But Jesus' statement at John 6:29 is that God's work is that you believe.
Again, God is the genesis of the work that He gives to man.
Your employer makes widgets. So the work of your employer is for you to make widgets. If your employer makes the widgets himself then he does not need you. Yet the employer himself does not make the widgets, he is the genesis, souce, provider of the work he has hired you to do.
In verse 27 Jesus said to work for the meat that endures unto everlasting life. THis settles the issue that one must work for everlasting life. After Jesus told them to work for everlasting life the people asked "What shall
we do, that
we might work the works of God?"
The people understood that Jesus was giving them a work to do, they asked what work of God is that WE MUST DO. And from verse 29 that work from God that Jesus gave them to do was the work of believing.
Again when the peole asked "What shall
we do, that
we might work the works of God?" Jesus did
NOT say "do no works else you would be earning your savlation" nor did Jesus say "do no works for God will do it for you" nor did Jesus say "do no works for I have done all the necessary works". These are typical responses one who believes in faith only would give to these people but not what Jesus said at all.
Heymickey80 said:
So can people follow the entire law? All Israel was commanded to do the entire law, it was incumbent upon them to do the entire law. Did they have the ability to do the entire law?
Yes, the jailer was commanded to believe...he was given the work of belief to do as Jesus said in Jn 2:27-29. The imperative means the jailer had both the ability and responsibility to believe. The jailer was not commanded to keep the law of Moses as fleshly Israel but commanded to obey Christ's NT law concerning belief, Jn 3:16; Jn 8:24; etc.
Heymickey80 said:
And yet the answer is never an answer of working to believe.
I won't accept an answer contradicting Paul's contrast of works and faith in Romans 9:32.
You said yourself the people answered Jesus ""
Well how do we work to believe?"
So you must have understood that Jesus was giving them a work to do.
In Rom 9:32 Paul is contrasting NT faith from the works of the OT law. NT faith is a work. In Rom 9 Paul was answering objections he knew the Jews would have about God cutting them off and grafting in the Gentiles, Rom 11. From Rom 9 to the beginning of Rom 10 the Jews were lost for they would not submit/obey the comandments of God, they would not beleive and confess with the mouth, that is, they would not call upon the name of the Lord/they would not obey the gospel.
Heymickey80 said:
Okay, so, you're going to take plainly the prior statement? "Don't work for the food that perishes ...", doesn't that contradict statements like those in 2 Thessalonians?
The statement of Jesus is a contrast, that if you're going to work for one, certainly you should work all the more for the food of eternal life. But as He goes on Jesus' statements shift away from work, from the capability of people to work for eternal life, and for their complete dependence on God for eternal life and not their own work: (cf John 6:39)
First, Jesus said to work for the meat that endures unto everlasting life. Again
that settles the issue. So it is IMPOSSIBLE for one to have eternal life without working for it.
Secondly, when Jesus said work not for the meat that perishes, does not mean they are to do nothing for the food they eat for that would contradict verses like 2 Thess 3:10.
Jn 6:27 is an elliptical not-but type statement as is 1 Cor 1:17 or 1 Pet 3:3,4 where emphasis is put one one thing over another but not to the exclusion of both. THey were to put more emphasis on the work that endures unto everlasting life over the work done for food but not to the complete exclusion of working for food. Just as in 1 Pete 3:3,4 wives were to put more emphasis on the inward adorning over the outward but not to the complete exclusion of outward adroning..Peter was not literally telling the wives to be unclothed in 1 Pet 3:3.
HeyMickey80 said:
As I've never asserted that God's believing for them -- only that God changes hearts so that they believe -- objecting to a claim I never made doesn't really fall on me.
So for all those that are lost due to unbelief are lost due to
God's fault for failing to change their heart so they could believe. God did not change their hearts thereby making them unblievers then God punishes them for the unbelievers that He made them to be. Of couse this is not the way it is. In Acts 16 the jailer was commanded to believe so he had the ability within himself to believe so if he did not believe that is his faulta dn failure and not God's fault for failing to change his heart where he could then believe. Rom 10:17 says faith comes by hearing the world of God, fiath does not come miraculously, directly from God apart from man hearing His word being preached. When man hears God's word then it is encumbant upon man to believe in his heart and not encumbant upon God to first enable man to believe.
Heymickey80 said:
Belief is not as a work, according to Paul in Romans 9:32. Why would I contradict a direct statement of an Apostle in order to establish a theology?
Believing is a work, 1 Thess 1:3; Gal 5:6 for it is dead if it is not a work. Again, in Rom 9:32 Paul is contrasting NT faith from works of the OT law.
