 This video is part of a study series titled Biblical Salvation Settled Wonsome for All. Please see the playlist link in the video description. So welcome back to the series. We're now on John chapter 5. So this will be an interesting study because there's a few bits in John chapter 5 where it appears to be a little bit trickier or a bit different to what we've read so far. And if we don't understand it carefully and interpret it carefully it may undermine some of the stuff that we were reading in John chapter 3 and 4. So we introduce this chapter with the story of the the lame man at the pool of Bethesda. Now I'm going to read the first 13 verses not because there's any doctrinal points that I need to pluck out of these verses but because it's going to be very important to setting the context in verse 14, okay? It's going to be very important just to understand what came before verse 14 so that we can interpret it correctly. So starting in verse 1 After this there was a feast of the Jews and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. Now there is at Jerusalem by the Sheet Market a pool which is called in the Hebrew Tongue Bethesda having five porches. In these lay a great multitude of impotent folk of blind, halt, withered, waiting for the moving of the water. For an angel went down at a certain season into the pool and troubled the water. Who so ever then first after the troubling of the water stepped in was made whole of whatsoever disease he had. And a certain man was there which had an infirmity thirty and eight years. When Jesus saw him lie and knew that he had been now a long time in that case he said unto him will you be made whole? The impotent man answered him, sir I have no man when the water is troubled to put me into the pool, but while I am coming another steps down before me. Jesus said unto him rise take up your bed and walk and immediately the man was made whole and took up his bed and walked and on the same day was the Sabbath. The Jews therefore said unto him that was cured. It is the Sabbath day. It is not lawful for you to carry your bed. He answered them, he that made me whole the same said unto me take up your bed and walk. Then asked they of him, what man is that which said unto you take up your bed and walk? And he that was healed did not know who it was. For Jesus had conveyed himself away multitude being in that place. So as I mentioned no doctrinal points that I want to pluck out of these verses, but they're very important to set the context for what's coming next. So with that context in mind it says in verse 14 afterward Jesus found him in the temple and said unto him Behold you are made whole. Sin no more unless a worst thing should come upon you. So the statement Sin no more is often used as a very quick remark to dispute salvation by faith alone or that is to say faith without works although they usually quote from John 8 story of the woman caught in adultery where I actually said go and sin no more So these are just a couple of example comments from YouTube and I've been kind enough to block out the names But people will say things like go and sin no more sounds pretty clear to me You know easy believers and is right up there with a deadly doctrine of one saved always saved And so they take that statement on its own go and sin no more and apply that to salvation Right, and these are just a couple of other examples of people doing the same thing You know go and sin no more make sense Jesus said get up and sin no more and then they just Automatically say things like sounds like they love their sin more than God just by default of having it the faith alone doctrine or whatever So let me show you what the problem is with with taking this statement sin no more I'll go and sin no more and applying that as an instruction for our salvation because up to now We've been reading in John 3 and John 4 whoever believes believe and have eternal life Who so ever believes no mention of sin no more no mention of turning from our sins to be saved It's just believe and Now obviously these people will say well we have to use the whole Bible Well, yes, but you have to use it in the right context as to what it's talking about So the problem with taking this statement sin no more and turning that into an eternal life instruction We'll say on the next slide is that you were reading verses 1 to 13 there presumably I read them out Salvation and eternal life Was never mentioned in that passage There is absolutely no proof from these first 13 verses that this man was saved before during or after he was healed, okay So when work salvation is justified from this passage, they only assume That salvation is implied in the context of sin no more, but it's not really proved Okay, and what you'll find is with work salvation and conditional security and all the groups do this whether it's the Catholics or the Son of the Adventists or Jehovah's Witnesses or whoever They often rely on adding Unprovable Conjecture to passages, okay Just because this man got healed it doesn't necessarily mean that he was saved at the same time And we will actually see an example of this later in John 9 and when somebody gets healed But doesn't automatically know who the Christ is and so Yes, we can say that healing is a picture of salvation But it's not in of itself fundamental proof that people actually got saved though Okay, people could have been healed potentially not saved all they could have already been saved before they got healed You can't just automatically equate to So we will again we'll see this similar story in John 8 with the woman caught in adultery where again Jesus says go and sin No more they automatically take that as a salvation instruction even though there's nothing in that story To bring out salvation in any way that eternal life was ever the context of Jesus exchange There's just no mention that he ever talked about that subject with that woman So building on this point then that Eternal life is not given as the context of going sin no more. We need to be able to interpret this verse So Jesus advises him sin no more for what purpose? It's because you might lose your salvation if you don't well, he doesn't say that he just says sin no more Unless a worst thing will come upon you. Okay? This does not necessarily or automatically mean hellfire. Okay, Jesus never mentions hellfire here Even though he has no problem mentioning it in other conversations in other gospels. All right It's just it just doesn't mention it He could have said unless you be cast into hell fire if that's the point that he wanted to get across But he doesn't say it like that. He just says unless a worst thing could come upon you. Okay? So just thinking about this logically You can easily demonstrate that worse things can come upon him physically such as for example He could be become blind and late. So he just got healed from being late He could become lame all over again, and then he could be blind as well. Well, that would be worse. Okay? He could have he could be killed physically, but not spiritually. So we just assume he gets killed physically He doesn't lose his salvation or anything Possibly with an unpleasant death like for example king soul died falling upon his own sword cut his life short So while every slain presumably he's not in a great deal of pain when he's actually laying But obviously it's very frustrating to be lame, but then you know, he could have a much more unpleasant outcome in that regard now Again, it's too early in the Bible to actually pull all of this out But if we understand that the chastisement of believers It's perfectly plausible that the lame man was already saved prior to his encounter with Jesus Okay, Jesus never actually gave him the gospel as far as we could see he didn't say believe on me Have to know he never mentioned that in the passage that we've read. Okay? So Jesus has to want if we assume that he's already a believer, let's just say that he is for the sake of argument Jesus then has to warn him being a believer That worse things could happen to him physically even though he salvation isn't affected because the Bible is clear God chasens his sons Hebrews 12. Okay, there are a lot of wicked people in the world who do wicked things and Live to be you know in their 80s and die the natural way very peaceably Okay, and then there's a lot of people who haven't done all those wicked things and they end up with a much worse life Okay, but the Bible is clear that God does chasing his children. It doesn't say chasens the people of the world Now even though how even if hell were the context Okay, technically he could say sin no more But then what if let's say this man was to die without Christ. Let's just say that he wasn't actually a believer. Okay? It is absolutely true that this worst thing then could come upon him anyway because even if he did never sin again But he dies without Christ well then this warning of less or worse think well That's going to come upon him anyway if he dies without Christ. Okay? Christ never instructed the layman to believe on him. There is no gospel instruction evident in this passage at all Okay So just as we saw with the issue of go and sin no more being related to salvation. This would be totally conjectural We obviously don't want to make assumptions about this passage So you might flip it back on me and say well, I can't prove that this is exactly what Jesus meant But all I'm trying to show you is that there are other ways of looking at it Okay, there's other ways of interpreting it. The key point here is that there is absolutely no proof That sinning no more unless a worse thing coming upon you is in any way Related to a warning about losing salvation and being thrown into hell You have to inject that into the context because you want to prove your doctrine if that's what you want to interpret it Yes, okay, so you've got a doctrine you wanted to prove it So you're just going to make the text say that it with no real proof surrounding that that's what it actually means. Okay? So obviously we've only looked at the first 13 verses. We've only looked at what came before Verse 14, but then what about the verses that came after verse 14 because after verse 14 in the rest of John 5? Jesus is actually going to talk about eternal He is going to talk about believing on him in the same chapter. So then you might wonder well, okay Maybe it is the context of sin no more It's just that it's the verses that come after it rather than verses before it well the verse that comes after verse 14 Will disprove that so let me show you So in verse 15 it says the man departed and told the Jews that it was Jesus which had made him whole So notice the lame man has departed He's no longer present or relevant to the dialogue that Jesus is going to have in the upcoming verses Okay, Jesus said go and sin no more to the lame man at the pool of Bethesda and now he's departed in the next verses You're going to see that Jesus is now talking to the Jews and it's the Jews that this this man told So Jesus doesn't say go and sin no more to this crowd of Jews. He said it to the layman He's departed so when he starts talking about eternal life in the upcoming verses They are not the context of go and sin no more. Okay, those two things are not connected Even though the chapter hasn't changed or someone else has just decided to check number of the chapters in however They will but the context has changed partway through the chapter. Okay So and it you'll find advocates of a works-based salvation or salvation that incorporates works or loss of salvation in some way They constantly do this the Catholics do this the seventh day Adventists do this the Jehovah's Witnesses do this The Mormons do this even Protestants and evangelicals can do this where they'll they'll take a statement out of the Bible and They'll apply it to it's an eternal life instruction when it simply is not okay Or what they do is that the passage says something and they will add this conjecture or embellish what the statement actually says To make it say something that it does not actually say Once again because they just want to prove their doctrine and they just want to pull these verses out without actually looking more Holistically at the Bible by comparing scripture with scripture. So let me show you a few examples of how they actually do this So for example, the Bible says in Hebrews 10 26 it says for if we sin willfully after that We have received the knowledge of the truth there remains no more sacrifice for sins So they take that statement there remains no more sacrifice for sins They then interpret this verses actually saying if we sin, excuse me after we are saved Jesus's sacrifice will no longer be effective for us And so we have to repent of our sins and go through that whole process all over again But it doesn't actually say that his sacrifice will no longer be effective It says there remains no more sacrifices for sins and if you just look at the verses that came before it And it talks about the Old Testament sacrifices. It's clear Jesus has now been sacrificed. There is no continual sacrifices required anymore. That's what it says That's the context of it, but they read it completely differently You have statements like in James 2 20. It says but will you know over a man that faith without works is dead? Well, a lot of people that that's one of the favorite go-to verses for everybody that has a work salvation And they'll say things like well, there's no such thing as faith without works and this here is the proof text But if faith without works didn't exist the statement faith without works is dead Would be a meaningless statement. It would make no sense because for something to be dead It had to have existed and been alive, you know, if there's a dead dog in the road You can't say the dog doesn't exist then. There's a dead dog in the road. Okay, it does exist, but it was once alive And it's now dead, okay Romans 6 1 and 2 it says what shall we say then shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? God forbid how shall we that are dead to sin live any longer therein? So when it says shall we continue in sin that grace may abound Paul is obviously asking a hypothetical question there And then he answers his own question But they'll read that as saying if you carry on sinning after you are saved you forfeit God's grace Or you've walked away from from God's grace But that would that would mean that Paul's hypothetical question Then is a stupid question because he said well shall we continue in sin that grace may about well grace doesn't abound when we sin So it's just it's a daft question. Okay, the thing is grace does abound because sin abounds But that's still not an excuse to carry on living in sin That's his point which we'll see when we actually do a study of roms But that's the point that Paul's actually making To interpret it the way that people often interpret it just means that Paul's question makes no sense There's no reason why he would even raise that hypothetical question. Okay? He asks that hypothetical question because he's got to answer it. Okay One John 3 15 this statement says for whosoever hates his brother is a murderer And you know that no murderer has life abiding in him So people will ask this stupid hypothetical thing or they'll raise this hypothetical point of well Then a born-again Christian could go out and murder a load of school children. Okay, so they you can't clearly say that They're saved if they go out and do that because no murderer has life abiding in him But the thing is The people who say this and they'll point to people like me or faith alone and eternal security And they'll point to us and say well, you could just go out and kill a bunch of people and you'll still be saved But the thing is they can provide no real-life examples of a hypothetical born-again person Who go goes out and does a bunch of those things? Okay? I I've never advocated doing that I don't know of a born-again person who's done that and if someone says to me that I could go out and do that And so we must not be able to believe in faith alone We cannot have eternal security because it just gives me an excuse to go out and kill people and still let me say Well, really it reveals more about what's in their heart than what's in my heart because I don't want I don't understand Why a born-again person would want to go around killing a bunch of people? Okay? I can understand why an unsaved person would want to go out and do that So when they come up with that hypothetical and they object to faith alone because we could just go out and kill people That to me just tells me that that's what they would go and do if they thought they could get away with it so You know all they'll interpret it as saying well, you know No murderer has eternal life abiding him, but I'm not a murderer So, you know, I get a free pass on my sins because at least I'm not a murderer according to the standard of 1 John 3 15 And it just goes to show you How foolish it is when they just take these things and just read something that it just doesn't say okay And then the last example that I've given is in later in the John's Gospel in 14 5 Jesus will say to his disciples If you love me Keep my commandments. Okay, and again that People if I believe that faith is alone or I believe in eternal security They will they will accuse me of saying that we can disobey Christ's commandments and go around sinning Okay, even though they can't ever quote me as ever actually saying that. Okay, I've never said let's go out and sin Let's go out and party. I've never said that but I will be automatically accused of saying that By virtue of being faithful or by virtue of proclaiming eternal security And you try and explain to these people about the chastisement of believers that how God actually deals with the sins of believers You try and show them where Paul says if I sin it's no longer I that do it but the sin that dwells in my flesh and you just try and explain this to them and all you get is like Does not compute repeat previous rhetoric and it's just it's so frustrating because the Bible is really clear about that, you know It's really clear about what happens if you don't obey its commandments But but they just take this statement if you love me keep that and they just make this big doctrine about work salvation But again salvation is never implied as a context which we'll actually see when we do a study of John 14 So, you know, they do the same thing in in John's gospel over and over again John's gospel is saying believe have eternal life believe have eternal life Believe have eternal life and when it says that is predominantly Jesus talking to Unsaved people that need to believe on him and get saved. All right But then they take these statements like sin no more or if you love me keep my commandments And they make that an eternal life instruction, even though that is never mentioned as the context of this phrase Jesus never mentioned eternal life to the man at the pool of Bethesda. He never mentioned it to the woman court in adultery He never insisted that they need to believe on him and get saved And when he says if you love me keep my commandments he's talking to his disciples It's a very intimate conversation with his choice disciples and again He never mentions eternal life to them because he or they already have eternal life. They already believe on him. Okay, so Yeah, I'm sorry for kind of digressing. I know we need to stick to John 5 You know had to get off my chest now, you know, should we go and sin no more? Well, yes, absolutely I believe that we should if you are in bondage to sin you need to be out of bondage because as Jesus said Unless the worst thing could come upon you But the thing is that that doesn't have to mean hell fight it doesn't have to mean losing salvation because You don't have to be a spiritually-minded person To understand that you see I don't want to spend the rest of my life Or 37 or 30 however many years of my life with no working legs sat by a pool like the man at the pool of Bethesda Okay, I don't want God to cause me or allow me to have a debilitating accident where I end up in a wheelchair For the rest of my life. Okay. Now. I'm in my 30s my early 30s I don't want to then be blind or maim or lame For another 50 years of my life. Okay, so that for me is a good enough reason in and of itself To keep his commandments and go and sin no more that that's just a good enough reason in itself Even if I'm going to heaven anyway, okay, because you know, do you really want to spend 50 years of your life? Lame or blind. Well, nobody does. Okay, and so the point you see there's two ways that you could end your life You could end your life like soul and fall upon your own sword Okay, or you can be like Paul and say I fought the good fight. Okay Again perfectly good enough reason to sin no more and obey Christ's commandments, even if you are going to heaven anyway, okay? But regarding my salvation, I have a promise from Jesus He said that he is the shepherd he holds on to his sheep Which is something that we'll see later in John chapter 10 later in the series. It's beautiful chapter Okay, we have those promises that Christ will hold on to us. Okay, so, you know, it just goes to show that the foolishness of People that just take this fellow Jesus said go and sin no more our salvation must depend on it makes perfect sense to me And they just don't grasp the irony of which they they say these statements. Okay, so So whenever we get these Statements like this we need to look at what's the surrounding context is it even talking about what we think it's talking about? Is there enough clear information to build such a doctrine around this statement? Okay, and What's the audience that Jesus is talking to and as the series progresses and I start doing more studies on John in in some of the more difficult chapters later like 1415 We can start to actually pluck some of this out and we can give you more tools to actually how to divide the word of God And how what how to build our doctrine around the appropriate verses? So that's all I'm sort of going to say about that But there's a little bit more that I do need to cover about going sin no more So then an objection that people will throw then is that What they might say something like Jesus wouldn't have told the man to sin no more If it was not possible. So this must mean it is literally possible to sin no more otherwise You know why is Jesus saying that and that's an important question, you know, we need to be Be able to be proven with hard questions and answer a question like that because it is a good and fundamentally important question So I'm not going to spend too long on this point because I don't want to digress too far from John 5 But we will we will briefly look at it because it has to be dealt with and when we do future studies on other more relevant passages we can unpack that a lot more. Okay, but The problem with that question on of its own Is to take a very isolated View of the bible because you have to take a statement like this on its own With no real surrounding salient context or information. You see, we don't know What underlying sins the man at the pool actually had that caused his infirmity if any, okay We don't have that information. So you're arguing arguing from silence We also don't know what kind of life he lived after Jesus said this to him We don't know whether he did literally sin no more. We don't know if he just he didn't do any major sins But he did stumble as human beings do We just don't know that about him. We have nothing to go on. Okay You also have to take one or two isolated short statements like this at the expense of Plenty of other clear and more detailed passages, which we will I intend to cover later in the series So there are plenty of scriptures that deal with the issue of a believer that sins There are plenty of scriptures that deal with the chastisement of believers And Jesus clearly dealt with the issue of forgiveness The need for god to forgive us and the need to forgive one another which would be completely redundant if we didn't sin so You can't just take this statement on its own and then just pretend that the rest of the bible doesn't exist and put Your fingers in your ears. We need to be able to bring those two things together whenever you appear to get A contradiction we need to be able to bring those two things together So let's let's compare that the two opposing sides that we've got in scriptures. So Why would jesus say Sin no more when he could have said something along the lines of well try and stop sinning or you know try and do better next time Unless it is truly possible. Okay Well on the one hand we have verses that deal with god's mercy on our sins As believers now i've not provided any direct Quotes here aren't i'm sort of paraphrasing but the verses are there if you want to look them up So, you know in the lord's prayer it says give us lord our daily bread. Okay daily needs and forgive us our sins Okay, clearly asking for forgiveness, which again if we didn't sin. What do we need to forgive them from? If you forgive other men their trespasses your heavenly father will forgive you forgive yours and that's matthew 614 there, okay It says forgive anything you have against anybody when you pray so that your heather father in heaven may forgive your trespasses That's in mark 11 25 Compassion and forgiveness belongs to the lord for we have rebelled against him. Okay, that's daniel 9 9 Be kind tender hearted and forgiving towards one another even at for as god for christ's sake has forgiven you that's Ephesians 4 32 Now look at this. This is an interesting verse, but there is forgiveness with god That he may be feared. Okay, that's psalm 134 that's a very interesting verse because actually it's saying here The purpose of the forgiveness of god is that he may be feared. It's not that well, he must be feared in spite of his forgiveness He may be feared because of his forgiveness because there is forgiveness with god very very interesting passage there We have redemption through christ's blood in him forgiveness of our trespasses according to what is it according to us turning from our sins No, it's according to the riches of god's grace. That's Ephesians 1 7 If any man sin we have an advocate with the father Jesus Christ the righteous, that's one john 2 1 there So we have all these verses that deal with god's mercy on our sins as believers Okay, but then Contrast that with all these verses that talk about striving against sin and overcoming it So this same passage the same verse that i've used there one john 2 1 The same verse also says these things I write on to you or john writes on to you that you do not sin That's the purpose of him writing that okay at the same time is saying that if we simply have an advocate And it says in Galatians 5 16 if you walk in the spirit, you shall not fulfill the lusts of the flesh there And the Lord chasens those he loves and scourges every son who he receives. Okay, that's he bruised 12 6 And shall we sin because we are under grace not under the law god forbid that's Galatians 6 15 very similar To how he writes in romans that you know shall we sin that grace may abound well? Oh god forbid And if you will live after the flesh you shall die But if you through the spirit do mortify the deeds of body you shall live that's romans 8 13 And then later in that same chapter he'll go on to say we are more than conquerors through him that loved us And and the context is about sin there and walking in the spirit And he abides in christ ought to walk as christ walked that's in one john 1 6 And then later in john's same letter he'll say in chapter 3 verse 9 Whosoever is born of god does not commit sin for god's seed remains in him and he cannot sin It's quite a strong statement there because he is born of god So on the one hand we have all these verses about forgiving our sins And some of that implies that there's actually an ongoing need for that And then we have these verses about striving against him and how you know he was born of god does not sin Okay So we can't just take all of that and then pretend that that doesn't exist or it only refers to the past sins You know because you'd have to have a conjecture really to come to that conclusion and it undermines actually what some of it says But you can't just take some of this and then just pretend that the the bible never says any of this either so Bringing this all together We so we have sins about we have all verses about past and an ongoing forgiveness. Okay, and though we have verses about sinning and mortifying flesh of the desires So Understanding the flesh and the spirit here and the distinction between the two will actually help this to make more sense Which will become more apparent when we when we're studying romans six to eight But we still need to answer why does jesus say sin no more when he could have phrased it as try and stop sinning perhaps But there's a very good reason for this. Okay, because bringing these two sets of verses together We we don't want to have a defeatist attitude towards it because you know people can have a defeatist attitude and say well We're always gonna sin so no point in trying not to you know, well, we'll just bear our cross or you know, however, they'll say it But the thing is is that the very thing that separates the saved From the unsaved besides being saved in the first place not not just in itself But it's the fact that we now have a born-again spirit to wrestle against the flesh Okay, which the unsaved man he does not have that he either doesn't wrestle against this flesh at all and just carries on living in sin Or he tries to wrestle against flesh with flesh and that's trying to be justified by the law ultimately So yes, we absolutely should strive to sin no more by putting on the new man and walking in the spirit Nevertheless despite this fact, you know, even still considering this fact We still need to acknowledge our ongoing need for christ's forgiveness and our unredeemed flesh. Okay Now I haven't referenced the verses here, but it will become apparent later in the study of the new testament is that our new body is a future resurrection Okay, the current body is still mortal. It's still a condemned vessel. This flesh is unredeemable. Okay It does not catch up with the new man that you have in the spirit. Okay Christ still instructed us to pray for forgiveness Okay, so if you're going to come up with a doctrine that says a true believer will never sin or never sin again Well, then you why did christ tell us to ask for forgiveness then that that's a completely redundant statement And he said it in the lord's prayer. We says give us our daily bread. Okay, that's a daily need All right, so bringing the two things together. There's a continual need to ask for christ's forgiveness And some people will say things like well all sin is willful because there's this thing in hebrew's 10 where it talks about if we sin willfully this happens and so on And so people say well all sin is willful, but the thing is actually willful sins aren't are just one category of sin There are other categories of sin such as for example The sins of ignorance which you might call the unknown sins and the bible even says actually the thought of foolishness is sin that's in proverbs 24 so, you know You would wonder whether these high and mighty sinless perfectionist would claim to never ever have a foolish foolish thought Because even having a foolish thought is sin according to the bible And what the point that god's trying to get across to you is that there is a standard of righteousness That you cannot attain. Okay Only jesus attained that standard. Okay, you've got to believe in him To have his righteousness imputed on you. He doesn't say you become this super uber righteous christian That just never seems to get it. It's christ's righteousness imputed on to you. His righteousness is given to you That's all I can really say about it, you know from here But that will become more apparent as we study More things in the bible remember that johnny's keeping things fairly simple here And he's also telling some of the stories of jesus. Okay, so not all of them are doctrinal statements about salvation So let's just move on So i've spent more than half an hour dealing with one verse But let's just go back to john chapter 5 and continue where we left off. So in verse 15 The man departed and told the jews that it was jesus which had made him whole And therefore did the jews persecute jesus and sought to slay him because he had done these things on the sabbath day But jesus answered them my father works up until now and I work Therefore the jews sought the more to kill him because he not only had broken the sabbath But said also that god was his father making himself equal with god So the context has now changed we we already explained that earlier jesus is now talking to the jews. He's not talking to the man at the pool So um some do wonder what the meaning is of jesus defending Working on the sabbath and they do wonder well does that mean that he broke the law by violating the sabbath well It's not really clear enough from this passage alone. You really need a greater understanding of Salvation doctrine across the bible to sort of understand this But when we understand a more overall picture is that the sabbath is actually a picture of salvation Okay, and the reason is is because if we understand that it's not by our works It's by faith that we're saved. It's because jesus did the work. It's his righteousness imputed onto us So he did the work for salvation whereas we rest and so salvation is rest and salvation is a picture of that So with this greater understanding It's perfectly reasonable That jesus worked on the sabbath day while everybody else rested Okay, and likewise he did the work on the cross during the Passover when everyone else was resting Okay, so in the overall picture of salvation He works for our salvation We do not because salvation is by grace through faith in his works not in our works Why because no man can boast okay only christ can do the works necessary to earn our salvation We cannot okay, so that's just something when you have a greater understanding It makes perfectly sense perfect sense why he works on the sabbath because he's the lord of the sabbath He does the work for our salvation, but we rest in his work. Okay, that's why they rested on the sabbath day while he worked Okay, and carrying on in verse nine then answered jesus had said onto them Truly truly I say unto you the son of man can do nothing of himself But what he sees the father does For what things so ever he does these also does the son likewise For the father loves the son and shows him all things that he himself does And he will show him greater works than these that you may marvel For as the father raises up the dead and quickens them even so the son quickens whom he will For the father judges no man, but has committed all judgments onto the son That all men should honor the son even as they honor the father He that honors not the son honors not the father which has sent him so There's nothing here to address in terms of salvation per se Obviously it does apply to our salvation in the wider context in terms of the relationship between the son and the father in the deity of christ But this series is not really meant to address theology and the trinity and all that kind of stuff So i'm not actually going to delve into that. Um, it's related to our salvation But there's no salvation instruction as to what to do to be safe. So, um, I'm not really going to cover any more about that And then a crucial verse verse 24 truly truly I say unto you He that hears my word and believes on him that sent me has everlasting life And shall not come into condemnation, but is past from death onto life. And so This verifies what was said a few verses ago this relationship between the son and the father now earlier in john's gospel We were told to believe on the son. Okay, believe on his only begotten son that you may have everlasting life But now jesus is telling us believe on him that sent me. Well, that's the father Okay, so earlier we said believe on the son for everlasting life now He's saying believe on the father. So these are interchangeable. You can't have one without the other. Okay We're also seeing more of these very definite clear statements. So you notice it says has present tense everlasting life It's not well, you might have you could have maybe you have everlasting life. Okay, very definite statement there It also says shall not future tense come into condemnation. So again, doesn't say well might not may not, you know, whatever it is shall not Okay, and then john bearing in mind john 3 18 said in our earlier study is not condemned present tense So we see there's no present tense condemnation and there's no future tense condemnation. Okay Is present tense past perfect present from death onto life? Okay Has already passed and is now onto life not death. Okay There is no evidence by the way from this passage that passing from death onto life Is in any way reversible? Okay Now, yes, there are other passages that deal with falling away departing from the faith Which we will have to deal with later in the series as we get to those passages We can't just put our fingers in areas and pretend that it doesn't say that But there is no proof Okay, that a born against spirit can reverse into death and people with conditional security if they get very doctrinal about it, they'll Come up with a doctrine about how the spirit can still die So you can be born again in spirit, but then you die and then you have to be born again or all over again And so there is no proof that the spirit can die. Okay So let's pick up on that point and let's let's compare eternal security Versus conditional security in light of this verse Just to try and prove what what what jesus is showing us here and if we can understand this If we can understand how to Rightly divide the difference between eternal security and conditional security and which one actually fits with the bible We can then properly interpret the verses that warn about falling away from the faith and departing and and and so on. Okay So picking up then on this point passed from death onto life We have eternal security also known as one saved always saved And then we have conditional security where we can lose our salvation now I did already explain this distinction in my study of john 4 When we looked at taking jesus described taking the water of eternal life. Okay Everlasting life equated with drinking and glass of water. So we looked at that. We kept it fairly simple The more we read john the more advanced scriptures we get and the more we can build on this same point, okay, because we have more scriptures now to to verify what we're saying and so Under the eternal security model. So a man believes on christ is born again And and he cannot lose his salvation no matter what he does. Okay Well, then as put all the scriptures in the bible We can say that this man is elect predestined sealed onto the dev redemption But we can also say for sure That this man Shall not come into condemnation and is passed from death onto life We can say that for sure about this man in light of the verse in john 5 that we've just read Okay Under the conditional security model. That's where we can lose our salvation. Well, the man believes gets born again But then he sins or he walks away or whatever happens and he loses his salvation again So then he has to believe all over again and get born again again Okay, but then he could sin again or he could lose his faith again and he could lose his salvation again And then he has to go through that whole process of being born again again Now if god's graceful to him or i don't like using this word But if he's lucky you might say he might die here. He might die in his saved condition But he could also die here. He could die in his unsaved condition or his unsaved states. Okay Well, we cannot say the same about this man He might be condemned if he's unlucky Or he might die in his safe state if he's lucky it comes down to pure chance really because you don't know what state He's gonna die. Okay. He could die here, but then he could die yet. We cannot say for sure We can't say that he is passed from death on to life Because he could he could reverse into death again and that might be the condition where he actually dies in And that's where he spends eternity in condemnation We don't know for sure that he's going to spend eternity In eternal life under this model Okay now one of the objections that The conditional security advocates often point to man's free will and they'll say well Because man has free will he can walk away from his salvation. Okay There's a lot of problems with this because first of all they have no proof text where because of man's free will He can lose his salvation by choice. There's no proof text that says that They have to conjecture that by polling some verses that talk about free will And then injecting it into passages about salvation like john 524 that never actually mentioned that free will has anything to do with it whatsoever It also actually ignores the fact that some decisions are actually permanent. Okay, you know if you commit suicide You can't say oh well free will god will let me back in and have another you can't say that because some decisions are permanent. Okay We will explore this more throughout this this particular study. So Let's just say okay a man has free will but at the same time we can also say that god has appointed our days There are scriptures that say that god knows the days of our life. He knows our days are numbered And he sealed us onto the day of redemption So then it has to if god sealed us from the day of redemption until the day of redemption, sorry It then begs the question Why god would allow him To die in his unsafe state because if god knows when this guy's gonna die He knows whether he's gonna die here or here. Remember god already knows this and even conditional security advocates have to admit that god knows everything Okay, you can't deny that without being blasphemous Well, if god knows that this guy could have gone off a cliff and lost his salvation Well, god could could caused, you know, him to have had an accident or allowed him to have some sort of accident Or debilitating illness Which could have caused him to die here Just so that then at least god could say well He is sealed onto the day of redemption because I know when he's gonna die So I'll just make sure that he dies in his safe state Now then they'll throw it back as it. Yeah, but man can choose though. He asked for you Well, yeah, but then at one point he already chose this here He already chose life here. He already chose life here. So God could still make sure he died in this safe condition, but it was still man's choice And and this is the problem It just completely ignores the fact under this model that god knows all things. Okay. God knows whether you're gonna have eternal life or not So this is the problem with this model It just acts like god is just letting us and it's all by chance By the way, whether you'll die here or here like you could be hit by a bus here Maybe you'll die peacefully here. You just don't know it comes down to pure chance. Okay, ultimately And it's just not biblical in the whole scope of things now We haven't really unpacked a lot from john to necessarily prove this point It will only be proven stronger when we get to john chapter 6 and john chapter 10. So You know, just keep keep coming with me keep keep bearing in mind this But with this in mind though picking up on this earlier point that when we looked at the issue of sin no more People that advocate conditional security They will object to eternal security and they'll object to faith alone because in their view It allows believers to carry on sinning And still make it to heaven. Okay That's their opinion. Well, we can't allow eternal security in faith alone because it just means you can sin as much as you want And still make it to heaven, right? And so that's that's why they cling on to conditional security But the problem with this view is that conditional security It doesn't actually absolve people of being able to sin as much as they want Which which i'll show in the next slide So, you know, they'll make these statements from which they find from the bible where he says, you know You must endure to the end to be saved. You must abide in him. You must have works fruit to show your faith So let me prove to you The faulty logic of this assertion. Okay, so let's look at then the faulty logic of conditional security So under this model both of these guys can can lose their salvation. Okay They're just people that take slightly different paths in their life. So this guy Gets born again. He gets saved. He spends his whole life living for god and continues to abide in christ But then in the last few hours of his life, he has some unfortunate circumstances, you know financial trouble family trouble Whatever it all gets a bit much for him He ends up drinking and then stupidly because he's drunk. He ends up driving as well. So he drink drives He then loses his salvation But then because he's drink driving he dies in a car crash instantly He doesn't have chance to repent at all. Okay, he just doesn't have that chance because it was such a quick death And yet somehow even though he spent his whole life living for god spent his whole life enduring One moment of madness doesn't even get chance to repent And somehow he falls under the category of depart from me. I never knew you Okay This guy down here. He spends his whole life rejecting god and living in sin But then in the last moment of his life, he's hospitalized You know, he's in hospital. He's ill. He knows he's going to die. So during that time He repents of all these sins Believes in christ and get saved and somehow he falls under the category of Well done my good and faithful servant. He that endures to the end shall be saved So this really in of itself ought to explain to you The rather ridiculous logic of conditional security of saying that eternal security somehow absolves people of sin. Okay Now this issue where this guy could repent the last minute of his life. Um, obviously salvation is undeserved Okay, so yeah, there's there's no reason why if if somebody repented at the last minute of their life There's no reason why they couldn't be saved Above anybody else that that lived a whole life, you know beat being a faithful servant So, you know, he doesn't deserve to be saved any more or less than I do or anybody else does Now there are scriptures that deal with Manharding his heart and going down a kind of reprobate path where it becomes so even so reprobate where he's never going to be saved He will he will never believe He won't even have this last minute chance to repent However, in my experience most people who believe in conditional security Don't agree with that doctrine. They believe that man can repent up until his dying breath And in fact, even eternal security advocates believe that sometimes it's a bit ridiculous really, but The thing is a lot of people who say you can lose your salvation They still believe that a man can repent in the last moment of his life So this guy could still go through this entire journey of rejecting god living in sin But then he just decides to repent at the last minute and then somehow he enjoyed to the end to be safe But but this guy who lived the life had fruits meat for repentance He loses it all just because of one mess up basically regardless of what actually happened through this period in his life And this ought to really show you The faulty logic of work salvation the faulty logic of conditional security. Okay, but as you can see Conditional security doesn't deal with this problem. They object to eternal security and faith alone because well You could just sin as much as you want and still be saved Well, so can this guy under their model? Okay This is what's so stupid about this worldview. It doesn't absolve people From sin because they can still sin and then just repent and get their salvation back anyway. Okay And and again in our study of john 3 we briefly looked at the issue of being born again It is too early in the series to really expound on that yet because i've not got the right verses from from john to be able to deal with it But really the burden is on conditional security advocates To explain why if a born again person cannot continue in sin Okay, why he's a born again person. He's a new creature according to the bible So why even if we have free will okay, let's just say that we have free will we can choose to lose our salvation But why would a born again person who's a new creature in christ Ever choose to walk away from salvation like if you knew what eternal life was Why would you ever walk away from it? And jesus christ sort of touched upon this with the woman at the well in john chapter 4 If you knew with the gift of god, okay, if you knew it you would have asked for it, you know um, we will actually see this in um, john chapter 6 actually in terms of why would a born again person ever walk away from eternal life I'll show that in the next study, but Why would a born again person who's a new creature ever choose to forfeit salvation? But again, this is the problem people who advocate conditional security They don't understand the flesh between they don't understand the distinction between the flesh and the spirit But they also don't understand the distinction between the chastisement of believers. Okay We'll park that issue for now We'll we'll deal with that when we get to the scriptures that deal with that particularly in romans It's too early to explore explore it just yet. Um, but in conclusion Conditional security does not absolve people from being able to sin as much as they want Because those who don't sin can just as easily lose their salvation at any moment in one moment of madness really Um, many advocates also believe that someone can repent at any moment of their life So under this assertion, someone can still live a life full of sin anyway And just repent at the last minute that they don't always believe in the the hardening of hearts They reject that doctrine sometimes So that that really ought to show you that they defeat their own logic And it's just Think about this loot. It's ludicrous to think that someone who's lived this life for christ who clearly loves christ who clearly believes He could die. We don't know how he's going to end his life He could easily die in an accident and these conditional security advocates expect him, you know, god forgive me Like, you know, just in two seconds He's supposed to just repent in sackcloth and ashes in the two seconds He has to think before he dies in a car crash And the thing is as well is What about people with Alzheimer's? Okay, someone who is in their 80s and starts losing their mind Do you think they're going to go on living for god while they have Alzheimer's? Now if you were to confront somebody with conditional security, uh, believes Well, what about that person and they'll say well, yeah, of course God's going to have mercy on that person because of their unique situation But the thing is what scripture can you base that on where can you show me that god has some special exemption For unique situations and you know, you throw things at them Like you try and point to the thief on the cross as an example for Someone who died without works it. Well, that's a that's a one-off situation Like they make special exceptions For their carnal mind because they think that god should grant them an exception because they would grant them an exception Right, but the thing is under the eternal security model We have those promises god promised you are passed from death on to life god promised Jesus I will never let them be plucked out of my hand god promised. They shall not come into condemnation Under conditional security You don't really have that promise Okay So you can't say to me that someone with Alzheimer's won't lose their salvation again because you've got no promise for that You make it all about man and him keeping himself. You don't make it about god keeping people And so this will become more apparent through the study I'm not I'm not going to kind of dwell on that point anymore here But it really should just show you that the absolute ludicrousness of this doctrine and how it just doesn't fit in the bible at all okay, it's just completely Contradictory to everything that jesus has been telling us now once we understand this more and we will understand it more in our study of john We can then rightly interpret the verses that deal with falling away and departing from the face We can understand those once we can understand these points. Okay, so for now, let's let's get back to the study of john 5 So continuing than in john chapter 5 verse 25 truly truly I say unto you The hour is coming and now is when the dead shall hear the voice of the son of god and they that here shall live For as the father has life in himself So has he given to the son to have life in himself And has given him authority to execute judgment also because he is the son of man Marvel not at this for the hour is coming in which all that are in the graves shall hear his voice and shall come forth They that have done good onto the resurrection of life And they that have done evil onto the resurrection of damnation So then this statement here in in 20 nights those who have done good Versus those who have done evil You can understand how this could easily be misused to teach a works Salvation because now the conditions for the resurrection of life, which is an aspect of our eternal life It's it's no longer who so ever believes but rather it's who has done good quote unquote Now if we were to assert that done good means those who have done good works Not only does that undermine everything that we've been reading so far in chapters 3 through 5, but it it does not address These contradictions because what about believers who have done evil? what about unbelievers who have done good and Really, there's not enough surrounding context for you to just automatically decide That that automatically means works unless you just just decided that you want it to mean that okay Now this first does have specific context notice it doesn't use the more generic terms of eternal life and condemnation Rather it uses something more specific the resurrection of life and the resurrection of damnation So the resurrection of life is part of eternal life But it is more specific Okay, so we need to define what it means to have done good versus done it doing evil done evil Understanding that the context is the resurrection of life or the resurrection of damnation Rather than just generally eternal life or condemnation generally So we need to have an understanding of how the resurrection Fits into the plan of eternal life. Okay So let's look at how the resurrection fits into eternal life now. We haven't really progressed enough into the study to show this in great detail from The scriptures and really this is almost a separate study in its own right really because Although we did see in john chapter 3 that eternal life the kingdom of god and heaven we used Interchangeably in that chapter. They were quite interchangeable terms there A lot of christians if they don't know a lot about the bible or they don't they don't really know that much about christianity They just assume well you die you go to heaven and that that's kind of the end of the story But it's not really because even eternal life Is broken down into into several stages and so I'm not going to go to great lengths To prove this just because it's not the focus of my study My study is more about how to be saved and get eternal life and keep it Not so much about what he's actually going to be like when we get there. So The current stage is that the dead in christ Are resting in heaven only in soul. Okay, the body is dead, but but they are asleep. They're resting Passages like for example, paul touches about about this on first Thessalonians 4 between 13 and 15 He advises the Thessalonians about what's going on regarding those are asleep Which is euphemistic for those who have died. Okay And then it but in those verses He'll start to point them towards their future resurrection hope which will be clarified here. So You've also got like luke 16 it talks about A beggar that was covered in sauce and he was carried by the angels into abraham's bosom And then jesus said in luke 23 43 to the thief on the cross you shall be with me in paradise Um, so that there's a few things there about resting. Um, they're in a place of peace Um, that this luke 16 does seem to imply that there is some sort of consciousness going on there That's something that people do argue about But they're resting. Okay. They're dead in christ, but they are resting with christ Okay, and and they're awaiting the next stage now revelation 7 and 14 also do give glimpses of Happenings in heaven prior to the resurrection, but they're a very different story because they don't really deal so much with rest They deal more towards worship and singing before the throne of god As I say we'll maybe cover those passages later when we do get to them, but it's too early at this stage to really bring that out So then what we're looking for and in thessalonians paul will bring this uphill He'll carry on this thought into this thought that we're actually looking forward to a future resurrection This will tie up with when christ comes back Okay, so this is the first resurrection and it's the millennial reign of christ So you have like thessalonians 16 to 17 that the lord will descend with a shout Though uh, we which are alive and remain will be caught up together with them in the clouds That's those who are sleeping. Okay, and then we shall be ever with the lord and then you've got one carinthians 15 deals with um the resurrection of christ and How we will be made alive, but it's still a future issue. Okay And then revelation 20 Blessed in the holy sea that has part in the first resurrection On such the second death has no power But they shall be priests of god and of christ and shall reign with him for a thousand years And so the resurrection will tie in with a millennial reign of christ there And then the final stage as you keep working your way through revelation into the final chapters Is that there is a new heaven and a new earth And there's also between these two so between these stages is actually where the resurrection of life Takes place. So we'll we'll look at that in a moment So so that's the essentially the three stages of eternity there And this is all wrapped up in what the bible calls the the kingdom of god or the kingdom of heaven because It says in daniel that it's an it's an everlasting kingdom. Okay, it doesn't just take place Periodically, it's an everlasting kingdom. It goes on forever. Okay And then also even while jesus was on the earth, um, you know, it's set in matthew 1112 And from the days of john the baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffers violence and violence takes it by force Um, so well until what so what does he mean and from the days of john the baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffers violence Well, what did john the baptist start? He started baptizing for the remission of sins Why does the king why does the kingdom suffer violence? Well because john christ and believers have been persecuted? Okay, so again, I am obviously super summarizing it there very very briefly So i'm sorry that i've rushed this on i'm sure some of you would probably want a more deeper delving into this stuff really Um, some of you you may disagree with my view on the end times Or you may disagree with me about abraham's bosom referring to heaven But again, this study series is more about how to get eternal life and uh keeping it But it's not really about what it's like when we get there. So i'm not i'm not really going to go any any further than that now So before we tap into the uh resurrection Let's just briefly go back to to john 5 29. So Earlier in john's gospel, jeep, bear in mind Jesus described two types of people There are those that believe versus those that don't believe okay There are those that have eternal life and there are those that are condemned already. Okay So jeez is still describing two types of people here It's just that they're described in a different way. There's those that have done good versus those that have done evil So we need some context as to what it means to have done good or done evil So um Advocates of conditional security and facebook's works, obviously they would define it as those who've done good works But versus those who have done evil works But the problem with this is that a It would go against the surrounding context of john's gospel where two options thus far have been those that believe Versus those that don't believe okay, so to change the context for this verse alone is really to Move the goalpost and invent an arbitrary link to work salvation They also have to invent these hypothetical types of people And then lump them into one of the above categories So those who believe but have no works or bad works is a new category of person that john's gospel has never really hypothesized thus far And and also you have the problem of man defining by his own standard Whether man's works are actually good bad or non-existent or insufficient which we'll explore later in this series I'm not I'm not going to pick up that now, but There's also those who don't believe but for all we know argue believe lived a more righteous life than believers who have Done good works. Okay, but it's just that they do not believe and obviously they must be condemned according to the early verses So that they have to invent these hypotheticals that that john has never really Hypothesized so that that will become more apparent as we continue our study in john So really the only way that you can say that this verse Asserts that doing good works is necessary to legitimize one's salvation The problem is that you've already assumed that salvation must involve works. You've already got a workspace salvation So therefore you're already reading this Through the lens of your assumption rather than allowing the bible to define itself. So This is what's called isogeesis So this is where people read the way they want it to read because they've already got a presupposed doctrine But instead what we need to do is interpret it through exogeesis and that that's allowing the bible to interpret itself And i'm not deliberately trying to use fancy words. I'm just trying to To show you that these two ways of looking at it. So We clearly see that this verse is about the resurrection of life And the resurrection of damnation very specific. It's not dealing with eternal life or the condemnation In a broader sense So let's look at a parallel passage then that deals with the two resurrections very specifically and this is in revelation 20 And revelation by the way was supposedly written by the the same john who wrote the gospel So it's a good book to compare, you know, if we assume that john is consistent with his own writings So john's having his vision in revelation 20 so starting from verse 12 And i saw the dead small and great stand before god and the books were opened And another book was opened which is the book of life And the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books according to their works And the sea gave up the dead which were in it and death and hell Delivered up the dead which were in them and they were judged every man according to their works And death and hell cast into the lake of fire. This is the second death And whosoever was not found written in the book of life was cast into the lake of fire So then when we compare that with john 5 29 remember that that contrasted two types of people Okay, those who have done good onto the resurrection of life. We saw that there And there's those who have done evil the resurrection of damnation. We saw that there Then in his vision in revelation once again, he has portrayed two types of people Those who are written in the book of life Who are consequently not cast into the lake of fire because it's whoever was not written in the book was cast Okay And then there's those who are not written in the book of life who are consequently judged according to their works It says and because of the things written in the other books So notice there's a singular book the book of life And then there's plural books which were the other books not the book of life specifically And the the dead were judged out of those plural books multiple books according to their works So we have books of works multiple books And one book of life. Okay So notice something very very important Those who were judged by their works Are those whose names are not written in the book of life Okay, and were instead judged out of those things written in the Books plural according to what their works Okay Notice also that it is very specifically The judgment of the dead. Okay, because it doesn't really tell us about the people who Weren't judged who were written in the book of life only really tells us about the people who weren't Okay, it's the dead that were judged here because Jesus said in john 11 26 We haven't got there in the series yet, but Jesus said whosoever believes in me shall never die Okay, but it's the dead that are being judged here and a few slides ago When we looked at the the span of eternal life Thessalonians Paul used the phrase asleep rather than dead Okay, because in a manner of speaking here, we can say they're dead in the flesh But in the grand scheme of eternity, they're not dead. Okay, they're just asleep This is the dead that are being judged. Okay When conclusion then the condemnation of those who were judged according to their works Is specifically attributed to those who are dead. Okay, but Jesus promised that those who believe in him Shall never die. Okay. Therefore, they must not be included in this judgment This is also consistent with what john said Early in his gospel Jesus said he that believes on me not he that does not believe on me is already condemned Okay, that's what he says already condemned not he will be condemned. He's already condemned. Okay Now an objection that people will throw to this is that obviously because revelation 2012-15 it gives us no explanation of actually How or why? Someone's name is written in the book of life to begin with But obviously the the the bible does talk about needing blotted out So the wonder will show that it's possible then for Christians who will be judged according to their works As their name could be blotted out of the book of life Now this objection is understandable because of the fact that the bible never mentions Getting your name written in the book of life as a salvation instruction Sometimes I have a preachers when they're giving the gospel say you need to get your name written in the book of life The bible never actually says get your name written in it only ever really warns about Having your name blotted out or your part in the book of life taken away or not being found written in the book of life But the thing is the book of revelation as a whole not not the specific chapter But the revelation as a whole already explained before chapter 20 By giving us a condition That christ will keep somebody's name written in the book of life. So let's have a look at what that is So in revelation 3 5 it says he that overcomes the same shall be clothed in white raiment and I will not Blot out his name out of the book of life But I will confess his name before my father and before his angels So we clearly see that he who overcomes whoever that is Will not have his name blotted out. It won't happen. He's overcome. Okay. Well, then the question is How do we overcome? Okay. Well have another another look at a verse from revelation 12 11 And they which in the context is the brethren Overcame him who's that the devil by what by their works? No by their obedience. No by the blood of the lamb Okay, that's referring to jesus's blood. It's what jesus did his death on the cross And by the word of their testimony and they loved not their lives onto death So they overcame what by the blood of the lamb. Okay, that's jesus Okay, now also, obviously the word of their testimony which still points to jesus And they love not their lives onto death Which it's too early to explain exactly what that means But this will actually become more apparent in our later study of john I think uh when we get to chapter 12, I think that will crop up and and we can Understand exactly what that means But it's it's not by their own works of righteous. It's by the blood of the lamb. Okay It's all about what christ did. It's not about what they did themselves. Okay Now revelation would obviously need its own study to understand this in more depth For now, let's bring it back to john's gospel So we don't digress too far from the intended passage but by comparing it with revelation in the context of resurrection We can see then what it means to do good and do evil So when john 529 says they that have done good The resurrection of life. Well, we saw in revelation that that's whose names jesus kept in the book of life because they overcame By his blood, which is synonymous with they believed on him. Okay And then there's those that have done evil onto the resurrection of damnation Well, that's those who were not found in the book of life and were judged by their works Okay, according to the other books that were written. Okay So we obviously haven't established the relationship between believing on him and overcoming by his blood We haven't yet got to the crucial passages in the bible that we deal with that So obviously our money's summarizing shortly But the whole point that the bible's trying to get across to you here Is that our salvation is all about christ. It's about jesus. It's about what he did Okay, we have to believe on him because we cannot have any faith in our own obedience We overcome by his blood not by our blood. Okay, it's his righteousness his obedience. It doesn't matter how obedient You want to claim that you are okay? You cannot overcome by your works. Okay, you do not want to be judged by your works Unless you are a sanctimonious narcissistic self-righteous fool. It's that simple So, you know, if you want to be judged by your works You will not overcome because you will be classed as those who have done evil You need to overcome by christ's blood. You need to believe in him and not trust in your own obedience. Now look Yes, we should follow jesus's commandments. Absolutely. We should obey his commandments Yes, we should be seek to be like to be like him But not for our salvation not to justify our eternal life because we can only be justified By his righteousness imputed on to us not by our righteousness So continuing then in jom 5 between 30 to 37 I haven't really brought out all these verses because jesus explains the witnesses that testify of him But there's nothing to cover in terms of how to actually be saved now verse 34 Does allude to this by saying I receive not the testimony from man But these things I say that you might be saved But that that's really sort of directed to the crowd that he's talking to that he doesn't require the testimony of man But he refers to it so that people might believe that testimony and get saved But for us there's not really any salvation instructions that we need to unpack from there In verse 30, I realize I've not included the the previous context But jesus talking to the the crowd of jews and continuing this conversation and he says And you have not his word abiding in you for whom he has sent him. You believe not So it's too early in john's gospel to unpack this verse just yet, but when we look at jom 15 This issue about abiding Will reemerge and and john 15 is a go-to passage For the teachers of conditional security They use it to teach that you can lose salvation because jesus does warn about Abiding in him and the risk of being cut off from the vine and cast into the fire Advocates usually have insist that our works and our watchful our endurance are our Responsibility in order to abide in christ So obviously john 15 will need its own detail study to properly understand it when we do we will need to come back to this verse This will be very crucial But for now what we can take from this verse is that the key point here Is that having christ's word abiding in you is equated with believing? Okay, it's not equated with works of obedience or some kind of endurance or fight. It's our belief It's what we believe that will be very important when we study the implications of john 15 Um when it will deal with the issue of abiding them and being cut off But i'll i'll hold it there for now You'll just have to wait for the john 15 study to to unpack that So then continuing in verse 39 search the scriptures for in them you think you have eternal life And they are they which testify of me and you will not come to me that you might have life So obviously lots of people think they have eternal life according to the scriptures Jesus is saying otherwise, but then the question is why is that now the scriptures testify of jesus But what's the issue here the issue is that many people will not come to him Which they might have life which we assume means eternal life because that's just continuing the context in verses 29 and 34 in this same conversation So notice the issue is not that they would not turn from all their sins Or they would not walk down the path of righteousness Or they just could not grasp salvation doctrine because it was too complicated and they just didn't learn to understand it The issue is they would not come to jesus for everlasting life and this is synonymous with Not believing on him which we will see when we do a study of chapter 6 this Sort of equate equation between believing on him and coming to him The scriptures point to christ. Okay. He is the one that we need to believe in. Yes They tell us to do but they don't point to our works as the means of our salvation. Okay So then continuing in verse 41 I receive not honor from men But I know you that you have not the love of god in you I am coming my father's name and you receive me not if another shall come in his own name Him you will receive How can you believe which receive honor one of another and seek not the honor that comes from god only? Do not think that I will accuse you to the father. There is one that accuses you even moses in whom you trust For if you had believed moses you would have believed me for he wrote of me But if you believe not his writings, how shall you believe my words now? This is obviously more directed at a jewish audience um, it's perhaps not as much of a Stumbling block for a christian audience because obviously in our bibles We use both the old and the new testament The some christians have a bit of a stupid attitude about the old testament and how it's not as important or they don't like it or whatever But for the most part it's more of a stumbling block for jews really That supposedly they trust in moses but not in christ But then christ is saying if you would have believed moses you would have believed me It's that simple and where this does apply to christians is that a lot of christians mistakenly believe That the jews get a free pass on being god's chosen people for no other reason than being jewish or believing the old testament But jesus was very clear that they don't even believe what was written in the old testament because if they did then by default They would believe in jesus and his words. Okay, and the problem is the people think i'm sat i sound mean when i say that But a lot of christians have this attitude that the jews are okay. We don't need to preach the gospel to them and it's just That's not loving them. Okay, just like the muslims or the catholics or the hindus or anybody else They need the gospel. Okay, they need to believe on christ. There is no salvation in any other name. Okay So then this concludes our study of john 5 and continues to agree with john 3 and 4 that salvation is by believing And this will continue to be strengthened in chapter 6 where we'll get some extremely important passages to set foundations for dealing with The issue of those who fall away. Okay in relation to conditional versus eternal security Um, obviously he asked you some trickier language here But we've been able to rectify it with the bible to prove that it's not a contradiction at all and it's not saying two different things So, um, hopefully soon have the john 6 study ready for you and it would be put in the playlist as part of the The whole series playlist