Understanding God’s election

[studier]

There's no such animal in scripture as "[imperfectly] moral people". There are only two biblical categories of people in the world: The righteous (those perfectly moral in Christ) and the unrighteous who totally miss the [moral] mark, since they are outside of Christ.

And for your info, the Gospel that is only revealed in Special Revelation is not revealed through Natural Revelation in the Sun, Moon, Stars, Constellations or other sundry celestial bodies. If the Message of Life has been revealed in Natural Revelation, there would be no need for the Great Commission.

This is repetitive.

I'm willing to use different terminology. There were men living righteously before Christ arrived Luke1:5; Phil3:6. If you'd like to call them imperfectly righteous or something similar, please feel free. Phil3:6 is speaking of Paul who also explained life under law living in conflict with the flesh, so he viewed himself as living righteously and in conflict with the flesh. I don't think either of us would call this perfect righteousness, correct?

Yes, there are Christians and non-Christians. Then, among the non-Christians there are those who reject God and those who do not reject God. So, now we have at least 3 biblical groups of people, so we're already past the "only two" you speak of.

Yes, we classify revelation for convenience, and I know and understand the terminology. The Word just says what is revealed and at times, when.

 

[PaulThomson]

All the elect were given to Jesus in eternity before the beginning of time (2Tim 1:9; Tit 1:2). This last passage says that the hope of eternal life was promised before the beginning of time! But promised to whom!? None of us were around before the beginning of time! So, to whom was the promise made? It could only be the Eternal Son of God who is Federal Head of God's people. This is why the New Covenant is called the "eternal" covenant!

Also, if anyone interprets Jn 17:2 in such a narrow sense as to limit the number given to Jesus as being at most only first century disciples (perhaps up to the 500 to whom Christ appeared after his resurrection), then that is the complete number that was saved in this world, for the text clearly that the Son will give eternal life to all the Father has given to Him.

Furthermore, your creative, biased interpretation arbitrarily omits the Second Sheepfold spoken of in v.20. Why would Jesus even mention those if they, too, weren't given to Him!? Jesus always had "the other sheep" in mind (see Jn 10 the Good Shepherd Discourse). They weren't just a mere afterthought, most especially because the Father covenanted with the Son in eternity to make him the Lord and Savior of the Gentile nations (thus fulfilling God's promise to Abraham)-- to make Him the Light of all the nations (the world), cf. Isa 46). Paul very likely had this OT passage, and/or other very similar ones in mind, when he wrote about the eternal life that was promised in Tit 1:2.

And you also conveniently forget that NO ONE CAN COME to the Son unless the Father draws them (Jn 6), which means no sinner was ever saved apart from the effectual saving grace of the Father. The only people who truly seek Christ are those the Father effectually draws to Him.

These matters have all been explained to you several times before. I am not going to bother trying to explain these things to you again, as you refuse to acknowledge any any verses anywhere in the Bible could possibly mean anything other than LOUPI.

 

[studier]

Good point, Rufus, and John 8:43, 47, 1 Co 2:14, confirms that:

[Jhn 8:43, 47 KJV]
43 Why do ye not understand my speech? [even] because ye cannot hear my word. ...
47 He that is of God heareth God's words: ye therefore hear [them] not, because ye are not of God.

[1Co 2:14 KJV]
14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know [them], because they are spiritually discerned.

Let's fill in at least a few blanks here to see how Jesus categorizes these Judeans who would later crucify Him. It's quite clear that He was not talking to just any man:

NKJ John8:44-46:​

44 "You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you want to do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and does not stand in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaks a lie, he speaks from his own resources, for he is a liar and the father of it.​

45 "But because I tell the truth, you do not believe Me.​

46 "Which of you convicts Me of sin? And if I tell the truth, why do you not believe Me?​

Then let's back up a bit and see the power of the revelation and testimony of God's Son:

NKJ John8:25-32:​

25 Then they said to Him, "Who are You?" And Jesus said to them, "Just what I have been saying to you from the beginning.​

26 "I have many things to say and to judge concerning you, but He who sent Me is true; and I speak to the world those things which I heard from Him."​

27 They did not understand that He spoke to them of the Father.​

28 Then Jesus said to them, "When you lift up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am He, and that I do nothing of Myself; but as My Father taught Me, I speak these things.​

29 "And He who sent Me is with Me. The Father has not left Me alone, for I always do those things that please Him."​

30 As He spoke these words, many believed in Him.​

31 Then Jesus said to those Jews who believed Him, "If you abide in My word, you are My disciples indeed.​

32 "And you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."​

​

John8:43 & John8:47 aren't much of a story on their own no matter who gives you ribbons for your post.

If you're serious about 1Cor2:14 intently consider context at minimum. I say at minimum because there are quite a few things to dig into here, including understanding the specific words for "know" and "receive". As a start:

1. Paul stops talking about the basic Gospel in 1Cor2:5
2. Paul says he is speaking a certain wisdom to mature [Christians] 1Cor2:6-7
3. Paul says if the rulers of that age knew these things they wouldn't have crucified the Lord of Glory 1Cor2:8
4. Paul is speaking about deep things the Spirit has revealed to him that God has prepared for those who love Him 1Cor2:9-10
5. Paul is speaking of things God has freely given to them 1Cor2:12
6. Paul is speaking about things he couldn't even give to baby Christians 1Cor3:1
7. In context the soulish (psuchikos) (translated "natural") man assuredly cannot understand advanced spiritual teaching
   1. Paul is not talking about the basic Gospel but about the deeper things he had come to understand by the Spirit
   2. Paul can only speak to mature Christians about these things
   3. I have one article re: psuchikos that says it was coined by Aristotle and came to be referring to a Greek man at his best - the man who philosophy commends
      1. If this is accurate then Paul is saying these deep things of God the Spirit has taught him were not known by the rulers of the age, are not welcomed by the best of the Greeks, cannot be taught to baby Christians, and can only be spoken about to mature Christians.
         1. So, Paul brackets the best of the Jews and the best of the Greeks and says they could not ever know all of what the Spirit had revealed to him.
   4. The Text does not seem to speak lightly about the psuchikos:
      1. Read James3:15 and note this word is in the middle of "earthly" and "demonic"
      2. Read Jude and know that this word is used in Jude1:19 and is part of all the horrendous description of those who they needed to fight against for the Faith.

This is really not about an unbeliever's inability to understand and accept the basics of the Gospel. Paul dealt with that in 1:17-2:5 and said he declared [to unbelievers in Corinth] the testimony from God, Christ crucified, and in demonstrations of the Spirit and power so their faith would be in God's power. He's writing to those who believed because of those things. Paul is far beyond that and essentially saying no one but mature Christians can understand all that he has been taught by the Spirit [that is now in the full scope of the NT Writings].

You Christians should really move on from this 1Cor2:14 matter. It's way deeper than you're treating it. If anything, it's saying the man committed to the soul, the basic earthly part of life, no matter his status, never could have known or discovered anything near the depth of what Paul had learned and was teaching to mature Christians while trying to get baby Christians to stop the fleshliness so they could grow up sufficiently in Christ in Spirit to get taught the depths of what God has prepared for those who love Him.

 

[GWH]

It is part and parcel the very thing free willers deny... some of whom have no idea who the natural man
is, and show this by ascribing to him characteristics and abilities only the spiritual man possesses.

At the risk of praising God's love ad nauseum (cf. #10,428 on p.522), I will say yet again that MFWists are no more "natural"
than those who choose to be anti-MFWism, but they glorify God for enabling all sinners to seek salvation and find it (being drawn by His loving-kindness), because God does not hide it from anyone--and the evidence of finding it or being "spiritual" is manifesting or reflecting divine love to everyone, especially or beginning with fellow believers by striving for spiritual unity and agreement regarding the essential Gospel.

 

[Pilgrimshope]

Not much I can do for you. IMO you're importing language "true spiritual faith of the heart" into the Text. Everyone can believe. The issue is what they choose to believe and Who they choose to believe.

ESV John20:29-31 Jesus said to him, "Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed." 30 Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in this book; 31 but these are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.

This entire document written by John of signs Jesus did was written so unbelieving men who have not seen Jesus could believe that Jesus is [YWHW''] Christ, the Son of God and thereby have eternal life.

Some will choose to believe and some will not. In the end of it all, it's really that simple.

Receiving "true spiritual faith of the heart" so a man can believe is made up and a myth.

amen but

The whole message of the gospel they were sent to preach is meant so people can hear it and then believe or not.

“For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him,

for, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in?

And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? And how can anyone preach unless they are sent?

As it is written: “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!” But not all the Israelites accepted the good news. For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed our message?” Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭10:12-17

Hearing The witness of the gospel he sent to all people ( our New Testament in the Bible ) creates faith in those who listen to it and dont reject it as fallacy and fable but as truth and salvation

 

[PaulThomson]

I don't know New Testament Greek. Certainly in English Jesus seems quite clearly to be saying that the reason His hearers did not believe was that they were not of His sheep. The next words support this view:

“"My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me.” (Joh 10:27 NKJV)

Perhaps someone here who does know NT Greek can tell us whether the Greek of John 10:26 could possibly mean "You are not of my sheep. [I deduce this] because you do not believe in Me."

Please allow me to backtrack and recant the line of argument I have taken from here in this thread. It is clear to me that I made a scribal error and inverted two clauses, putting them in the wrong order and then proceeded to build a case based on the unbiblical inverted sentence. My bad. I took a shortcut of not including the Greek text and accidentally wandered off into the weeds.

Please allow me to go back to this post here and correct my error.


Jhn 10:24
ἐκύκλωσαν (Surrounded, aorist active indicative) οὖν (therefore) αὐτὸν (to him) οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι (the Jews) καὶ (and) ἔλεγον (said, aorist active indicative) αὐτῷ (to him) Ἕως πότε (how long) τὴν ψυχὴν (the breath) ἡμῶν (of us) αἴρεις (you are taking away, present active indicative)? εἰ (if) σὺ (you) εἶ (are) ὁ Χριστός (the Christ) εἰπὲ (tell, aorist active imperative) ἡμῖν (us) παρρησίᾳ (lit. in an all utterance, i.e. not holding anything back).
So, the Jews surrounded Him and said to Him, "How long are you keeping us in suspense? if you are the Christ tell us in no uncertain terms.

Jhn 10:25
ἀπεκρίθη (answering, aorist active participle) αὐτοῖς (to them) ὁ Ἰησοῦς (the Jesus) Εἶπον (I told, aorist active indicative) ὑμῖν (you) καὶ (and) οὐ (you) πιστεύετε (do not believe, present active indicative)· τὰ ἔργα (the works) ἃ (which) ἐγὼ (I, emphatic) ποιῶ (am doing, present active indicative) ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι (in the name) τοῦ πατρός (of the Father) μου (of me) ταῦτα (these) μαρτυρεῖ (are testifying, present active indicative) περὶ ἐμοῦ (upon of me).
Jesus in response said to them, " I told you and you do not believe. The works that I am doing in my Father's name, these are testifying on my behalf.

Jhn 10:26
ἀλλ᾽ (But) ὑμεῖς (you pl.) οὐ (not) πιστεύετε (are believing, present active indicative) οὐ (not) γὰρ (for) ἐστὲ (you are) ἐκ τῶν προβάτων (out of the sheep) τῶν ἐμῶν (the of me sheep) καθὼς (just as) εἶπον (I told, aorist active indicative) ὑμῖν (you).
But you are not believing, because you are not out of my sheep. (i.e members of my flock).

Jhn 10:27
τὰ πρόβατα (The sheep) τὰ ἐμὰ (the of me sheep) τῆς φωνῆς (the voice) μου (of me) ἀκούει, (are listening to) κἀγὼ (and I) γινώσκω (am knowing experientially, present active indicative) αὐτά (them) καὶ (and) ἀκολουθοῦσίν (they are following, present active indicative) μοι (me)
My sheep are listening to My voice and I have a meaningful relationship with them and they are following Me.

You question was, "Perhaps someone here who does know NT Greek can tell us whether the Greek of John 10:26 could possibly mean "You are not of my sheep. [I deduce this] because you do not believe in Me."

So, no. It can't mean that. I inadvertently inverted the clauses and went off on a false tangent.

Let's look at what John 10:26 does actually say.
But you are not believing, because you are not out of my sheep (i.e you are not members of my flock).

Does this mean that
1. only those who are already Jesus' sheep can start to believe in Him? Or does it allow for the idea that
2. those who start to believe in Him become His sheep, and one cannot become one of His sheep without believing in Him and one cannot remain as one of His sheep without continuing to believe in Him? Which is why Jesus knows they are not yet His sheep, because they are not yet believing in Him.

If Jesus had meant to communicate the first option, He would have used the aorist form of the verb believe and said,
"But you did not believe (ἐπιστεύσατε, episteusate, as in Matt. 21:32) because you are not one of my sheep."

But He uses the present tense (πιστεύετε, pisteuete), But you are not believing, because you are not out of my sheep.

The evidence that one has become one of Jesus' sheep is that they are now believing in Him. If someone is not presently believing in Him, it is evident that they are not presently His sheep. However, should they start to believe in Him, they will become His sheep. And if they continue to believ in Him, they will continue to be His sheep. This is what the Greek of John 10:26 means.

 

[studier]

amen but

The whole message of the gospel they were sent to preach is meant so people can hear it and then believe or not.

“For there is no difference between Jew and Gentile—the same Lord is Lord of all and richly blesses all who call on him,

for, “Everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

How, then, can they call on the one they have not believed in?

And how can they believe in the one of whom they have not heard? And how can they hear without someone preaching to them? And how can anyone preach unless they are sent?

As it is written: “How beautiful are the feet of those who bring good news!” But not all the Israelites accepted the good news. For Isaiah says, “Lord, who has believed our message?” Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ.”
‭‭Romans‬ ‭10:12-17

Hearing The witness of the gospel he sent to all people ( our New Testament in the Bible ) creates faith in those who listen to it and dont reject it as fallacy and fable but as truth and salvation

Agree with another refining "but" back to you. For various reasons I don't think I'd use "creates faith". Just thinking out loud: Men are ultimately being commanded to believe something (1John3:23) so they have the faculty of faith, and they believe many things. Faith or belief already exists. What God in His grace has provided is the content to believe. God provides revelation.

This specific belief - this specific faith - ("the faith") which is the language of Romans10:17 referring back first to Romans10:16 is belief and obedience to God's spoken message. The language is a simple preposition which at its base means "from". So, "the belief/faith [results] from God's message ("the thing/report/news heard").

Because of all the confusion and disagreement re: faith and what it is and where it comes from and whether or not a man can simply believe/do what he's told to do by God, I'm simply trying to say that we need to be very tight with the language. We are too good at creating rabbit trails from a word here and there.

I could see using "creates" because God created the message and the entire salvation plan and process contained in the message, so He did create what to believe, so He did create THE FAITH, and He did create the faculty of faith/belief, so in effect He did create it all, but this is all underlying Rom10 but is not really the language of Rom10.

 

[Rufus]

This is repetitive.

I'm willing to use different terminology. There were men living righteously before Christ arrived Luke1:5; Phil3:6. If you'd like to call them imperfectly righteous or something similar, please feel free. Phil3:6 is speaking of Paul who also explained life under law living in conflict with the flesh, so he viewed himself as living righteously and in conflict with the flesh. I don't think either of us would call this perfect righteousness, correct?

Yes, there are Christians and non-Christians. Then, among the non-Christians there are those who reject God and those who do not reject [their version of God but do reject the God of the bible who reveals himself through the Gospel.] So, now we have at least 3 biblical groups of people, so we're already past the "only two" you speak of.

Yes, we classify revelation for convenience, and I know and understand the terminology. The Word just says what is revealed and at times, when.

FTFY what is bolded in red. There's still only two kinds of people in the world. Those in Christ (the righteous) and those outside of Christ (unrighteous). Any other category is a figment of your overworked imagination. I suppose next you'll try to con us into believing that there are also three different post-death destinations for each group: Heaven, Hell and....??? Purgatory, maybe?

Also, the men who lived "righteously before Christ arrived" were true OT saints of God since they by faith looked forward to the coming Messiah. Therefore, they were righteous in God's eyes due to the imputed righteousness of Christ. Legalistic righteousness counts for nothing in the eyes of God. Law-keeping can make no one righteous. You're really desperate once you start appealing to the Law as the basis for any sinner's righteousness, cf. Phil 3:9. Even the Law itself testifies that "the righteous shall live by faith" (Hab 2:4), for personal righteousness does not come through the Law (Gal 2:16).

 

[Rufus]

Please allow me to backtrack and recant the line of argument I have taken from here in this thread. It is clear to me that I made a scribal error and inverted two clauses, putting them in the wrong order and then proceeded to build a case based on the unbiblical inverted sentence. My bad. I took a shortcut of not including the Greek text and accidentally wandered off into the weeds.

Please allow me to go back to this post here and correct my error.


Jhn 10:24
ἐκύκλωσαν (Surrounded, aorist active indicative) οὖν (therefore) αὐτὸν (to him) οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι (the Jews) καὶ (and) ἔλεγον (said, aorist active indicative) αὐτῷ (to him) Ἕως πότε (how long) τὴν ψυχὴν (the breath) ἡμῶν (of us) αἴρεις (you are taking away, present active indicative)? εἰ (if) σὺ (you) εἶ (are) ὁ Χριστός (the Christ) εἰπὲ (tell, aorist active imperative) ἡμῖν (us) παρρησίᾳ (lit. in an all utterance, i.e. not holding anything back).
So, the Jews surrounded Him and said to Him, "How long are you keeping us in suspense? if you are the Christ tell us in no uncertain terms.

Jhn 10:25
ἀπεκρίθη (answering, aorist active participle) αὐτοῖς (to them) ὁ Ἰησοῦς (the Jesus) Εἶπον (I told, aorist active indicative) ὑμῖν (you) καὶ (and) οὐ (you) πιστεύετε (do not believe, present active indicative)· τὰ ἔργα (the works) ἃ (which) ἐγὼ (I, emphatic) ποιῶ (am doing, present active indicative) ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι (in the name) τοῦ πατρός (of the Father) μου (of me) ταῦτα (these) μαρτυρεῖ (are testifying, present active indicative) περὶ ἐμοῦ (upon of me).
Jesus in response said to them, " I told you and you do not believe. The works that I am doing in my Father's name, these are testifying on my behalf.

Jhn 10:26
ἀλλ᾽ (But) ὑμεῖς (you pl.) οὐ (not) πιστεύετε (are believing, present active indicative) οὐ (not) γὰρ (for) ἐστὲ (you are) ἐκ τῶν προβάτων (out of the sheep) τῶν ἐμῶν (the of me sheep) καθὼς (just as) εἶπον (I told, aorist active indicative) ὑμῖν (you).
But you are not believing, because you are not out of my sheep. (i.e members of my flock).

Jhn 10:27
τὰ πρόβατα (The sheep) τὰ ἐμὰ (the of me sheep) τῆς φωνῆς (the voice) μου (of me) ἀκούει, (are listening to) κἀγὼ (and I) γινώσκω (am knowing experientially, present active indicative) αὐτά (them) καὶ (and) ἀκολουθοῦσίν (they are following, present active indicative) μοι (me)
My sheep are listening to My voice and I have a meaningful relationship with them and they are following Me.

You question was, "Perhaps someone here who does know NT Greek can tell us whether the Greek of John 10:26 could possibly mean "You are not of my sheep. [I deduce this] because you do not believe in Me."

So, no. It can't mean that. I inadvertently inverted the clauses and went off on a false tangent.

Let's look at what John 10:26 does actually say.
But you are not believing, because you are not out of my sheep (i.e you are not members of my flock).

Does this mean that
1. only those who are already Jesus' sheep can start to believe in Him? Or does it allow for the idea that
2. those who start to believe in Him become His sheep, and one cannot become one of His sheep without believing in Him and one cannot remain as one of His sheep without continuing to believe in Him? Which is why Jesus knows they are not yet His sheep, because they are not yet believing in Him.

If Jesus had meant to communicate the first option, He would have used the aorist form of the verb believe and said,
"But you did not believe (ἐπιστεύσατε, episteusate, as in Matt. 21:32) because you are not one of my sheep."

But He uses the present tense (πιστεύετε, pisteuete), But you are not believing, because you are not out of my sheep.

The evidence that one has become one of Jesus' sheep is that they are now believing in Him. If someone is not presently believing in Him, it is evident that they are not presently His sheep. However, should they start to believe in Him, they will become His sheep. And if they continue to believ in Him, they will continue to be His sheep. This is what the Greek of John 10:26 means.

Another screw-up by Jesus, heh? He just didn't know how to express himself clearly, did he? The Pharisees in Jn 8 were not of Jesus' flock of sheep precisely because they did not belong to God but belonged to the devil. As children of the evil one they could not believe Jesus (Jn 8:43). The devil had blinded their minds, as he he does with all unbelievers, so that they CANNOT see the light of the Gospel (2Cor 4:4).

Furthermore, your argument for Jn 10:26 is exceedingly lame. Jesus rightfully used the present tense because he was speaking not of people who once upon a time made a profession of faith in the past (as if that counts for anything), but He spoke of actual believers in the here and now. The ones who ARE PRESENTLY his sheep hear his voice, follow the Shepherd and obey him. Just because someone professed Christ in the past does not automatically translate into they're still believers presently. Jesus knew and understood this. You, though...not so much.

 

[studier]

FTFY what is bolded in red.

An example of why we don't go to certain repair shops especially ones that have tulips on the service counters.

You're really desperate once you start appealing to the Law as the basis for any sinner's righteousness, cf. Phil 3:9.

Paul under inspiration wrote Philippians.

Luke under inspiration wrote Luke (Luke1:5-6 since I missed v.6).

So, a customary response; your argument is not with me.

Believing Israel (the Remnant) + unbelieving Israel + Gentiles at various levels of having God's Law working in them - some who had rejected knowledge of God and some who hadn't = at least 3-4 groups of people and many degrees of variation within the themes.

Today, in Christ + not in Christ so I'd agree 2 major categories also with variations in the themes such as: not in Christ comprised of those who haven't rejected knowledge of God + those who have. Then: in Christ babes through mature.

Not too difficult to glean this from Scripture.

 

[Rufus]

An example of why we don't go to certain repair shops especially ones that have tulips on the service counters.



Paul under inspiration wrote Philippians.

Luke under inspiration wrote Luke (Luke1:5-6 since I missed v.6).

So, a customary response; your argument is not with me.

Believing Israel (the Remnant) + unbelieving Israel + Gentiles at various levels of having God's Law working in them - some who had rejected knowledge of God and some who hadn't = at least 3-4 groups of people and many degrees of variation within the themes.

Today, in Christ + not in Christ so I'd agree 2 major categories also with variations in the themes such as: not in Christ comprised of those who haven't rejected knowledge of God + those who have. Then: in Christ babes through mature.

Not too difficult to glean this from Scripture.

Of course, Zechariah and Anna were blameless and, and like David and other Psalmists loved God, loved his Law and essentially and substantially obeyed it precisely because they had faith in the coming Messiah. What makes you think for a nanosecond that they had this godly disposition of heart apart from God's saving grace? Don't you know that man's ways are NOT in himself!? That the Lord directs man's steps!?

Prov 20:24
24 Man's steps are ordained by the Lord,
How then can man understand his way?
NASB

Of course, you and other FWs think you understand all God's ways. In your arrogance and pride you FWs believe that you have God all figured out. All you naive FWs cry "FOUL! FOUL! FOUL! This text cannot be true since the King of kings and Lord of lords would be FORCING his will upon his subjects." Well, eat your self-deceived hearts out! Here are a few more confirming passages:

Prov 16:9
9 The mind of man plans his way,
But the Lord directs his steps.
NASB

And,

Prov 16:1
6 The plans of the heart belong to man,
But the answer of the tongue is from the Lord.
NASB

And,

Jer 10:23
23 I know, O Lord, that the way of man is not in himself,
that it is not in man who walks to direct his steps.
ESV

And you totally take Phil 3:6 out of context. Paul is comparing his former way of life to the Judaizers of his day who were corrupting and perverting the Gospel. And he does this by listing his sevenfold Jewish pedigree to show that the Judaizers of his day have nothing over him. His purpose in doing this is to teach the Philippians just how far he has come since then and just how far removed from the Judaizers he has become since his conversion. Paul, prior to his conversion, was every bit as self-deceived and ignorant as the Judaizers who were teaching legalism. Read the larger context of chapter 3 for crying out loud. You are going to boast in the obvious that what Paul wrote was inspired scripture? Well, so was Gal 2:16 and the rest of chapter 3 in Philippians. Paul did not contradict himself in Phil 3:6 but was merely reflecting back on his pre-conversion, and how no Jew was more Jewish than he was! Yet, now after his conversion, he counts all things as lost (including his "blameless law-keeping days of old) for the sake of gaining Christ, which certainly was not his attitude or disposition of heart prior to his encounter with the living Christ on the road to Damascus.

 

[studier]

Of course, Zechariah and Anna were blameless and, and like David and other Psalmists loved God, loved his Law and essentially and substantially obeyed it precisely because they had faith in the coming Messiah. What makes you think for a nanosecond that they had this godly disposition of heart apart from God's saving grace? Don't you know that man's ways are NOT in himself!? That the Lord directs man's steps!?

Prov 20:24
24 Man's steps are ordained by the Lord,
How then can man understand his way?
NASB

Firstly, you left the previous discussion and segued into another. So, I assume you accept how I classified mankind as opposed to how you did. Agreement is good.

I think we are pretty much agreed that there was faith in Israel pre-Christ and that there was a Remnant of such Jews in Israel when Messiah arrived.

We are disagreed about God's saving grace because I know where you go with this. Yet, I'm not opposed to the concept of God's grace involved in mankind throughout history and man having no way to Him if He had not chosen to reveal Himself in history and work as He did and still does.

I agree that the interplay between men and God is amazing. I also know there is more to it than listing one verse from Proverbs.

I'll pass on your vitriol against those who view the Text different than you, so I'm skipping the next section. I've played the game and have seen vividly posted how far you'll descend.

Paul was clear in Phil3:6 what he said was his life in Judaism. Just as Luke was clear in regard to John's parents. As discussed, there was faith in Israel when Messiah came. Paul's expressed humility after our Lord spoke to him and blinded him for a while ultimately seems about as strong as was his zeal for his faith pre-Faith.

 

[PaulThomson]

Furthermore, your argument for Jn 10:26 is exceedingly lame. Jesus rightfully used the present tense because he was speaking not of people who once upon a time made a profession of faith in the past (as if that counts for anything), but He spoke of actual believers in the here and now. The ones who ARE PRESENTLY his sheep hear his voice, follow the Shepherd and obey him. Just because someone professed Christ in the past does not automatically translate into they're still believers presently. Jesus knew and understood this. You, though...not so much.

I agree. Jesus "spoke of actual believers in the here and now" as being His sheep, not people who may have made a profession or actually believed in God in the past, and not those who were not believing in God yet but may believe in God and Christ the future. We agree.

 

[studier]

Please allow me to backtrack and recant the line of argument I have taken from here in this thread. It is clear to me that I made a scribal error and inverted two clauses, putting them in the wrong order and then proceeded to build a case based on the unbiblical inverted sentence. My bad. I took a shortcut of not including the Greek text and accidentally wandered off into the weeds.

Please allow me to go back to this post here and correct my error.


Jhn 10:24
ἐκύκλωσαν (Surrounded, aorist active indicative) οὖν (therefore) αὐτὸν (to him) οἱ Ἰουδαῖοι (the Jews) καὶ (and) ἔλεγον (said, aorist active indicative) αὐτῷ (to him) Ἕως πότε (how long) τὴν ψυχὴν (the breath) ἡμῶν (of us) αἴρεις (you are taking away, present active indicative)? εἰ (if) σὺ (you) εἶ (are) ὁ Χριστός (the Christ) εἰπὲ (tell, aorist active imperative) ἡμῖν (us) παρρησίᾳ (lit. in an all utterance, i.e. not holding anything back).
So, the Jews surrounded Him and said to Him, "How long are you keeping us in suspense? if you are the Christ tell us in no uncertain terms.

Jhn 10:25
ἀπεκρίθη (answering, aorist active participle) αὐτοῖς (to them) ὁ Ἰησοῦς (the Jesus) Εἶπον (I told, aorist active indicative) ὑμῖν (you) καὶ (and) οὐ (you) πιστεύετε (do not believe, present active indicative)· τὰ ἔργα (the works) ἃ (which) ἐγὼ (I, emphatic) ποιῶ (am doing, present active indicative) ἐν τῷ ὀνόματι (in the name) τοῦ πατρός (of the Father) μου (of me) ταῦτα (these) μαρτυρεῖ (are testifying, present active indicative) περὶ ἐμοῦ (upon of me).
Jesus in response said to them, " I told you and you do not believe. The works that I am doing in my Father's name, these are testifying on my behalf.

Jhn 10:26
ἀλλ᾽ (But) ὑμεῖς (you pl.) οὐ (not) πιστεύετε (are believing, present active indicative) οὐ (not) γὰρ (for) ἐστὲ (you are) ἐκ τῶν προβάτων (out of the sheep) τῶν ἐμῶν (the of me sheep) καθὼς (just as) εἶπον (I told, aorist active indicative) ὑμῖν (you).
But you are not believing, because you are not out of my sheep. (i.e members of my flock).

Jhn 10:27
τὰ πρόβατα (The sheep) τὰ ἐμὰ (the of me sheep) τῆς φωνῆς (the voice) μου (of me) ἀκούει, (are listening to) κἀγὼ (and I) γινώσκω (am knowing experientially, present active indicative) αὐτά (them) καὶ (and) ἀκολουθοῦσίν (they are following, present active indicative) μοι (me)
My sheep are listening to My voice and I have a meaningful relationship with them and they are following Me.

You question was, "Perhaps someone here who does know NT Greek can tell us whether the Greek of John 10:26 could possibly mean "You are not of my sheep. [I deduce this] because you do not believe in Me."

So, no. It can't mean that. I inadvertently inverted the clauses and went off on a false tangent.

Let's look at what John 10:26 does actually say.
But you are not believing, because you are not out of my sheep (i.e you are not members of my flock).

Does this mean that
1. only those who are already Jesus' sheep can start to believe in Him? Or does it allow for the idea that
2. those who start to believe in Him become His sheep, and one cannot become one of His sheep without believing in Him and one cannot remain as one of His sheep without continuing to believe in Him? Which is why Jesus knows they are not yet His sheep, because they are not yet believing in Him.

If Jesus had meant to communicate the first option, He would have used the aorist form of the verb believe and said,
"But you did not believe (ἐπιστεύσατε, episteusate, as in Matt. 21:32) because you are not one of my sheep."

But He uses the present tense (πιστεύετε, pisteuete), But you are not believing, because you are not out of my sheep.

The evidence that one has become one of Jesus' sheep is that they are now believing in Him. If someone is not presently believing in Him, it is evident that they are not presently His sheep. However, should they start to believe in Him, they will become His sheep. And if they continue to believ in Him, they will continue to be His sheep. This is what the Greek of John 10:26 means.

If you have the time and will, I'd like to go through the John10:26 with you and try to hit it with many questions and observations. I'm going to be signed off quite a bit today and tomorrow and I'd like to try to be focused. Care to cooperate as we are able? It seems like an important hill of never-ending battles.

First question: Are you siding with hoti and not gar?