John 6:37-39

[Dr. Walter]

Jn6:37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.
39 And this is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.

QUESTIONS:

1. Will any of those given to the Son by the Father fail to come to Him?

2. Will the Son lose any of those the Father gave him?

3. Is Christ providing the expression of God's will in verses 38-39 as additional confirmation of what Christ states to be matter of fact conclusions in verse 37?

4. Should any interpretation of any passage in the Old or New Testament be considered correct that would openly contradict this explicit conclusion by Christ in John 6:37 and the explicit expression of God's will in verses 38-39?

 

[npetreley]

Jn6:37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.
39 And this is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.

QUESTIONS:

1. Will any of those given to the Son by the Father fail to come to Him?

No.

2. Will the Son lose any of those the Father gave him?

No.

3. Is Christ providing the expression of God's will in verses 38-39 as additional confirmation of what Christ states to be matter of fact conclusions in verse 37?

Can you reword that?

4. Should any interpretation of any passage in the Old or New Testament be considered correct that would openly contradict this explicit conclusion by Christ in John 6:37 and the explicit expression of God's will in verses 38-39?

No.

http://www.spurgeon.org/sermons/sum&sub.htm

 

[Skandelon]

My answers are the same as Nicks...

 

[Rippon]

My answers are the same as Nicks...

Hmm, that's puzzling in light of your Arminian-like stance which you have championed so often here on the BB.

 

[HankD]

Jn6:37 All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.
38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.
39 And this is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.

QUESTIONS:

1. Will any of those given to the Son by the Father fail to come to Him?

2. Will the Son lose any of those the Father gave him?

3. Is Christ providing the expression of God's will in verses 38-39 as additional confirmation of what Christ states to be matter of fact conclusions in verse 37?

4. Should any interpretation of any passage in the Old or New Testament be considered correct that would openly contradict this explicit conclusion by Christ in John 6:37 and the explicit expression of God's will in verses 38-39?

1. No.
2. No.
3. Unclear, but the answer seems to be "yes".
4. No (but its correct interpretation should be provided to the seeker).

However, these questions do not address the Father's criteria of selection of those whom He chooses to give to Christ which gives room for a view which would support one of the general views of aminianism or calvinism (if that is your unspoken purpose).

HankD

 

[Dr. Walter]

1. No.
2. No.
3. Unclear, but the answer seems to be "yes".
4. No (but its correct interpretation should be provided to the seeker).

However, these questions do not address the Father's criteria of selection of those whom He chooses to give to Christ which gives room for a view which would support one of the general views of aminianism or calvinism (if that is your unspoken purpose).

HankD

Some on this forum have interpreted passages in the book of Hebrews and the parable of the soils in Matthew 13 to support the doctrine of apostasy of true believers. My point is that such an interpetation makes Christ a liar.

They would not budge from their interpretation of apostasy in these scriptures but persisted in saying that our interpretation, which was consistent with these words of Christ, was a wrong interpretation. Therefore, I am simply confronting them with the predicament their interpretation of Hebrews 3 and Hebrews 6:4-6 and Matthew 13 puts them in with these words from Christ.

They have one of three options. They can continue to hold to intpretations of these passages that openly contradicts these words from Christ. They can recant their interpretations of these passages. They can reject the inspiration of the Scriptures and claim that the writer of Hebrews teaches contrary to Christ.

 

[Dr. Walter]

http://www.spurgeon.org/sermons/sum&sub.htm

Some believe that John 6:38-39 is simply God's revealed will or desire but is conditional upon man's will and may be overthrown by any man just as the ten commandments are his revealed will but are overthrown every day by men.

The point that I was trying to awkwardly make, was that verses 38-39 follow a statement of unconditioned absolute fact (v. 37) and therefore should be understood by Christ as expression of the Soveriegn will of God rather than merely the expressed revealed will or desire of God.

In other words, in verse 37 Jesus says this is the way it is and in verses 38-39 Jesus says the reason this is the way it is, is because it is God's absolute unchangable sovereign will in this matter and I have come to perform that Will.

Sorry for the clumsy wording.

 

[Dr. Walter]

1. No.
2. No.
3. Unclear, but the answer seems to be "yes".
4. No (but its correct interpretation should be provided to the seeker).

However, these questions do not address the Father's criteria of selection of those whom He chooses to give to Christ which gives room for a view which would support one of the general views of aminianism or calvinism (if that is your unspoken purpose).

HankD

The criteria of selection/election has been debated. They flee to one verse where the term "foreknowledge" is found and interpret it to mean that God chose us because He foreknew we would choose Him. Therefore since He forenew our choice He rubber stamped it by making those foreknown believes His choice.

However, that is not the meaning of "foreknowledge" when used in context of the redemptive purposes of God. Foreknowledge is based upon God's purpose or blueprint (Rom. 8:28 "according to His purpose"; Eph. 1:11 "In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:").

This interpretation of "foreknowledge" also directly contradicts other passages that define the design of election. Ephesians 1:4 defines election to be the cause of future acts of holiness rather than the consequence as their explanation of "foreknowledge" demands. Romans 9:11 defines election as uninfluenced by any kind of future decisions or acts of goodness or badness

(For the children being not yet born, neither having done any good or evil, that the purpose of God according to election might stand, not of works, but of him that calleth

Yet their definition of election based upon their definition of "foreknowledge" direction contradicts election as defined by Paul in Romans 9:11 as Paul denies election is determined by foreknown acts of men.

Their defintion of "foreknowledge" also contradicts passages of scripture which clearly define election to be strictly of "grace" or undeserved faor and yet the have God choosing those who He sees choose him.

Their definition of "foreknowledge" also contradicts John 17:2 with John 6:37, John 6:44 and Eph. 1:4. All these passages cleary establish that it is the Father who chooses (Eph. 1:4) and gives the chosen ones to the Son in order to give eternal life unto (Jn. 17:2) while not choosing to do wo with the rest:

As thou hast given him power over all flesh, that he should give eternal life to as many as thou hast given him. - Jn. 17:2

All that the Father giveth me shall come to me; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out....that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.
- Jn. 6:3739

No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me. - Jn. 6:44-45

Who does He have power over? ANSWER: "all flesh"

Who does He give eternal life to? ANSWER: "as many as thou hast given him"

Who comes to Christ? ANSWER: "ALL that the Father giveth me"

How many that come will be lost ANSWER: "of all...I should lose nothing"

Who can come? ANSWER: "no man can..exept the Father...draw him"

How many will be taught by the Father? ANSWER: "ALL taught of God"

How many taught will come to Christ? ANSWER: "EVERY MAN..cometh"

What is the consequence of being elected, given, and drawn by the Father? ANSWER: "every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day."

What is that John 6:40 is introduced by the very same words as verses 38-39 "This is the Father's will" showing that those in verse 40 who believe are those in verse 39 who were given to the Son that none should be lost.

Election by the Father is restricted to only those the Father gives to the Son in order for the Son to give eternal life unto (Jn. 17:2). Therefore ALL those given by the Father to the Son will come to the Son (Jn. 6:37) and not one shall be lost (Jn. 6:39) because they are the "every one" that believeth on him" (Jn. 6:40). The same ones given by the Father who effectuallly come to the Son in faith (Jn. 6:37-40) are those drawn by the Father (Jn. 6:44) because the very same person drawn "him" is the very same "him" that is raised (Jn. 6:44) demonstrating that "ALL" the Father teaches, "EVERY MAN" thus taught "cometh unto me" (Jn. 6:45).

Thus election is not based upon looking forward to see who would believe and who would not believe, but it is based upon God's eternal purpose of salvation to give unto the Son some of fallen depraved underserving mankind to Christ for the purpose to give eternal life (Jn. 17:2) so that might become holy (Eph. 1:4) and might come to Christ for eternal life while leaving the rest of mankind free to follow their FORESEEN rejection of God (Psa. 14:2-3; Rom. 3:10-11).

The LORD looked down from heaven upon the children of men, to see if there were any that did understand, and seek God.
3 They are all gone aside, they are all together become filthy: there is none that doeth good, no, not one. - Psa. 14:2-3

This is the passage from which Paul quotes in Romans 3:9-11 in order to prove there are no human beings within the human race that freely choose to seek God or do righteousness. This is what God foresaw "The LORD looked down from heavn to see." He saw NONE that would freely choose to seek Him and yet the Arminian definition of "foreknowledge" directly contradicts this thrice repeated statement by God (Psa. 14:2-3; 54:2-3; Rom. 3:9-11).

There is a clear cause and effect relationship in these verses (Jn. 17:2; 6:37-40; 44-45). The cause of coming to Christ is being GIVEN by the Father and the very term "GIVEN" in John 6:65 is used as a synonym of "draw" in John 6:44 and so the cause for coming is equally being DRAWN. All that are GIVEN come and all who are DRAWN come.
Eternal life is the EFFECT of the CAUSE of being GIVEN to the Son for that purpose (Jn. 17:2). The Father did not give "all flesh" to the Son for that purpose (Jn. 17:2). The effect of coming to the Son is first being GIVEN by the Father to the Son (Jn. 6:37). All who are willing to believe in him is the EFFECT of being first GIVEN to Him (Jn. 6:39-40).

 

[Bro K]

Matthew 13 relates to the Kingdom of Heaven NOT the Kingdom of God.
Hebrews 3 shows some of the contrast between law and grace.
Hebrews 6: 4-6 reaffirms John 6: 37-39.
John 10: 28-30 "And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. I and my Father are one."

 

[Dr. Walter]

Matthew 13 relates to the Kingdom of Heaven NOT the Kingdom of God.
Hebrews 3 shows some of the contrast between law and grace.
Hebrews 6: 4-6 reaffirms John 6: 37-39.
John 10: 28-30 "And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand. I and my Father are one."

I agree that Hebrews 6:4-6 reaffirms John 6:37-40. Hebrews 3 ought to be interpreted in the light of the writers own explanation given in Hebrews 4:1-2 - or those who rebelled against God never really believed the gospel although they heard and knew the gospel.

There is no distinction between the kingdom "of God" and the kingdom "of heaven" as both designations are used in the same parable by different gospel writers showing they are synonyms.

 

[npetreley]

They have one of three options. They can continue to hold to intpretations of these passages that openly contradicts these words from Christ. They can recant their interpretations of these passages. They can reject the inspiration of the Scriptures and claim that the writer of Hebrews teaches contrary to Christ.

Is it possible that not every book in the Bible is truly inspired? Is it also possible that some books not in the Bible are inspired?

Those are probably questions for another thread, though.

 

[npetreley]

However, that is not the meaning of "foreknowledge" when used in context of the redemptive purposes of God. Foreknowledge is based upon God's purpose or blueprint (Rom. 8:28 "according to His purpose"; Eph. 1:11 "In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:").

Exactly. And (fore)knowledge in the context of salvation is not "knowing in advance what you will do." Otherwise Jesus would have been spouting gibberish when he said, "Depart from me, I never knew you."

 

[Bro K]

The Kingdom of God is the the family of God and is enter into only by the new birth! Kingdom of Heaven is the kingdom which Christ will set up on his return to earth.

 

[Dr. Walter]

Is it possible that not every book in the Bible is truly inspired? Is it also possible that some books not in the Bible are inspired?

Those are probably questions for another thread, though.

Possible in whose mind?

 

[Winman]

Some on this forum have interpreted passages in the book of Hebrews and the parable of the soils in Matthew 13 to support the doctrine of apostasy of true believers. My point is that such an interpetation makes Christ a liar.

They would not budge from their interpretation of apostasy in these scriptures but persisted in saying that our interpretation, which was consistent with these words of Christ, was a wrong interpretation. Therefore, I am simply confronting them with the predicament their interpretation of Hebrews 3 and Hebrews 6:4-6 and Matthew 13 puts them in with these words from Christ.

They have one of three options. They can continue to hold to intpretations of these passages that openly contradicts these words from Christ. They can recant their interpretations of these passages. They can reject the inspiration of the Scriptures and claim that the writer of Hebrews teaches contrary to Christ.

I am the one who wrote about the parable of the sower and Hebrews 6, and I have said many, many times on this forum that I do not believe a person can lose their salvation, that I believe in preservation of the saints, not perseverance. So, either you are a very careless reader, or you intentionally misrepresented what I have written here.

Now, to answer your questions.

1. Will any of those given to the Son by the Father fail to come to Him?

No.

2. Will the Son lose any of those the Father gave him?

No, and this is exactly why I believe in preservation, not perserverance, because it is Jesus that keeps us, not ourselves.

3. Is Christ providing the expression of God's will in verses 38-39 as additional confirmation of what Christ states to be matter of fact conclusions in verse 37?

Jesus confirms that he will keep those who the Father has given to him, and will raise them up at the last day.

4. Should any interpretation of any passage in the Old or New Testament be considered correct that would openly contradict this explicit conclusion by Christ in John 6:37 and the explicit expression of God's will in verses 38-39?

Not really sure at what you are getting at, how about providing some of these OT scriptures you believe contradicts John 6:37.

 

[Winman]

Their defintion of "foreknowledge" also contradicts passages of scripture which clearly define election to be strictly of "grace" or undeserved faor and yet the have God choosing those who He sees choose him.

It is Calvinism that defines grace to be the unmerited favor of God, but the word grace simply means favor. And the scriptures say it is impossible to please God without faith. No faith, no grace.

Heb 11:6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

We have been speaking of those who come to God in John chapter 6. This verse shows that they must have faith to come to God. It also shows that God rewards those who diligently seek him. So, while we have no righteousness before God, God is still pleased if we have faith in him and seek him.

Jesus said men will not come to him that they might have life (John 5:40). This proves that a man is not regenerated or spiritually alive when he comes. It is only after coming to Jesus that a man is made spiritually alive. But Heb 11:6 shows it is impossible to come to God without faith, thus proving that unregenerate man has the ability to have faith in God and Christ.

John 20:31 But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.

You have to have faith before you receive life.

 

[Winman]

One of the problems with Calvinism is that it always defines grace as unmerited or undeserved, but I believe the scriptures show exactly the opposite. In most cases, especially in the OT, it speaks of God seeing something in a man (or woman) that causes him to show grace to that person. Some examples.

Gen 6:8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.

What did God see in Noah that caused him to show Noah grace? I believe the answer is faith.

Heb 11:7 By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith.

In a totally corrupt world, Noah was an exception. The scriptures say he was a just man and perfect in his generations and walked with God. Noah had faith in God when all about him did not.

Gen 50:4 And when the days of his mourning were past, Joseph spake unto the house of Pharaoh, saying, If now I have found grace in your eyes, speak, I pray you, in the ears of Pharaoh, saying,

In Gen 50:4 it speaks of Joseph finding grace in Pharaoh's eyes. Was this grace unmerited or undeserved? No. Joseph had earned his favor with Pharaoh by being a faithful steward.

1 Sam 20:3 And David sware moreover, and said, Thy father certainly knoweth that I have found grace in thine eyes; and he saith, Let not Jonathan know this, lest he be grieved: but truly as the LORD liveth, and as thy soul liveth, there is but a step between me and death.

Here the scriptures say David found grace in Jonathan's eyes. Was this grace unmerited or undeserved? No, David had been a faithful and loving friend to Jonathan, and promised to show favor on Jonathan's family when he became king.

So, grace is almost always shown as something someone sees in another and rewards. It is not shown to be unmerited or undeserved, but quite the opposite.

 

[Winman]

Exactly. And (fore)knowledge in the context of salvation is not "knowing in advance what you will do." Otherwise Jesus would have been spouting gibberish when he said, "Depart from me, I never knew you."

You couldn't be more wrong. When Jesus said "I never knew you" it actually confirms that his foreknowledge is knowing who will believe in advance. He is speaking of knowing a person in a personal sense here, as when he spoke of his believers being sheep.

John 10:14 I am the good shepherd, and know my sheep, and am known of mine.

But before Jesus said this, he also said his sheep know his voice.

John 10:3 To him the porter openeth; and the sheep hear his voice: and he calleth his own sheep by name, and leadeth them out.
4 And when he putteth forth his own sheep, he goeth before them, and the sheep follow him: for they know his voice.
5 And a stranger will they not follow, but will flee from him: for they know not the voice of strangers.

What is Jesus's voice? The word of God, the scriptures. And how can you know someone's voice if you have never heard it? So, obviously they had heard his voice before.

John 5:46 For had ye believed Moses, ye would have believed me: for he wrote of me.
47 But if ye believe not his writings, how shall ye believe my words?

The sheep who believed on Jesus were those Jews who had first heard Moses and the prophets (OT scripture). Those who truly believed the OT scriptures recognized Jesus as the promised Christ or Messiah as Jesus pointed out.

So, Jesus's sheep are clearly identified as those Jews who had heard, been taught, and learned of the Father.

Those who did not believe are identified as not being Jesus's sheep.

John 10:25 Jesus answered them, I told you, and ye believed not: the works that I do in my Father's name, they bear witness of me.
26 But ye believe not, because ye are not of my sheep, as I said unto you.

Look at the order shown here very carefully. What is stated first?

#1 "I told you" This is the word of God, faith comes by hearing and believing the word of God (Rom 10:17).

#2 "and ye believed not" These Jews heard the word of God, but they did not believe it.

#3 "because ye are not of my sheep". They are not Jesus's sheep because they did not believe.

Jesus's sheep are those that hear the word of God and believe it. And Jesus knows his sheep beforehand. But they also knew Jesus's voice when they heard it, because they had believed the OT scriptures when they heard them.

John 10:27 My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me:

What does Jesus mention first here? That his sheep hear his voice. After saying this he says he knows them. He knows those who will hear and believe him, and these are his sheep. The order is very important here. Notice in every instance he first mentions that his sheep know and hear his voice, and afterward says he knows them.

 

[npetreley]

Possible in whose mind?

I don't want to hijack the thread, but I'll mention a few things and if you want to start another thread, that's okay. I'm not in the mood to start one.

1. Jude's quote from Enoch implies that the book of Enoch (or the book wherever he read that quote, or even just the quote itself) is inspired. That implies that not all inspired written works are included in today's Bible.

2. Several very reputable and reliable men in our church history, including some of the church fathers, were of the opinion that not all the books were inspired. I don't want to argue about those particular men or those particular books here, but it seems to me that we're far more closed-minded about such things today. If they weren't afraid to question the inspiration at some time in their lives, even if they changed their minds, it shouldn't be considered blasphemy to question it in our times, either.

 

[Dr. Walter]

It is Calvinism that defines grace to be the unmerited favor of God, but the word grace simply means favor. And the scriptures say it is impossible to please God without faith. No faith, no grace.

No Sir, it is scriptures that define "grace" as unmerited favor and your order is wrong. It should be "no grace no faith" rather than "no faith no grace" as faith is of grace not vice versa (Rom. 4:16).

1. "justified freely by grace" - Rom. 3:24 - term translated "freely" means "without a cause." No cause found in the justified but rather in Christ.

2. "Therefore it is of faith, that it might be by grace; to the end the promise might be sure to all the seed;" - Rom. 4:16. What makes "the promise" "sure " is grace as it is not conditioned upon our obedience - Faith is a gift of God (Eph. 2:8; Phllip. 1:29) of which God is the author (Heb. 12:2) and therefore is a "work of God" (Jn. 6:29) that must be "given unto him" of the Father (Jn. 6:64-65).

3. "and if by grace it is no longer or works" - Rom. 11:6 - contrasted with what man does "works".

4. "Now to him that worketh is the reward not reckoned of grace, but of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth" - Grace is not the product of our work and neither is faith. If it were then God would be in our "debt."

Faith has no existence in a vacuum or by its self. "Faith is the substance of things hoped for." Faith is inseparable from the object that provides the basis for hope. Faith saves no one. Faith justifies no one. It is the object of faith that determines its validity for salvation or justification. Faith is not a substitute for righteousness. Faith that saves or justifies is always IN something that can save or justify. Faith is a "gift of God" (Philip. 1:29) and not all have been given faith (2 Thes.3:1) because faith is "of grace" not of us.