The Jewish leaders ask for a plain answer from Jesus and He responds that they do not believe because His sheep hear His voice, they follow and He gives them eternal life and no one can snatch them away and claiming that He and the Father are one. Dr. Sproul considers the implications of Jesus and the Father being one and how the church has addressed different distortions. He then continues the section addressing the claim of Jesus' blaspheming and Jesus' elevated view of Scripture.

We have been going through the gospel according to Saint John for over a year now, and we will continue that study this morning as we look at the text in John 10:31–42. I ask the congregation to stand for the reading of the Word of God:

Then the Jews took up stones again to stone Him. Jesus answered them, “Many good works I have shown you from My Father. For which of those works do you stone Me?”

The Jews answered Him, saying, “For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy, and because You, being a Man, make Yourself God.”

Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your law, ‘I said, “You are gods”’? If He called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), do you say of Him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’? If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me; but if I do, though you do not believe Me, believe the works, that you may know and believe that the Father is in Me, and I in Him.” Therefore they sought again to seize Him, but He escaped out of their hand.

And He went away again beyond the Jordan to the place where John was baptizing at first, and there He stayed. Then many came to Him and said, “John performed no sign, but all the things that John spoke about this Man were true.” And many believed in Him there.

He who has ears to hear the Word of God, let him hear it. You may be seated. Let us pray.

Again, our Father, as we give our attention to Your Word, we pray that unlike those who listened to the teaching of Christ that is recorded here, we may respond with joy, thanksgiving, and faith. For we ask it in Jesus’ name. Amen.

Tell Us Plainly

Last time, we looked at the beginning of John 10, and I briefly read to you the words from verse 22 and following about the byplay between Jesus and the Pharisees. I would like to go back and visit that briefly before I look at the concluding text of chapter 10.

John 10:22 situates this interaction between Jesus and the authorities during the Feast of Dedication in Jerusalem. We have noticed throughout the book of John how John is careful, from time to time, to tell us the occasion when certain things took place. We have also noticed how often these encounters in Jerusalem took place during the traditional feast days of the Jews, like the Passover, the Tabernacles, the Harvest, and so on.

Where in the Old Testament do you find the Feast of Dedication? You do not, because this feast arose during the intertestamental period, celebrating the victory of the Maccabees over the enemies of the Jewish people. It became known as the Feast of Dedication and, later, the Feast of Lights, which is celebrated to this day in the Jewish community by the name of Hanukkah, during the same period that we celebrate Christmas.

In any case, it was winter in Jerusalem, and the Jews were gathered to celebrate the deliverance they had achieved under Judas Maccabeus. We are told: “Jesus walked in the temple, in Solomon’s Porch. Then the Jews surrounded Him and said to Him, “How long do You keep us in doubt? If You are the Christ, tell us plainly” (John 10:23–24). That is an interesting charge to Jesus.

When I read that, I cannot help but immediately think of a similar circumstance that happened in the sixteenth century in Germany at the Diet of Worms. I am sure you all were snapped back to that same moment by reading this text. Martin Luther was on trial for his life before the princes of the Roman Catholic Church and Charles V of the Holy Roman Empire. There was a table in the middle of the hall, on which all the books of Luther were stacked up. His interrogator demanded that he recant his heretical writings and say the word revoco, “I recant.”

Luther responded by saying, in effect: “Which writings? I’ve written many, many things. Surely, you’re not indicating that everything that I’ve written is heretical.” He wanted them to specify exactly which of his works were the bad ones. This is essentially what Jesus says in this discussion: “For what works do you want to stone Me? How about being specific with your charges?”

When Luther tried to dialogue at that point, Johann Eck said to him, “Please answer non cornuum”—that is, “without horns.” Essentially, “Be direct; don’t be evasive; don’t fill our ears with studied ambiguities.”

I am reminded also of the other magisterial Reformer, John Calvin. When he wrote on the doctrine of the Trinity in his Institutes, he referenced those in church history who hid behind a studied ambiguity, which he said is the fortress of all heretics. People are intentionally fuzzy and unclear in their statements so that they can dodge any consequences that might come their way. Calvin, in his benign fashion, said this was the way of slippery snakes. That is the way heretics do things.

That is the implication made in this text about Jesus. The Jews basically say to Him: “No more evasions, no studied ambiguities. Speak to us non cornuum, without horns. Tell us plainly: Are You the Christ? Are You the Messiah?” Jesus was not a slippery snake, and Jesus was not being evasive to escape personal consequences.

Throughout His entire public ministry, He was very careful about using the term messiah to describe His role. Privately, to the woman at the well, or to His disciples, He would reveal His identity. But when the public would try to make Him the Messiah, or greet and acclaim Him as the Messiah, He would resist, and there was good reason for that. They did not have a clue what it meant to be the Messiah.

Jesus understood that in the Old Testament, the office of Messiah was merged with the office of the servant of the Lord, of whom Isaiah writes in the latter part of his book, the one who is called the “Suffering Servant of Israel.” But the popular view of the Messiah was that he would come as a warrior and drive the hated Romans out of the land. They had no room in their popular expectancy for the Messiah who would suffer and die. So, Jesus was very guarded about the use of that title, particularly now as the cross is looming in front of Him.

Authority to Give Eternal Life

Let us listen to how Jesus handles it. They said, “If you are the Christ, tell us plainly” (John 10:24). He answered:

“I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in My Father’s name, they bear witness of Me. But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep, as I said to you. My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father’s hand. I and My Father are one.” (John 10:25–30)

Here, Jesus declares a unity between Himself and the Father. This is a text that has been ripped from its context time and again in church history. We think back to Arius in the fourth century, who used this verse, “I and the Father are one,” and interpreted it in this way: Yes, Jesus was one with the Father, but only in the sense that they agreed on the same mission. They thought alike. They embraced the same ethic. But, said Arius, Jesus was not God. He did not share in the being or the essence of God, only in the agenda of God.

Arius—and later Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons, who interpret it the same way—said that we cannot refer to the statement, “I and the Father are one,” as an expression of deity for Jesus. We must be reminded that anytime we interpret the Scriptures, we have to interpret the text in context. In context means two things: first, the immediate context, and second, the broader context of the whole book, or even the whole Bible.

We know that since the very first chapter of John’s gospel, John has been laboring the point of the deity of Christ, the One who was in the beginning with God and who was God. If we look at the immediate context of this, notice what Jesus says about His sheep in verse 28: “I give them eternal life.” No creature has the power or the authority to give anything or anyone eternal life. Yet here, Jesus claims the power and authority to give to His people everlasting life. He is claiming—unmistakably, without horns—divine authority and divine power.

Secure in His Hand

Jesus goes on to say, “And they will never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand.” Many Christians wrestle with the question: “Can you lose your salvation?” Do we have eternal security? Can we really say, “Once in grace, always in grace”? We respond by saying: “If you have it, you never lose it; if you lose it, you never had it,” because that is exactly what the New Testament teaches.

The reason we believe in the perseverance of the saints and the security of every believer is not that we have an exaggerated or inflated view of our ability to persevere in the Christian life. If it were left to us, we would all fall, and we would all perish, even after coming to faith in the first place.

I heard a very simple illustration used to describe the biblical concept. It is the story of a strong father walking with his three-year-old son by a dangerous railroad track. There are two ways that the father can protect the son. The father can reach out his hand and say to the little boy, “Now listen, son, hold on tightly to my hand, because if you let go you could fall onto the tracks and get killed.” That is one way the father could protect the son, by offering him his hand and telling the son to hold on to his hand. Or, the father could say, “Son, give me your hand,” and take hold of the boy’s hand. The father holds on to the son, not the son holding on to the father. Which is the safer method?

Jesus says, “No one can snatch them out of My hand.” We are secure, not in ourselves, but because of the One in whose hands we are held. Jesus says, in essence: “Every one of My sheep is going to have eternal life. They will never perish, and I’m going to see to it. I’m giving them eternal life, and nobody’s going to snatch them out of My hand.” That is a tremendous text.

Jesus says: “My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all. No one has ever snatched them out of His hand. After all, these are My Father’s. He gave them to Me; now they’re mine also. I won’t let go of them, and neither will My Father. So, between us, their future is guaranteed.”

God Made Himself Man

Then Jesus says, “I and the Father are one.” The Jews take up stones again to stone Him, and He says, “For which of those works do you stone Me?” They say: “We’re not stoning You for the good works. We picked up the stones before because You healed the man on the Sabbath day, and You did things that You shouldn’t be doing on the Sabbath day. Yes, we did pick up stones on those occasions. Now, it’s not a matter of what You’ve done. It’s what You’re saying that we can’t tolerate.”

Notice there was no Arian, no Jehovah’s Witness, and no Mormon in the crowd. Every one of Jesus’ contemporaries understood exactly what Jesus was saying about Himself. He was claiming deity, and His contemporaries understood that. They were saying, “We’re stoning You for blasphemy because You, being a man, make Yourself God.”

It’s ironic, isn’t it? At the beginning of the gospel of John we read: “In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. . . . And the Word became flesh and dwelt among us” (John 1:1, 14). The eternal second person of the Trinity, who from all eternity was very God of very God, became man—that is, He took upon Himself a human nature.

The reality of what had actually transpired is the very opposite of what the enemies of Jesus are protesting. Here, God had made Himself man, and now they are accusing Jesus of being a man who makes Himself God. They got it backwards.

The Worst Blasphemy

Notice how Jesus replies to this. It almost sounds evasive, but He says to them: “Is it not written in your law, ‘I said, “You are gods”’? If He called them gods, to whom the word of God came (and the Scripture cannot be broken), do you say of Him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?”

Let me stop there for a second. It could sound like Jesus is arguing from a Jewish technical loophole here. He says: “You’re accusing Me of blasphemy because I call Myself God. Aren’t you familiar with the Scriptures in the Old Testament where human beings are called gods?” There is some obscurity about that Old Testament text regarding whether it refers to judges in Israel, or to angels, through whom the law was mediated, or even to the whole nation of Israel, which was called the son of God. In all probability, it was a reference to the judges who sat at the gate and ruled over the people. They were supposed to rule according to the authority of God. So, in popular nomenclature, they were called gods with a little g.

Jesus is appealing to historical precedent. In essence: “In the Old Testament, human beings were called gods, and nobody picked up stones to kill them for blasphemy. Why are you ready to stone Me?” Jesus is not saying—and here is where you have to be careful—“Just like they called mere mortals in the Old Testament ‘gods,’ I’m also a mere mortal, so it’s okay for Me to call Myself the Son of God.” That is not the way the argument is going.

This is one of those lesser-to-greater arguments. Basically, what our Lord was saying to His adversaries was this: “If it was okay in Old Testament times for people who were mere mortals to be called gods, how much more legitimate is it for One who is God incarnate to be called God?”

Notice what Jesus says about His own identity: “Do you say of Him whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world . . .” He is essentially saying: “I am the One who, from all eternity, in the covenant of redemption, the Father set apart for this task of coming into the world to save My sheep. Do you think it’s blasphemy—which is a sin against holiness—for God to sanctify Me? If God is the One who gave Me this holy mission and this holy task, if God is the One who sent Me into the world to perform the works that I’ve done before your very eyes, who are the blasphemers?” To pick up a stone, to execute the One whom God has ordained from all eternity to be the Savior of the world, the incarnate Son of God, and to accuse Him of blasphemy is the worst of all kinds of blasphemy.

Of course, if God did not sanctify His Son, if God did not send His Son into the world, and some local Jew stood up and said: “I am the Son of God; I give everybody eternal life,” without any evidence of healing people the way Jesus did nor of His other miracles, then of course he would be guilty of blasphemy. But you see, there was nothing in the thinking of His adversaries to even allow for the possibility of the incarnation of God.

In our day, the great stumbling block to the pagan is the resurrection. But in the first century, the great stumbling block to the enemies of the Christian faith was the incarnation, the idea that God would take upon Himself a human nature in the person of His Son. That was the scandal to the first-century mind, and those who fought, attacked, and denied it were not His sheep. They were the wolves that would destroy the sheep and the shepherd together.

Scripture Cannot Be Broken

Notice that Jesus also said, “The Scripture cannot be broken.” I am often asked why I have such a high view of sacred Scripture, and I say that it’s simple. If the Bible is only basically reliable—which, if it is not, we have no basis for Christianity at all—if it is not even inspired, if it is not any of those things, if it is just a decent record from history, it is basically unreliable. If you give it the smallest kind of reliability, go through it with a fine-toothed comb, and even get rid of all the passages you think are not historical and keep the ones undisputed among critics, the one thing you will find in the little piece of Scripture that is left is a universal testimony that Jesus of Nazareth taught that the Bible is more than generally reliable.

If there is enough evidence to come to the conclusion that Jesus was a prophet—never mind the Son of God, never mind the second person of the Trinity—if you just get enough information to be persuaded that He was a prophet, then what do you do with His prophetic teaching about the nature of the Scriptures? He tells us that Scripture is much more than just basically reliable; it cannot be broken.

I have heard it said that the days of Billy Graham-style evangelism are over. No longer can a minister stand up in a pulpit, hold up this book, and say, “The Bible says,” because we think are too sophisticated for that. We believe that somewhere along the line, something we have done has smashed the authority of Scripture into smithereens. If that is the case, Jesus was hopelessly wrong. Hopelessly wrong does not even qualify to be a prophet, not to mention the Son of God. He says the Scripture cannot be broken. It cannot be done.

He continues, “If I do not do the works of My Father, do not believe Me; but if I do, though you do not believe Me, believe the works, that you may know and believe that the Father is in Me and I in Him.”

Let me close with a footnote, a little parenthesis. Keep this text in mind for later, this discussion where Jesus talks about oneness, “I and the Father are one.” Later on, in His High Priestly Prayer, you will see Jesus praying for His disciples that they may be one, even as He and the Father are one. Nine-hundred-ninety-nine people out of one thousand take that to mean organizational unity, doctrinal unity, and all the rest. But if Jesus is speaking in the same manner in the High Priestly Prayer as He is speaking here about the Father, that is not what He meant at all.

Even if you and I never agree on certain doctrines, if you and I are both Christians, then I am in Christ, and you are in Christ, and Christ is in me, and Christ is in you. So, we do not have to have an ecumenical meeting to be one in Christ. The day Jesus prayed that prayer, it was fulfilled. We will come back to this when we get to the seventeenth chapter. Let us pray.

Our Father and our God, how grateful we are that You have given to us Your only begotten Son, that by believing in Him we would not perish but have everlasting life, life that cannot end, life that cannot be taken away from us. We thank You that our destinies are in His hands, today, tomorrow, and forever.

This transcript has been lightly edited for readability.