Twisted Scripture (False Doctrines)

[Apologetic_Warrior]

So everything Jesus said was to the Jews and we non-Jews should ignore it? That'll surprise a lot of Calvinists.

Nice try but no cigar. Christ himself said; “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” Mat 15:24

Of course it doesn't mean what you are implying, however, from what we read in Scripture, it did come as quite a shock to Peter that (any) Gentiles were to be grafted, adopted into the promises of God. And of course Paul wrote to Jews and Gentiles.

Inclusivism vs the Gospels

victory = Gospels

 

[Hammster]

WHERE does the NT say this?

John 10.

 

[Hammster]

Incorrect. Jesus never said that, nor any other inspired writer.

This is what He actually said:

John 10:9
“I am the door; if anyone enters through Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture.

Then He said this:

John 10:11
“I am the good shepherd; the good shepherd lays down His life for the sheep.

Nothing about "His" sheep. Just "the" sheep. And if anyone (of the sheep) enters the door through Him, will be saved.

It's all quite clear and very simple.

It is, especially when taken in context.

So Jesus said to them again, "Truly, truly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. All who came before Me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not hear them. I am the door; if anyone enters through Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture. (John 10:7-9 NASB)

Who can enter? Sheep. Can thieves and robbers enter? No. Why? Because they aren't sheep.

 

[Hammster]

How is this any different than saying only certain sheep get saved?
Jesus gave his life for the SIN of the WORLD. I don't read anywhere in the NT that He did that for a chosen few. FYI, Jesus judges who is a sheep and who is a goat WHEN He returns. I'm pretty sure most of the goats are not very evident today, but as soon as they die, they will be.
Jesus is the GOOD shepherd because He gave His life.

Actually, FYI, Jesus doesn't judge who is a sheep and who is a goat when He returns. He separates the sheep and the goats and then judges them.

 

[stan1953]

Nice try but no cigar. Christ himself said; “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” Mat 15:24
Of course it doesn't mean what you are implying, however, from what we read in Scripture, it did come as quite a shock to Peter that (any) Gentiles were to be grafted, adopted into the promises of God. And of course Paul wrote to Jews and Gentiles.
Inclusivism vs the Gospels
victory = Gospels

Yes, so do you take him literally or not, despite the fact I wasn't addressing you.

 

[stan1953]

Actually, FYI, Jesus doesn't judge who is a sheep and who is a goat when He returns. He separates the sheep and the goats and then judges them.

FYI in the context I was using it, judges means decides. I try not to equivocate like so many do.

 

[Apologetic_Warrior]

Yes, so do you not take him literally or not, despite the fact I wasn't addressing you.

Since when does it matter on a forum like this whether or not one is addressed to offer a response? That's what I thought.

Do I take him literally? Of course parables are not meant to be taken wooden literally, as though a person could be a person and literally a sheep at the same time. The symbolic language of a shepherd and sheep and goats is not literal in the strictest sense. Does that make the meaning any less clear? No, it shouldn't be that difficult, though acting on indwelling sin can and does (in one way or another) create a blinding effect on our perception and interpretation, even on Christians.

What did the concept of adoption and grating mean to the Jews around Jesus' time?

What was Peter talking about when he said: "If then God gave the same gift to them as he gave to us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could stand in God's way?” (Acts 11:17) And WHY did he tell his audience?


Now for further context into what Christ said about "the lost sheep of the house of Israel" learn from this passage in the Gospel of Matthew chapter 21...

42 Jesus said to them, “Have you never read in the Scriptures: “‘The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone;4 this was the Lord's doing, and it is marvelous in our eyes’? 43 Therefore I tell you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you and given to a people producing its fruits."

Tell me sir, did Christ die for those fruit trees not producing fruit? Who is it that gives growth to a fruit tree to begin with? Can the tree water itself? Does it choose the ground where it is planted? Who is it that takes away?

 

[Hammster]

FYI in the context I was using it, judges means decides. I try not to equivocate like so many do.

He doesn't need to decide. He knows who are sheep and who are goats. All He's doing is separating them. And then demonstrates that sheep act like sheep, and goats act like goats.

 

[FreeGrace2]

So you're saying that Christ died for a group that we know exists just because they are not mentioned? This is what you consider to be scholarly debate?

I asked where the mention of "goats" is found in Jn 10? Please don't dodge my question. The mention of goats is in a DIFFERENT context. Let's not mash together different contexts in order to try to defend your view.

Nope! It is YOU who made the distinctions.

In fact, it was Jesus Himself who used the words, and therefore, MADE the distinction. Which would rather be ignored, it seems.

What's the benefit to ignoring the words that Jesus chose to make His points?

The cultists employ your same method.

Do you breathe on a regular basis? Gee, so do cultists.

However, to stay on focus; Jesus used His words carefully, not carelessly as is being insinuated.

THE sheep are HIS sheep.

Thanks for the opinion. Which is wrong of course. There are SOOOOO many places in Scripture that could have really made clear if Christ had not died for everyone. And one of them is in Jn 10. Jesus would have easily said that He would lay down His life for HIS sheep. But He didn't, and you don't like that.

Yes, "My sheep hear my voice and I know them and they follow me and I give unto them eternal life."

Yes. His sheep are believers. That's who He gives eternal life to.
John 3:15-16
15 so that whoever believes will in Him have eternal life. 16 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.

John 3:36
36 "He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him."

John 5:24
24 "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who hears My word, and believes Him who sent Me, has eternal life, and does not come into judgment, but has passed out of death into life.

John 6:40
40 "For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who beholds the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day."

John 6:47 "Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes has eternal life.

Rom 6:23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord

1 Tim 1:16 Yet for this reason I found mercy, so that in me as the foremost, Jesus Christ might demonstrate His perfect patience as an example for those who would believe in Him for eternal life.

Gal 3:22 But the Scripture has shut up everyone under sin, so that the promise by faith in Jesus Christ might be given to those who believe.

1 John 5:13
These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life.

Therefore, those who enter through the door are His sheep.

Correct!! But He specifically said He would lay down His life for THE sheep.

The attempt to force "THE" to mean "HIS" is remarkable.

The entire context of Jn 10 is sheep. Nothing else.

They enter the door because they hear His voice. They hear His voice because they are His sheep.

Sure. All believers have heard His voice. No argument.

Again, here are the sheep that Jesus specifically mentioned:
#1 THE sheep, for which He died
#2 HIS sheep, which hear His voice (Jews)
#3 OTHER sheep, which hear His voice (Gentiles)
#4 NOT OF HIS sheep, which do not hear his voice (unbelievers)

Please notice that He made no mention of goats in this analogy. ONLY sheep.

The term "not of My sheep" is included in "THE" sheep, for which He would die.

Consider these passages that makes reference to humanity in general as sheep.

Matthew 9:36
Seeing the people, He felt compassion for them, because they were distressed and dispirited like sheep without a shepherd.
Matthew 9:37
Then He said to His disciples, “The harvest is plentiful, but the workers are few.
Matthew 9:38
“Therefore beseech the Lord of the harvest to send out workers into His harvest.”

And the parallel passage in Mark 6:34.

The context of these passages is clear. Jesus was speaking about humanity, not believers without a shepherd, which would make no sense.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Yup,
Jesus uses the term sheep in just 2 basic ways,
a. the, his, my, sheep
b. and not of my sheep.
Those not of my sheep are those who dont believe in Jesus.
Which Jesus tells us further on.

In both Matt 9:36 and Mark 6:34, Jesus refers to mankind in general as sheep.

No way does this imply they were any kind of sheep.

To say "not of My sheep" in NO WAY implies that they weren't sheep. They just weren't of His. That is crystal clear.

I get a very strong impression that words only mean what Calvinists need them to mean.

 

[FreeGrace2]

It is, especially when taken in context.

So Jesus said to them again, "Truly, truly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. All who came before Me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not hear them. I am the door; if anyone enters through Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture. (John 10:7-9 NASB)

Who can enter? Sheep. Can thieves and robbers enter? No. Why? Because they aren't sheep.

Nice try, but no dice.

The sheep who enter by the door are believers, which Jesus called "My sheep", and "other" sheep, as opposed to "THE" sheep. But He specifically said He would die for THE sheep, NOT ONLY His sheep. Why do Calvinists continue to miss this very important FACT?

If Jesus ONLY died for believers, this would have been a perfect place to make that point: "The good Shepherd lays down His life for His sheep." But He didn't say that.

Yet, Calvinists try vainly to force "THE" to mean "HIS". Nope.

That is less than scholarly.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Actually, FYI, Jesus doesn't judge who is a sheep and who is a goat when He returns. He separates the sheep and the goats and then judges them.

What do you do with Matt 9:36 and Mark 6:34 where Jesus refers to mankind in general as sheep, in the context of missionaries and witnesses?

 

[Hammster]

Nice try, but no dice.

The sheep who enter by the door are believers, which Jesus called "My sheep", and "other" sheep, as opposed to "THE" sheep. But He specifically said He would die for THE sheep, NOT ONLY His sheep. Why do Calvinists continue to miss this very important FACT?

If Jesus ONLY died for believers, this would have been a perfect place to make that point: "The good Shepherd lays down His life for His sheep." But He didn't say that.

Yet, Calvinists try vainly to force "THE" to mean "HIS". Nope.

That is less than scholarly.

Obviously, this cannot be true unless thieves, robbers, and wolves are sheep. But Jesus makes a clear distinction.

And I don't try to make THE equal HIS. I don't need to since sheep in scripture are all His. You are not only arguing against the context of John 10, but all of scripture.

 

[Hammster]

What do you do with Matt 9:36 and Mark 6:34 where Jesus refers to mankind in general as sheep, in the context of missionaries and witnesses?

He didn't refer to mankind in general as sheep.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Obviously, this cannot be true unless thieves, robbers, and wolves are sheep.

I've already said that these would refer to demonic deceivers, prowl around like lions, seeking whom they may devour. 1 Pet 5:8, Rev 12:9.

But Jesus makes a clear distinction.

He sure does. As in kind of sheep:
#1 HIS sheep, who hear His voice (beleving Jews)
#2 OTHER sheep, who hear His voice (believing Gentiles)
#3 NOT of His sheep, who don't hear His voice (unbelievers)

From the specific context, how can this be refuted? I don't care about disagreement. Only refutation.

And I don't try to make THE equal HIS. I don't need to since sheep in scripture are all His.

Your statement is wholly without substance. I've given you 2 passages where Jesus referred to humanity as sheep without a Shepherd. Would Jesus EVER use that term on His sheep? Of course not. Refuted.

You are not only arguing against the context of John 10, but all of scripture.

Ha. That would describe your approach exactly!

All that has been done is to disagree with my view, yet, without any support for your own view.

 

[FreeGrace2]

He didn't refer to mankind in general as sheep.

Well, it would be rather helpful to actually read the passages before making such an error. How can it be proven that He wasn't, given the context of missionaries and witnesses for Him? The context refutes your view.

 

[Hammster]

I've already said that these would refer to demonic deceivers, prowl around like lions, seeking whom they may devour. 1 Pet 5:8, Rev 12:9.

The context doesn't support that.

He sure does. As in kind of sheep:
#1 HIS sheep, who hear His voice (beleving Jews)
#2 OTHER sheep, who hear His voice (believing Gentiles)
#3 NOT of His sheep, who don't hear His voice (unbelievers)

From the specific context, how can this be refuted? I don't care about disagreement. Only refutation.

The distinction is between sheep, and thieves, robbers and wolves. Refutation provided.

Your statement is wholly without substance. I've given you 2 passages where Jesus referred to humanity as sheep without a Shepherd. Would Jesus EVER use that term on His sheep? Of course not. Refuted.

No you didn't. No reference given says that.

Ha. That would describe your approach exactly!

All that has been done is to disagree with my view, yet, without any support for your own view.

How many references to sheep should I provide to demonstrate that sheep refer to His people?

 

[Hammster]

Well, it would be rather helpful to actually read the passages before making such an error. How can it be proven that He wasn't, given the context of missionaries and witnesses for Him? The context refutes your view.

I read the verses. They are the same. And the context doesn't support your assertion. Maybe some exegesis from you is required.

 

[sdowney717]

Well, it would be rather helpful to actually read the passages before making such an error. How can it be proven that He wasn't, given the context of missionaries and witnesses for Him? The context refutes your view.

Hebrews 13:20
New King James Version (NKJV)

Benediction, Final Exhortation, Farewell

20 Now may the God of peace who brought up our Lord Jesus from the dead,

that great Shepherd of the sheep,
through the blood of the everlasting covenant,

that shepherd of 'the sheep'

 

[FreeGrace2]

The context doesn't support that.

In fact, you haven't shown otherwise. And I gave supporting Scripture.

The distinction is between sheep, and thieves, robbers and wolves.

Hardly. He began His analogy with those who would steal, devour or deceive the sheep. Then He began His message about who He was going to die for.

Why anyone would think that Jesus was making a distinction between thieves, robbers, and wolves is really unusual. He clearly made the distinction between KIND of sheep.

#1 HIS sheep, who hear His voice (beleving Jews)
#2 OTHER sheep, who hear His voice (believing Gentiles)
#3 NOT of His sheep, who don't hear His voice (unbelievers)

You haven't refuted this.

Refutation provided.

No you didn't. No reference given says that.

Again, actually reading the passages BEFORE making such an error in opinion would be helpful.

But, let's get to the bottom line here. Just what did Jesus mean by "sheep without a shepherd" in those 2 passages that were apparently not reviewed?

How many references to sheep should I provide to demonstrate that sheep refer to His people?

So, what is this; theology by democracy? Please, just answer my question above. That will suffice. So far, you've ignored it.