly ridiculous!

 

There was nothing circumstantial in any of the veses i posted. The implication is there. Is this your way of trying to ignore what is written??

You say Jn.8:43-44 is proof that man is at a total inability..yet these veses imply otherwise!

"Those by the way side are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their hearts, LEST THEY SHOULD BELIEVE and be saved. (Luke 8:12)

"and will ye not come to me, that ye might have life" (Jn.5:40)

"Forbidding us to speak unto the gentiles that they might be saved, to fill up their sins alway: for the wrath is come upon them to the uttermost"

so what is it the Bible is full of contradictions then?

and what of Calvinsit such as D.A.Carson, who don't share your explination of jn.8:44 being a proof text of total inability??

"Jesus does not say they fail to grasp his message because they can not follow his spoken word, his idiom, but that they fail to understand his idiom precisely because they cannot "hear" his message. The jews remain responsible for their own "Cannot" which far from resulting from divine fiat , is determined by their own desire (theolusin) to perform the Lust ( tas epithymias) of the devil ( 8.44) this "Cannot" this slavery to sin(8.340 itself stems from personal sin"

 

I think I addressed what attributed to their not being able to hear Jesus very well..

Maybe I missed something Isn't that the problem of the entire Human race..

so if they were "unable" because of the fact that they were of their father the devil that would have to go for everyone in this world including the calvinist! (unless if Course no Calvinist was ever of their father the devil before they accepted and recieved Jesus as their savior.)

again lets try to be somewhat consistant.

 

I'm sure if you read my post you would see that they were and are very relivant to what is being disscussed.. Nothing I said seemed to point to any flaws??? perhaps you need to read again.

I'm sorry you didn't put anyone down??

I guess that was supposed to be a compliment
then..

No..What you did was ignore what you couldn't
explain away.

First I never argued that grace through faith wasn't a relivant thing

Explain that..

also I see it's alright for you to disrespect someone's exegesis ( you basically said I was ignorant just not in those exact words)but i can't say that it is ignorant for people to say that salvation was the same in both testaments.. I see..

You would need to consult a dictionary to see what the word re- generate means. it does not mean life.

"RE" a prefix meaning again, anew

"Generate" to bring into being.. to begat

REGENERATE- to form AGAIN

your definition is incorrect it is not life..it's life again. And furthermore I NEVER said noone had eternal life..what I said was noone was regenerated, in the old testament they were all dead in their trespasses and sins..

 

That is not true at all. and that is VERY deceptive. I know the Cavinist doctrine VERY well..I have read Calvin,Pink and the others I have read the Dort cannon,as well as the Westminister Confessions of Faith.. I have talked with many a Calvinist..I know Exactly what the Cavinist doctrine is all about.

Please show me the Holy spirit working in the Old testament..I must have missed that one especially when God was dealing with men by way of Angels, through prophets as well as one on one. No Holy spirit until Christ was crucified. Sorry. even Christ said it himself

"For if I not go away, the Comforter WILL NOT COME UNTO YOU; but if I depart, I will send him" Jn.16:7

So who had the Holy sprit working in him while Christ was there.. maybe you can tell me from this verse.

I haven't denied anything..I just know my Bible.