Table of Contents
Parent: JesusWordsOnly
The Misleading Suggestion by Emphasizing John s Gospel Account
Also, the elevation of John's Gospel by Luther and Calvin feeds an erroneous assumption. Those unfamiliar with John's Gospel are misled to assume there is no trouble for Paul anywhere in John's Gospel. Yet, John's Gospel is filled with problems for Paul.
http://mb-soft.com/believe/txw/sermonmt.htm (last accessed 5-24-05).
For example, John quotes Jesus saying that those who are following Him and losing one's life in this world to serve Him do so for "life eternal." (John 12:25-26.) Not for rewards, but for eternal life.
Another example is Jesus saying: "Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming, in the which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice, And shall come forth; they that have done good, unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil, unto the resurrection of damnation." (John 5:28-29 KJV) Jesus focuses the difference between the saved and lost on who did good and who did evil. It is not a contrast between those who believe versus those who do not believe.
In fact, (John 3:16) becomes another example when we reveal the subjunctive tense in the verse. It reads: "whosoever keeps on believing in Him should not perish but should have eternal life." There are two subjunctives in the verse-the subjunctive tense in Greek being used to show uncertainty and conditionality. (The NIV, without support in a textual variant, has it "shall have eternal life.") 14
14.The Greek have is echei. It is in the subjunctive. However, the NIV's translation is defended because it conforms better to salvation supposedly purposed by God based on faith alone. See. Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics (Zondervan: 1997) at 461, 473. Wallace claims we may vary the translation where the Divine will is involved, claiming that in such cases, " ina [so that] is used to express both the divine purpose and result." {Id. at 473.) Wallace explains: "The fact that the subjunctive is all hut required after ina does not, of course, argue for uncertainty as to the fate of the believer. This fact is obvious, not from this text , but from the use of ou mh in John 10:28 and 11:26, as well as the general theological contours of the gospel of John.'" What Wallace is doing is claiming ina creates a purpose clause that defeats the subjunctive meaning because we know from doctrine that God guarantees He will achieve His purpose of saving those who believe. (The proof he offers is utterly circular, as we shall see.) No one has ever explained why the purpose conjunction of hina would justify changing should into shall. In Greek, the contingency has actually a purpose of explaining the continuous tense that precedes it. Also, Wallace even concedes that there are over a dozen future indicatives after hina in the New Testament. (His footnote 71.) Thus, Jesus' use of the subjunctive must be deliberate in John 3:16, designed to differentiate the result from a future guaranteed result. Why is Wallace's proof circular? Because for support of the NIV translation, he cites two examples which are more of the same use of subjunctives conditioned on continuous verbs. (John 10:28 and 11:26.) Thus, to cite these two passages to support translating should as shall is simply to use the same error in the other verses as proof. That is the essence of circular proof!
Faith alone, Jesus implies in John, is not the sole criterion for judgment. You should be saved, but it is not necessarily going to be the case. Example in chief: the "believing" rulers who were too cowardly to confess Jesus. (John 12:42). As cowards, their fate is in hell despite their believing. (Rev. 21:8, "cowards, unbelievers" are in hell.)(For further discussion of them, see page 450.)
Another example, assuming the NIV translation as correct, is we find in John's Gospel a competing formula for eternal life that depends on obedience. Jesus says: "Verily, verily, I say unto you, If one keeps my word, he shall never see death." (John 8:51, NIV) A better translation of keep my word is "obeys my teaching...." (GNB.) (On page 501, we will see 3:16 and 8:15 provide a synergistic path to salvation.)
Next, John 3:36 is another very significant problem passage in John's Gospel for the Paulunist. John the Baptist (whom Jesus calls the greatest prophet) is quite clearly amplifying John 3:16 to say that a faith that should save is destroyed by disobedience to Jesus' commands. Thus, John 3:16 does not have Paul's meaning. John 3:16 has been quoted insufferably countless times out-of-context (besides being grossly mistranslated to fit Paul.) The Prophet John clearly is amplifying 3:16 in 3:36 by evoking the salvation formula of John 3:16 but modifies it. John contrasts believing with disobeying as a warning to the one-time believer about the impact of disobedience. Here is what John 3:36 says literally in a correct translation:
He that keeps on believing/trusting on the Son keeps on having
everlasting life [cf. the 3:16 formula], and he that keeps on
disobeying [apeitheo] the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of
God keeps on remaining on him.
This means a faith that should save is destroyed by disobedience. As John MacArthur says in The Gospel According to Jesus (Zondervan: 1994), John 3:36 teaches that salvation depends on a lasting obedience to Christ's authority, not on a one-time obedience to believe. (Id. at 39 fn.) A saving faith is one that "produces obedience." (Id. at 53.)
Hence, disobedience to Jesus' commands means God's wrath rests on you regardless of your subjective experience of a one-time belief. (Paulunists deflect this verse by the simple step of mistranslation.) 15
A final example, although not the last, is Jesus in John says a branch "in me" that does not produce fruit will be cut off, and is thrown outside the vineyard. It is as a branch that is withered (died). It will be burned. (John 15:1-6). Faith without works is dead. The branch is the Christian, not the fruit on the branch. The burning is of you, not some poor fruit (i.e., defective works) as Paulunists try to spin this passage. Thus, in John 15:1-6, Jesus is explaining that works are crucial to add to one's connection to Christ, even though the connection is how one produces fruit. Otherwise, faith (connection) without fruit (works) makes you withered (dead), to be thrown "outside" to be "burned." Jesus agrees with (Jas. 2:14)!
Thus, Paulunists ignore the many passages in John's Gospel that contradict Paul. They emphasize John 3:16 as if it is saying the same thing as Paul's Gospel. However, it does not. John's Gospel, correctly translated, is the antithesis to Paul's gospel.