The Five Points of Calvinism

[FreeGrace]

I think there may be a difference in the way we understand believe also. I think many Christians believe it is some sort of a spiritual thing, yet John says that it is believe that Jesus is the Christ, the son of God. I don't think that is a spiritual thing per se.

It's quite possible that the schemer Judas viewed Jesus as a political leader who would lead the Jews against Roman slavery and oppression. Recall that many of that time thought the Messiah would come to deliver them from Roman imperialism.

He saw the miracles just as the Jewish leaders, who rejected Jesus as the Messiah. I don't see any reason to assume that he ever believed that Jesus was God's Son. Which John 20:31 specifically notes what is needed to have eternal life.

 

[chessman]

Yessiree. Everyone will be raised up at the last day.

U sure????? I am, but are u?
What about The Beast and The False Prophet.

 

[chessman]

I understand what it says.
"And this is eternal life, that they know youthe only true God, and JesusChristwhom you have sent." John 17:3 (ESV) …
"I in them and you in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that you sent me and loved them even as you loved me." John 17:23 (ESV)
The phrase, "know you," is found in both, and also the word, "sent," but that is where the differences end.

No, in my opinion that’s not where the comparisons ends. [I think you meant comparisons, not differences.]
There seem to me to be at least four (if not five/six) major knowledge elements (saving, Eternal Life, knowledge elements, and/or Holy Spirit revealed faiths) contained within John 17:3 that compare to verse 23:

And this is eternal life that they know:
1. you; (God, The Father, since that's who Jesus was praying to when He said “you”.)
2. God is the only true God (i.e. Monotheism)
3. Jesus Christ; (i.e. Jesus the Messiah of God, so you could probably even separate this one element into two separate elements. But to simplify, I’ll just keep it as #3)
4. whom you have sent; Jesus/Messiah was sent by God (not just "sent" as you claimed but sent by God (The Father). Note, you could probably even bring in element # 6 (the Holy Spirit) here based on other truths about how Jesus was ‘sent’, i.e. conceived via the Holy Spirit and how The Holy Spirit is needed to reveal this Truth to people. But, again, I will not overly complicate things here and just leave it as #4)

So let's create a comparison of these four elements to those contained in v23. Which BTW, Jesus’ prayer for they also (meaning the other’s beside the ‘close disciples’ stretches from verse 20 thru verse 23 ,so it’s not just verse 23 that should be compared to Eternal Life’s definition/elements given in v3. But again, I’m trying to keep this simple.

The reason I’m spending the time on this debatable point is that I think you have way over-simplified the comparison of v3 to v23 by picking out three single matching words, versus the actual matching thoughts of the two texts. But really, in a way, you’ve already recognized that at least these three words compare. But anyway, parsing out v23 I see the following underlined elements within Jesus’ prayer for they also:
"I in them and you in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that you sent me and loved them even as you loved me." V23

Let’s look at the most direct comparison of v3 to v23 first:
1. you sent me (v23) ---- Jesus Christ whom you have sent (v3)
You [The Father] sent me [Jesus Christ] compares almost word for word to the pray of Jesus; Jesus Christ whom you [The Father] have sent. And the thoughts do compare exactly, in my opinion. Don’t you agree? I have no idea why you wouldn’t agree that these two elements compare, given a fair comparison.

2. I in them ---- Jesus Christ
When Jesus prays to The Father that he be “in them” I see no distinguishable difference in that to element 3 from verse 3. Do you?

3. you in me --- whom you have sent;
Again, I see no real appreciable difference in this element of what it means to have Eternal Life, (to believe that The Son was sent by The Father) versus the prayer that they come to believe “you in me”. This element is contained within verse 3 and verse 23.

4. loved them even as you loved me ---- Christ (Christ, the Messiah of God, the One God loves and sent to humanity because of that Love for humanity). Once again, the prayer in v23 matches the definition given in v3. Actually, to me, the fact that Jesus prayed for The Father to love the other believers of the world "even as you loved me" should put an end to the OSAS debate right there on it's own merits. But that's just me and my opinion, I suppose.

That the revelation which leads to belief that Jesus truly is the Messiah, and the Son of God is something that is spiritual and revealed by the Father and I would add through the Holy Spirit.

I agree. Which is actually what got me to comparing verse 3 to the elements of v23 in the first place.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

I understand what you're saying. I just don't see that as definitive. I see Judas as a believer who fell away. To me it's hard to conceive that he witnessed all that Jesus did and said and concluded that He was not the Christ.

I don't see any indication that he ever genuinely believed, but all references in Scripture either indicate his internal desires, or his future betrayal.

For instance:

“Why was this ointment not sold for three hundred denarii and given to the poor?” He said this, not because he cared about the poor, but because he was a thief, and having charge of the moneybag he used to help himself to what was put into it." John 12:5-6 (ESV)

Judas was a man who only sought riches for himself, and sold Jesus out to the Chief Priests for money. It does say that Satan had entered in to him, but that doesn't seem to mean that Judas wasn't also responsible for his actions as his mission and Satan's merely aligned for different purposes.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

U sure????? I am, but are u?
What about The Beast and The False Prophet.

The dead in Christ rise first, then the rest. Also, not everyone believes the beast and false prophet are individual people.

 

[Butch5]

What makes you think that Judas believed John 20:31? Maybe for another thread, but where in Scripture is there any evidence that demons can possess believers? Since the Holy Spirit does indwell believers, it seems impossible for any demon to possess the body of one who already has the indwelling Holy Spirit in residence.

The Holy Spirit had not yet been given.

 

[Butch5]

I don't see any indication that he ever genuinely believed, but all references in Scripture either indicate his internal desires, or his future betrayal.

For instance:

“Why was this ointment not sold for three hundred denarii and given to the poor?” He said this, not because he cared about the poor, but because he was a thief, and having charge of the moneybag he used to help himself to what was put into it." John 12:5-6 (ESV)

Judas was a man who only sought riches for himself, and sold Jesus out to the Chief Priests for money. It does say that Satan had entered in to him, but that doesn't seem to mean that Judas wasn't also responsible for his actions as his mission and Satan's merely aligned for different purposes.

Yes, I see that. My point is that that could have happened over time. If Judas was simply power hunger or looking for money, I don't see why he would follow a man who was dirt poor and rejected by the powerful. I don't see what Judas had to gain by following Christ if he was looking for worldly things. I agree that in the end Judas had no interest in following Christ. I just find it hard to believe he was like that from the very beginning. If Judas had a choice in following Christ, I can't see why he would so if seeking worldly gain.

 

[FreeGrace]

U sure????? I am, but are u?
What about The Beast and The False Prophet.

They are exceptions, no different than Enoch and Elijah, who bypassed physical death, even though Scripture says this: "And inasmuch as it is appointed for men to die once and after this comes judgment". Heb 9:27 NASB

 

[FreeGrace]

The Holy Spirit had not yet been given.

Good point. Yet, there are no clear verses that he ever did believe that Jesus was the Son of God, a requirement for saving faith (Jn 20:31). He saw the miracles just as the Jewish religious leaders, who also rejected Jesus as Deity.

 

[Butch5]

Good point. Yet, there are no clear verses that he ever did believe that Jesus was the Son of God, a requirement for saving faith (Jn 20:31). He saw the miracles just as the Jewish religious leaders, who also rejected Jesus as Deity.

That's true, the Scriptures don't tell us either way. It's merely speculation on either side. My point as it involves Calvinism is that His being saved isn't relevant to John 6:39. Jesus was speaking of those who were given to Him.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

No, in my opinion that’s not where the comparisons ends. [I think you meant comparisons, not differences.]
There seem to me to be at least four (if not five/six) major knowledge elements (saving, Eternal Life, knowledge elements, and/or Holy Spirit revealed faiths) contained within John 17:3 that compare to verse 23:

And this is eternal life that they know:
1. you; (God, The Father, since that's who Jesus was praying to when He said “you”.)
2. God is the only true God (i.e. Monotheism)
3. Jesus Christ; (i.e. Jesus the Messiah of God, so you could probably even separate this one element into two separate elements. But to simplify, I’ll just keep it as #3)
4. whom you have sent; Jesus/Messiah was sent by God (not just "sent" as you claimed but sent by God (The Father). Note, you could probably even bring in element # 6 (the Holy Spirit) here based on other truths about how Jesus was ‘sent’, i.e. conceived via the Holy Spirit and how The Holy Spirit is needed to reveal this Truth to people. But, again, I will not overly complicate things here and just leave it as #4)

I'm a bit confused by this argument, as if a sentence was just an assortment of words that we can bold and take out of their context in order to make it apply to whoever or mean whatever we want. Yes, similar words and concepts are used, but that is not what is being communicated.

Let's break down your argument now.

So let's create a comparison of these four elements to those contained in v23. Which BTW, Jesus’ prayer for they also (meaning the other’s beside the ‘close disciples’ stretches from verse 20 thru verse 23 ,so it’s not just verse 23 that should be compared to Eternal Life’s definition/elements given in v3. But again, I’m trying to keep this simple.

The "they also," found in v.24 is applied to the close disciples, this we can learn from discourse analysis.

"The glory that you have given me I have given to them, that they may be one even as we are one, I in them and you in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that you sent me and loved them even as you loved me. Father, I desire that they also, whom you have given me, may be with me where I am, to see my glory that you have given me because you loved me before the foundation of the world." John 17:22-24 (ESV)

Note the two bolded sections, and what is being prayed for, the first one is a prayer for glory that corresponds to those who are to believe through their word. The second bolded section is expressing Jesus' desire that they also, that is his close disciples would see and partake in that glory. The "whom," directly identifies who the group is, and it is those given to Jesus by the Father.

The reason I’m spending the time on this debatable point is that I think you have way over-simplified the comparison of v3 to v23 by picking out three single matching words, versus the actual matching thoughts of the two texts. But really, in a way, you’ve already recognized that at least these three words compare. But anyway, parsing out v23 I see the following underlined elements within Jesus’ prayer for they also:
"I in them and you in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that you sent me and loved them even as you loved me." V23

Let’s look at the most direct comparison of v3 to v23 first:
1. you sent me (v23) ---- Jesus Christ whom you have sent (v3)
You [The Father] sent me [Jesus Christ] compares almost word for word to the pray of Jesus; Jesus Christ whom you [The Father]have sent. And the thoughts do compare exactly, in my opinion. Don’t you agree? I have no idea why you wouldn’t agree that these two elements compare, given a fair comparison.

2. I in them ---- Jesus Christ
When Jesus prays to The Father that he be “in them” I see no distinguishable difference in that to element 3 from verse 3. Do you?

I have no problem with pretty much all of this, though I don't think the integral part of eternal life is "knowing that God sent Jesus Christ," but rather knowing the one who Jesus was sent by. It's relational knowledge, not just information about something that happened. Though it is important to believe that Jesus Christ came in the flesh and is coming in the flesh.

3. you in me --- whom you have sent;
Again, I see no real appreciable difference in this element of what it means to have Eternal Life, (to believe that The Son was sent by The Father) versus the prayer that they come to believe “you in me”. This element is contained within verse 3 and verse 23.

Eternal life is not believing that Jesus was sent by the Father. Eternal life is knowing God and Jesus, let's look at the text.

"And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent." John 17:3 (ESV)

The bolded is the main thrust of Jesus' statement, that they know God and Jesus Christ. The second portion is not apart of the main idea, but provides additional information about Jesus in his relationship to the Father, that he was sent by him. This is integral in what is to be believed, but it, knowing that Jesus was sent by God is not "eternal life."

4. loved them even as you loved me ---- Christ (Christ, the Messiah of God, the One God loves and sent to humanity because of that Love for humanity). Once again, the prayer in v23 matches the definition given in v3. Actually, to me, the fact that Jesus prayed for The Father to love the other believers of the world "even as you loved me" should put an end to the OSAS debate right there on it's own merits. But that's just me and my opinion, I suppose.

It definitely does not end the debate, because the entire flow of what he is saying is not being properly analyzed. This text is traditionally not even used in the debate for OSAS, which also puzzles me that there is a great debate over what it means.

"I in them and you in me, that they may become perfectly one, so that the world may know that you sent me and loved them even as you loved me." John 17:23 (ESV)

The statements, "I in them and you in me, that they may become perfectly one," is a prayer spoken for believers, in which he is praying for unity with God and with each other. The "so that," is the Greek conjunction "hina," which is a subordinating conjunction which expresses purpose. The stated purpose of the unity of believers with each other and God is so "the world may know that you sent me and loved them even as you loved me." Our unity as a Church communicates God's love and desire for salvation, with regards to the rest of the world. The "may know," is the subjunctive verb ginoske, which this mood does not indicate an actuality but rather a desire. It doesn't say that the world will know, as we don't embrace universalism, but rather that it "may," or "might know." If a person of the world does realize that Jesus loves them and desires for them to be saved, and then acknowledges that Jesus is their Lord and Savior then they have eternal life. This verse does not indicate that eternal life is definitively given and will not be removed as it does in the first section.

Therefore I disagree with your assessment of this text.

I agree. Which is actually what got me to comparing verse 3 to the elements of v23 in the first place.

Please elaborate.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

Yes, I see that. My point is that that could have happened over time. If Judas was simply power hunger or looking for money, I don't see why he would follow a man who was dirt poor and rejected by the powerful. I don't see what Judas had to gain by following Christ if he was looking for worldly things. I agree that in the end Judas had no interest in following Christ. I just find it hard to believe he was like that from the very beginning. If Judas had a choice in following Christ, I can't see why he would so if seeking worldly gain.

Perhaps that is explained with the expectations that the disciples and indeed most Jews had about who the Messiah (Christ) would be. In that many of them were expecting him to overthrow the Roman occupation and liberate Israel.

Which is why they quarreled over who would sit on his right hand and left hand when he came into power. Many of them desired the power that came with being associated with a leader who could topple the Romans and put them in a position of power themselves. However, as it became increasingly obvious that Jesus was not setting out to accomplish this and become a military leader, Judas likely became disenfranchised with the movement. Whether or not he believed Jesus was truly the Messiah, or was a true disciple and follower of God never is indicated. I think arguing that he was a genuine believer who fell away is ultimately a losing battle, and there are better texts that express this point.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

Yes, Jesus said that to Peter. Here's how I see that. It had not really been revealed yet that Jesus was the Christ, remember Jesus told the demons not to make Him known. The passage I quoted from John was written many years, after Jesus' ministry to the Jews. As I said in an earlier post, I believe that every single person born is given some form of understanding by Christ, per John 1:9. So I don't believe there is anyone who is not in some way influenced by the Holy Spirit. When I said it's not a spiritual thing I didn't mean that there was no input from the Spirit at all. What I meant was that it is a real physical belief, not a sort mystical none material thing. Does that makes sense?

How then would you describe that God the Father revealed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God to him?

 

[Butch5]

Perhaps that is explained with the expectations that the disciples and indeed most Jews had about who the Messiah (Christ) would be. In that many of them were expecting him to overthrow the Roman occupation and liberate Israel.

Which is why they quarreled over who would sit on his right hand and left hand when he came into power. Many of them desired the power that came with being associated with a leader who could topple the Romans and put them in a position of power themselves. However, as it became increasingly obvious that Jesus was not setting out to accomplish this and become a military leader, Judas likely became disenfranchised with the movement. Whether or not he believed Jesus was truly the Messiah, or was a true disciple and follower of God never is indicated. I think arguing that he was a genuine believer who fell away is ultimately a losing battle, and there are better texts that express this point.

I agree, I think it's very possible that is what happened. I don't use the argument that Judas was saved in the OSAS debate. I do use the argument that he was one who was given to Christ. To me this is an open and shut case. I don't really see how it can logically be argued against.

 

[FreeGrace]

I agree, I think it's very possible that is what happened. I don't use the argument that Judas was saved in the OSAS debate. I do use the argument that he was one who was given to Christ. To me this is an open and shut case. I don't really see how it can logically be argued against.

I think the argument for OSAS is an "open and shut case" per Rom 6:23 and 11:29. The gift of God is eternal life, and God's gifts are irrevocable. That's not ambiguous.

 

[Butch5]

How then would you describe that God the Father revealed that Jesus was the Christ, the Son of the living God to him?

I think before Jesus was revealed it would be necessary for the Father to reveal Him. After He has been revealed there would be no need for the Father to have to reveal that information as it would be known.

 

[Butch5]

I think the argument for OSAS is an "open and shut case" per Rom 6:23 and 11:29. The gift of God is eternal life, and God's gifts are irrevocable. That's not ambiguous.

Not, the statements themselves are not ambiguous. It's about application. This statement isn't ambiguous either,

6 Jesus said to him, "I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me. (Joh 14:6 NKJ)

Suppose I said, no one living before or after Jesus could come to the Father and presented this passage.

 

[Doulos Iesou]

I think before Jesus was revealed it would be necessary for the Father to reveal Him. After He has been revealed there would be no need for the Father to have to reveal that information as it would be known.

Hi Butch5,

This still doesn't seem totally clear for me, can you elaborate a little more and perhaps provide a Scripture or two to support it?

Thanks!

 

[Butch5]

Hi Butch5,

This still doesn't seem totally clear for me, can you elaborate a little more and perhaps provide a Scripture or two to support it?

Thanks!

Sure,

23 Now there was a man in their synagogue with an unclean spirit. And he cried out,
24 saying, "Let us alone! What have we to do with You, Jesus of Nazareth? Did You come to destroy us? I know who You are-- the Holy One of God!"
25 But Jesus rebuked him, saying, "Be quiet, and come out of him!" (Mar 1:23-25 NKJ)

10 For He healed many, so that as many as had afflictions pressed about Him to touch Him.
11 And the unclean spirits, whenever they saw Him, fell down before Him and cried out, saying, "You are the Son of God."
12 But He sternly warned them that they should not make Him known. (Mar 3:10-12 NKJ)

14 Then the Pharisees went out and plotted against Him, how they might destroy Him.
15 But when Jesus knew it, He withdrew from there. And great multitudes1 followed Him, and He healed them all.
16 Yet He warned them not to make Him known,
17 that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by Isaiah the prophet, saying:
18 "Behold! My Servant whom I have chosen, My Beloved in whom My soul is well pleased! I will put My Spirit upon Him, And He will declare justice to the Gentiles. (Mat 12:14-18 NKJ)

The unclean spirits acknowledge Him as the Son of God and He rebuked them and told them to be quiet and not make Him known. Those too, who He healed He told them that they should not make Him known. I surmise from this that it was not yet time for Jesus to be revealed as the Son of God. If that is the case then it would seem to me that the only way anyone (other than the demons) could know that He was the Christ, the Son of God, is if He or the Father revealed it to them.

The statement that John made,

31 but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name. (Joh 20:31 NKJ)

Was written many years later, well after it had been revealed to the world who Jesus is. John in His gospel tells us that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. The Scriptures have given us the evidence to evaluate. Therefore, I don't believe that it is necessary today for God to reveal to people that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God. However, keep in mind that I am not denying the Holy Spirit's influence on every human being. In John 12:32 Jesus said, 'if I am lifted up I will draw all to me.'

Does that make it clearer?

 

[chessman]

The "they also," found in v.24 is applied to the close disciples, this we can learn from discourse analysis.

First off, I'm not sure if I know what you mean "it's applied to". Are you saying that "they also" is a reference to other believers or to the 'close disciples'? although actually, it doesn't matter to my point, one way or the other.

I thought you meant what you said earlier:

in v.24 he transitions back to "those whom you have given me," which the distinction is made with "they also."

Is it your position that verse 23 is a prayer still for the 'close disciples' or not? I thought when you said he transition back, that you had already observed that verse 23 was a prayer for other believers, not so much the 'close disciples'.

I just went with your original analysis and observations 1-9 and Obs 1-2 of them.
In other words, I thought you had already agreed that verse 20-23 was a prayer for the others (those besides the ‘close disciples’) so I limited my discussion to just what’s prayed for in verse 23.

You said verses 1-20 was a prayer for the ‘close disciples’, then a clear transition was made to being a prayer for other believers (21-23) and then a transition back in verse 24 to the 'close disciples'. Does He transition back to praying for the ‘close disciples’ now in verse 23 or is it still verse 24 that a transition back is being made?
Are you now thinking that verse 23 isn’t a prayer for the other believers?

It’s certainly not my intention to pull a words or phrases out of it’s context. I merely tried to clarify the several elements within the single sentence as best I could. {just as you are by bolding certain portions of the verse(s).

However, I thought you/I had already stipulated that 20-23 was a prayer about the 'other believers' and not the 'close disciples'.

It don’t see why you are even discussing 24 and beyond, frankly. Unless you think that somehow changes what you already stipulated in your original post with your observations laid out 1-9 and 1-2. (which BTW is a listing of words/phrases bolded and underlined taken from WITHIN the context of the passage, so I’m a little taken aback as to why you think other’s can’t do the same thing for clarifying purposes. I’m not taking anything out of context.

I just thought we’d already agreed on the broader context issues so I’m focused merely on v3 and v23.

The root of the issue/debate here between you/me is really quite simple.
Verse 3 defines Eternal Life. Clearly. I thought you had already agreed to this (not to mention that’s what the verse says).

[Frankly, I have no idea why you’d think the last part of the verse isn’t just as integral as the first part of it. But that doesn’t even matter right now.]

"And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent." John 17:3 (ESV)
The bolded is the main thrust of Jesus' statement, that they know God and Jesus Christ.

I don't think the integral part of eternal life is "knowing that God sent Jesus Christ," but rather knowing the one who Jesus was sent by.

And I thought you’d agreed that verse 23 is Jesus’ prayer NOT about the close disciples, but other believers. Do you agree with this or not? I thought you did, previously.
Okay, let’s just stipulate that it’s the ‘main thrust’ of Eternal Life and move on.
If yes (which is the correct answer, just read verse 23) then Jesus just prayed for Eternal Life for the other believers. Poof! That’s my point.

This text is traditionally not even used in the debate for OSAS,…

So?

Please elaborate.

I know you asked for elaboration, but I actually think simplification is called for. This is about as simple as I can ask:
Did Jesus pray for this ‘main thrust’ of Eternal Life for the other believers in verse 23 or not? Yes or no?

I am simply am comparing Jesus’ definition of Eternal Life given in verse 3 (I'll even just go with your definition of what's the main/bolded part within it, though I don't really agree with you there) to is prayer in verse 23. This is not that complicated.