John 6:44 and ability to come to Christ

[Moriah]

For example, if you have a sword in your belt and you draw it out, it is being impelled by the force of your arm power to come forth:
Joh 18:10 Then Simon Peter having a sword drew <1670> it, and smote the high priest’s servant, and cut off his right ear. The servant’s name was Malchus.
QUESTION: Did Peter talk his sword into willing coming out of his belt? Did he merely influence his sword to make its own decision and come willing forth to cut off the servants ear? Or did he FORCEFULLY draw his sword out and FORCEFULLY cut of the ear of this man? Please Answer!

In this case, I will answer a fool according to his folly. God’s word is powerful. We have the words of the Almighty God. His Word is powerful and trustworthy. Yet we can resist. How does the drawing of the sword disprove that God’s word is powerful? The scriptures say it is in hearing, but nowhere does the scriptures say it is not about hearing, only when God hardens people. Your beliefs say it is NOT about hearing. Your beliefs go against the Word of God.

For example, if you are mobbed by a great multitude that forcably brings you into the court that forcable action can be termed as "drew" or if the law demands your presence in court by the power of the law then that can be termed "draw" by the power of the law.

People still have the choice not to show up in court! Again, you prove nothing for your beliefs.

Ac 16:19 And when her masters saw that the hope of their gains was gone, they caught Paul and Silas, and drew <1670> them into the marketplace unto the rulers,

You think you can use God’s words to disprove God’s words!

Ac 21:30 And all the city was moved, and the people ran together: and they took Paul, and drew <1670> him out of the temple: and forthwith the doors were shut.
QUESTION: Did the mob talk Paul into going with them? Did they simply influence him to willfully come with them? Or did they "take" him and drag him forcefully into the marketplace and drag him out of the temple??? Please answer this!

You use a scripture that talks about physical force and you put it on a scripture that speaks of a loving drawing by the Lord!

Jas 2:6 But ye have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and draw <1670> you before the judgment seats?
QUESTION: Do the rich man simply talk you into coming before the court? Do they simply influence you to respond by your own will to come to court? OR do they force you by the Law to appear? Please answer this?

Again, you are trying to use God’s words against Him. God draws us with lovingkindness! That is what the word says! Yet you find scripture with word drew in it, a scripture that shows sinful men being physically forceful, and compare it to God drawing us with lovingkindness! See Jeremiah 31:3.

I asked you several questions and you simply ignored every question.

I do not ignore your every question. I have answered your nonsense.

I will ask you again. How can you know WHICH English version to use since ALL English Versions do not say the same thing. If you refuse to use a concordance then HOW do you know the KJV is not right but the version you select to use is right?

Of all the English BIBLE translations (not including paraphrase “Bibles”), none of the slight differences makes for false doctrines or different doctrines! However, I do have a preferred translation.

Do you believe you are inspired by God? Do you believe you have direct revelation from God? Do you consider yourself to be a Prophet?

Of course, God inspires me. I have the spirit of prophecy, as do all who have the testimony of Jesus. Revelation 19:10 For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy."

Please answer all the questions above directly and honestly or why continue this discussion at all if you cannot honestly and objectively respond to questions given you?

YOU need to answer questions.

 

[The Biblicist]

In this case, I will answer a fool according to his folly.

Answer the question! You simply ignored the question! Does the term "drew" in regard to the fish net mean that the net or the fish simply were influenced by the Fisherman and they came in of their own will rather than FORCEFULLY being pulled in?

ANswer the question! You simply ingnored the question! Does the term "drew" in regard to Peter's sword mean that Peter simply influenced it and it of its own accord came out of his belt and cut the ear of the servant off OR does the term mean that Peter FORCEFULLY "drew" it out and FORCEFULLY cut of the ear of the man???

People still have the choice not to show up in court!

Answer the question! The context shows they had no choice but the text says they were "CAUGHT" and it was the crowd which "drew" them into the court. The text says they were"TAKEN" out of the temple and brought to the court.

You are simply dealing with these scriptures and the meaning of "drew" dishonestly and YOU KNOW IT! Why be deceitful? Only a false doctrine requires deceit to defend it.

You think you can use God’s words to disprove God’s words!

You are the one who is obviously ignoring and then perverting the meaning of "drew" in all the above texts. You are simply being dishonest. If you think that is a false charge then prove it and answer the above questions.

You use a scripture that talks about physical force and you put it on a scripture that speaks of a loving drawing by the Lord!

First, the Hebrew text you are using is dealing with saved persons not lost persons. Second, the term "draw" is not isolated but is directly associated with "nigh" and means to come come close and so does the Greek term it translates.

Again, you are trying to use God’s words against Him. God draws us with lovingkindness! That is what the word says! Yet you find scripture with word drew in it, a scripture that shows sinful men being physically forceful, and compare it to God drawing us with lovingkindness! See Jeremiah 31:3.

I am not saying God forcefully makes a person do anything. The point of the term "draw" is that God excises power that changes the want to of a sinner from resistance to willingness - Psa. 110:3. Jeremiah 31:3 is speaking of the same eternal elective love of God before the foundation of the world.

Of all the English BIBLE translations (not including paraphrase “Bibles”), none of the slight differences makes for false doctrines or different doctrines! However, I do have a preferred translation.

So dropping half of Mark 16 make no difference? Omitting part of John 8 makes no difference? Omitting the word "God" from 1 Timothy 3:16 makes no difference, and I could go on and on!


[/QUOTE]Of course, God inspires me. I have the spirit of prophecy, as do all who have the testimony of Jesus. Revelation 19:10 For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy." [/QUOTE]

No you don't! YOu are no prophet and you are not inspired. The spirit of prophecy is subject to the tests of a prophet and there is not a man living who can or has passed those tests of the spirit of prophecy.

 

[Moriah]

Answer the question! You simply ignored the question! Does the term "drew" in regard to the fish net mean that the net or the fish simply were influenced by the Fisherman and they came in of their own will rather than FORCEFULLY being pulled in?

I speak the scriptures to you, but you do not like it.

ANswer the question! You simply ingnored the question! Does the term "drew" in regard to Peter's sword mean that Peter simply influenced it and it of its own accord came out of his belt and cut the ear of the servant off OR does the term mean that Peter FORCEFULLY "drew" it out and FORCEFULLY cut of the ear of the man???

God draws us with lovingkindness. Some people resist God. That is what the scriptures say.

Answer the question! The context shows they had no choice but the text says they were "CAUGHT" and it was the crowd which "drew" them into the court. The text says they were"TAKEN" out of the temple and brought to the court.

God draws us with lovingkindness. Stop comparing God to sinful men forcing a person to go where they do not want to go.

You are simply dealing with these scriptures and the meaning of "drew" dishonestly and YOU KNOW IT! Why be deceitful? Only a false doctrine requires deceit to defend it.

You teach falseness by comparing God drawing us in lovingkindness to that of forceful men dragging someone where they do not want to go.

You are the one who is obviously ignoring and then perverting the meaning of "drew" in all the above texts. You are simply being dishonest. If you think that is a false charge then prove it and answer the above questions.

Go in circles by yourself now. I have shown you enough times. Just like I have shown the Catholics in the other thread about statues.

First, the Hebrew text you are using is dealing with saved persons not lost persons. Second, the term "draw" is not isolated but is directly associated with "nigh" and means to come come close and so does the Greek term it translates.

You are in denial.

I am not saying God forcefully makes a person do anything. The point of the term "draw" is that God excises power that changes the want to of a sinner from resistance to willingness - Psa. 110:3. Jeremiah 31:3 is speaking of the same eternal elective love of God before the foundation of the world.

You are in fact saying that, except that you will not admit it, nor can you see it.

No you don't! YOu are no prophet and you are not inspired..

You are arguing against the Word of God. The Bible says the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.
Wo to me if all men liked me, because that is the way false prophets are treated.

 

[The Biblicist]

Answer the question! You simply ignored the question! Does the term "drew" in regard to the fish net mean that the net or the fish simply were influenced by the Fisherman and they came in of their own will rather than FORCEFULLY being pulled in?

ANswer the question! You simply ingnored the question! Does the term "drew" in regard to Peter's sword mean that Peter simply influenced it and it of its own accord came out of his belt and cut the ear of the servant off OR does the term mean that Peter FORCEFULLY "drew" it out and FORCEFULLY cut of the ear of the man???



Answer the question! The context shows they had no choice but the text says they were "CAUGHT" and it was the crowd which "drew" them into the court. The text says they were"TAKEN" out of the temple and brought to the court.

You are simply dealing with these scriptures and the meaning of "drew" dishonestly and YOU KNOW IT! Why be deceitful? Only a false doctrine requires deceit to defend it.





You are the one who is obviously ignoring and then perverting the meaning of "drew" in all the above texts. You are simply being dishonest. If you think that is a false charge then prove it and answer the above questions.




First, the Hebrew text you are using is dealing with saved persons not lost persons. Second, the term "draw" is not isolated but is directly associated with "nigh" and means to come come close and so does the Greek term it translates.






I am not saying God forcefully makes a person do anything. The point of the term "draw" is that God excises power that changes the want to of a sinner from resistance to willingness - Psa. 110:3. Jeremiah 31:3 is speaking of the same eternal elective love of God before the foundation of the world.








So dropping half of Mark 16 make no difference? Omitting part of John 8 makes no difference? Omitting the word "God" from 1 Timothy 3:16 makes no difference, and I could go on and on!



No you don't! YOu are no prophet and you are not inspired. The spirit of prophecy is subject to the tests of a prophet and there is not a man living who can or has passed those tests of the spirit of prophecy.

Until you answer the questions I will just keep repeating the questions. You are not an honest man because you do not answer the questions but then pretend you have.

 

[The Biblicist]

I speak the scriptures to you, but you do not like it.

You speak absolute falsehoods and that is what I do not like.

You are in fact saying that, except that you will not admit it, nor can you see it.

You don't understand my position and that is why you distort and pervert it. I believe that God gives a new heart to sinners (Ezek. 36:26). This is a heart created in true holiness and righteousness and loves light and hates darkness. The will is simply the servant of the heart. When God gives a new heart a new disposition of the will is given so that the person willingly embraces the light and rejects the darkness.

Psalms 110:3 says, "Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power, "

This is what Jesus means by "draw" in John 6:44 so that all who are drawn come to Christ.

The fact that ALL who are drawn come to Christ proves your interpretation and position are false.

44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.

Not one single solitary person the Father draws fails to come and be saved beause the "him" that the Father draws is the "him" that "I will raise HIM up at the last day."

EVERYONE that learns of the Father "cometh unto me"

Your theory has God drawing and teaching but many rejecting him but that is not the case with what Jesus teaches about giving, drawing or teaching by the Father.

You are arguing against the Word of God. The Bible says the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.
Wo to me if all men liked me, because that is the way false prophets are treated.

Note that "Jesus IS" not Moriah is! Second, take note that Jesus IS the spirit of prophecy"! He is not saying Jesus is the Spirit as in Holy Spirit but rather "spirit" is used here to refer to the heart of a matter or focus of a matter. Prophecy has for its central theme the testimony of Jesus Christ from Genesis to Revelation.

 

[Moriah]

Until you answer the questions I will just keep repeating the questions. You are not an honest man because you do not answer the questions but then pretend you have.

I have answered you. I am still waiting for you to answer questions in defense of your beliefs. All you can do is personally attack me, even after you said let us make a deal that you will not personally attack. I guess that is what you call being honest.

 

[Moriah]

I believe that God gives a new heart to sinners (Ezek. 36:26).

God gives a new heart to those who believe and repented, those whom God saved. God does not give a new heart to unbelievers to make them believe, that is not scripture. Calvinists say God gives His Spirit to those who do not want His Spirit, and to those who hate Him. That is nowhere in the scriptures.

This is a heart created in true holiness and righteousness and loves light and hates darkness.

Not all sinners love darkness. Not all sinners love darkness, but no sinner can stop sinning without the Holy Spirit. The scriptures do not say everyone loves darkness. The scriptures say those that do not come into the light are the ones who love darkness.

Psalms 110:3 says, "Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power, "
This is what Jesus means by "draw" in John 6:44 so that all who are drawn come to Christ.

That is not the word of God to say, “This is what Jesus means by “draw” in John 6:44”

The fact that ALL who are drawn come to Christ proves your interpretation and position are false.

All have a chance for Jesus to save them. When Jesus first came, he came only for the lost sheep of Israel, but when Jesus was lifted up from the earth, he draws all men to himself.
John 12:32 But I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to myself."
Isaiah 11:10 that day the Root of Jesse will stand as a banner for the peoples; the nations will rally to him, and his place of rest will be glorious.

44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.

I have explained this scripture so many times to you, but I do not mind repeating, repeating will help retaining it.

Not one single solitary person the Father draws fails to come and be saved beause the "him" that the Father draws is the "him" that "I will raise HIM up at the last day."

Jesus is talking about those who were already God’s.

EVERYONE that learns of the Father "cometh unto me"

Everyone who already believed in God before Jesus came to earth, they are the ones who learned the scriptures and were taught by God.

Your theory has God drawing and teaching but many rejecting him but that is not the case with what Jesus teaches about giving, drawing or teaching by the Father.

The scriptures tell us God calls and some do not answer. The scriptures tell us people resist the Holy Spirit. The scriptures tell us we draw near to God for a better hope that we hear from the gospel. Faith comes from hearing.

Note that "Jesus IS" not Moriah is! Second, take note that Jesus IS the spirit of prophecy"! He is not saying Jesus is the Spirit as in Holy Spirit but rather "spirit" is used here to refer to the heart of a matter or focus of a matter. Prophecy has for its central theme the testimony of Jesus Christ from Genesis to Revelation

We are to follow carefully, do not add or subtract.
This is what the scripture says. At this I fell at his feet to worship him. But he said to me, "Do not do it! I am a fellow servant with you and with your brothers who hold to the testimony of Jesus. Worship God! For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy."
The angel is saying he is a fellow servant with John and his brothers who hold to the testimony of Jesus. For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy.

 

[The Biblicist]

I have answered you. I am still waiting for you to answer questions in defense of your beliefs. All you can do is personally attack me, even after you said let us make a deal that you will not personally attack. I guess that is what you call being honest.

If you really think you have even attempted to answer the questions I set forth THREE TIMES then this is hopeless conversation. You have not yet given a direct answer to the first three questions I asked and to say you have is simply a falsehood.

 

[Moriah]

If you really think you have even attempted to answer the questions I set forth THREE TIMES then this is hopeless conversation. You have not yet given a direct answer to the first three questions I asked and to say you have is simply a falsehood.

I have answered many times, of course you do not think so, because you do not see it. I see what you are saying, I see it and find it false.

 

[The Biblicist]

I have answered many times, of course you do not think so, because you do not see it. I see what you are saying, I see it and find it false.

You have not! I asked you point blank if the net being drawn by the fisherman fits your defintion of draw.

I asked you point blank if the mobs TOOK HOLD of them and "drew" them into the court could fit your definition of "draw" and you have not responded.

I asked you point blank if the mobs that Luke said had TAKEN them and drew them out of the temple could fit your defintion of "draw" and you have not responded.

I asked you point bland if drawing the sword by Peter meant he talked the sword into coming out or wooed it to come out and you have not responded.

It does not take a rocket scientist to see that the context in which the term "draw" and "drew" are placed in these examples cannot possibly fit your defintion but you are too proud to simply admit that fact.

In all three examples the language associated with the term "drew" cannot possibly mean simply to "infuence" or to "woo" the net, the apostles into the court because they were said to have been "TAKEN" by the crowd in every case.

 

[Moriah]

You have not! I asked you point blank if the net being drawn by the fisherman fits your defintion of draw.

I asked you point blank if the mobs TOOK HOLD of them and "drew" them into the court could fit your definition of "draw" and you have not responded.

I asked you point blank if the mobs that Luke said had TAKEN them and drew them out of the temple could fit your defintion of "draw" and you have not responded.

I asked you point bland if drawing the sword by Peter meant he talked the sword into coming out or wooed it to come out and you have not responded.

It does not take a rocket scientist to see that the context in which the term "draw" and "drew" are placed in these examples cannot possibly fit your defintion but you are too proud to simply admit that fact.

In all three examples the language associated with the term "drew" cannot possibly mean simply to "infuence" or to "woo" the net, the apostles into the court because they were said to have been "TAKEN" by the crowd in every case.

Those who drew a net is not the same thing as saying we are drawn by words. You are trying to mix scriptures. Again, do not try to use the scriptures against each other. They are about different things. I have answered you and told you that God draws us with lovingkindness, not with force like the men dragging Paul away. You cannot see that your questions are answered, because you cannot see.

 

[The Biblicist]

Those who drew a net is not the same thing as saying we are drawn by words. You are trying to mix scriptures. Again, do not try to use the scriptures against each other. They are about different things. I have answered you and told you that God draws us with lovingkindness, not with force like the men dragging Paul away. You cannot see that your questions are answered, because you cannot see.

Whether you like it or not and whether you agree with it or not - all these texts use the word "drew" in the exact same sense and NONE use it according to your definition.

Any so-called Bible student that refuses to use a Bible concordance to define terms but instead goes to a English Dictionary is a hopeless case to discuss anything with.

 

[Moriah]

Whether you like it or not and whether you agree with it or not - all these texts use the word "drew" in the exact same sense and NONE use it according to your definition.

Any so-called Bible student that refuses to use a Bible concordance to define terms but instead goes to a English Dictionary is a hopeless case to discuss anything with.

We do not have to use a Bible concordance to understand an English word.
The word of God says God draws us with lovingkindness. God does not draw us by force. God draws us with His Word, not with a net.
You resort to personal attacks and meanness because you cannot defend your false doctrines.

 

[The Biblicist]

We do not have to use a Bible concordance to understand an English word.
The word of God says God draws us with lovingkindness. God does not draw us by force. God draws us with His Word, not with a net.
You resort to personal attacks and meanness because you cannot defend your false doctrines.

There would be no English Bible without the Hebrew and Greek Bible. Your bibleis merely a TRANSLATION and the Bible does not promise that translator's are inspired.

You need a good Bible concordance to see if the translators of your version were honest. A good bible concordance will not only show you what Greek term is being translated but how it is translated throughout the scriptures.

Your translation may have chosen an English word that does not properly translate the Greek term it is being used to represent. Theological bias may well have influenced how the translators chose their terms.

Most Bible students know these things as they are fundementals and they are obvious when you compare English Versions as one version picks one word but another picks another word to represent the same Greek term.

What are you going to do when you quote one version that chooses a word that means one thing but another person chooses another version which uses a different word and both of you accept your chosen version by faith and reject the other person's version and neither will use a concordance to see which translator is being dishonest???

I am not going to discuss anything with you because you are choosing to be willingly ignorant. You won't even use common sense study practices. Think about this, don't you have to learn English before you can read an English version? What if a person argued they will just trust their preacher to learn the truth of God's Word and they don't need to learn English. What would you tell them when you pointed out that a certain biblical word was a verb and they replied "My Bible don't have no verbs and nouns." I had that said to me when sharing Matthew 28:19 while pointing out that "teach" is the primary verb. You are illustrating the same kind of ignorance when you claim you do not have to study any further than the English when the Bible was not given in English but in Hebrew and Greek but your response is you will trust your translators.

 

[Moriah]

I am not going to discuss anything with you because you are choosing to be willingly ignorant. You won't even use common sense study practices. Think about this, don't you have to learn English before you can read an English version? What if a person argued they will just trust their preacher to learn the truth of God's Word and they don't need to learn English. What would you tell them when you pointed out that a certain biblical word was a verb and they replied "My Bible don't have no verbs and nouns." I had that said to me when sharing Matthew 28:19 while pointing out that "teach" is the primary verb. You are illustrating the same kind of ignorance when you claim you do not have to study any further than the English when the Bible was not given in English but in Hebrew and Greek but your response is you will trust your translators.

Everything that you falsely accuse me of, this is what you are guilty of doing. You speak of translators not being honest in how they translate a Greek word into English, and you claim that is why you study Greek from a concordance; however, you rely on another translator called Strong! Your argument against me is almost laughable.