"given" is inclusive of "draw" in John 6

[Yeshua1]

Either we have a complete contradiction between scriptures if your inference is correct or we have God demanding from man what only God can do, thus providing man with no other alternative to accomplish this command then reliance upon God?

I believe it is the latter not the former as you are inferring because:

1. Scriptures deny it is possible for man to remove his transgressions and thus impossible for man to cleanse his own heart and spirit from sin.

2. Scriptures deny it is possible for man to produce a new heart and spirit as that is a creative act that only God can do.

Hence, this command falls into the same category as "do this and live" in regard to the Mosaic Law or "be ye therefore perfect even as Your Father in heaven is perfect." Neither is possible for any man to do which drives man away from himself, his own power, his own works to acheive these ends. That is the point of giving the law to reveal inability to do these things and direct them toward God through Christ to accomplish all of these things.




Calvinist do not see any conflict with these statements as the natural state of the fallen depraved nature is to harden the heart to whatever light in whatever area of their life they are being exposed to light (Rom. 8:7-8; Jn. 3:19-20).




This an individual commandment. This does not prove or disprove Calvinism as among the children of Israel there were saved persons in whom the Lord created a new heart and spirit (Moses, Caleb, Joshua, Aaron, Miriam, etc.) while others would not be willing.





This has nothing to do with personal salvation but with the direction which God had told them to travel. There could be mulitude of reasons why they would or would not obey this which would have nothing to do with defining individual salvaiton status.




You need to read the context better. He is saying IN CONTEXT that they in rebellion against God and are acting soverignly, thus replacing the heart of God with their own heart as though they are God.





This is man's duty but it does not say anything about his ability to perform this duty. This falls in the same category as removing their transgressions from their hearts and spirit, and "do this and live" and "be ye therefore perfect even as your Father in heaven is perfect." None of these commandments are possible for fallen man or regenerated man as they are creative acts of God and or conditions of sinlessness that fallen man has already violated.

paul in Romans seemed to think that fallen/natural man is IMPOSSIBLE state/condition to either come to God, or else keep the Law, as while law was/is perfect, sinful flesh cannot keep it....

God HAS to be the agent granting new hearts, and new condition/state between us and Him, for we can do NOTHING in sinful/weak flesh!

 

[Winman]

Brother, Ezekiel is addressing the Israelites, those who were already in a covenant with God. This, imo , is the OT equivalent to us repenting when we sin and go astray. They, under the Law, had not the permanent indwelling of the Spirit, so they did what the prophets, high priests, judges, et al told them.

We are required to repent when we sin, just as they were required to do with those passages you posted. Of course, this is just my opinion, but what I also believe.

Nevertheless Willis, action was required on their part. And in the NT we are told that God commands all men everywhere to repent.

Acts 17:30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:

God commands all men everywhere to repent, or he will not save them. So participation and cooperation is commanded from men. To deny this is to deny much scripture Willis.

You can't simply focus on scripture showing God's part in salvation and ignore all the scripture that shows man plays a part in salvation, but this is what you and many other Calvinists attempt to do.

Do you really think that is the proper way to interpret scripture Willis??

 

[Winman]

We who have been saved by the Lord jesus, passed over from death to life in Him, and love God, love the Bible, love the bethren desire to serve him, to have prayer with him etc

Those are fruits and proofs to evidence that has been elected by God!

Read peter on how we can know by our life that our election from ofGod was confirmed as being true and sure!

If Jesus did not die for every man, then you have no idea if Jesus died for you. Those persons in Matthew 7 prophesied in Jesus's name, cast out devils, in his name, and did many wonderful works in his name, yet they were not saved. Your works prove NOTHING.

 

[The Biblicist]

All Drawn are raised to life eternal

Jn. 6:44 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.

The obvious and simplest interpetation of this verse is the singular "him" who is drawn is the same singular "him" who is raised. Hence, all drawn equals all raised.

This is not only the simplest and obvious interpretation of this text but when verse 45a and the prophetic support for this statement is examined IN CONTEXT Jesus is restricting this kind of drawing to only the New Covenant children of God thus excluding all others as seen in verse 63-64 even false professors from ever being drawn by the Father.

In addition to this is the immediate flow of the preceding context where Jesus continues to address the very same audiance where he explains that all that the Father gives do in fact come to Christ for savlation and none are lost (vv. 37-40) and verses 44-45 explain why all given do in fact come to Christ and none lost because "him" drawn is "him" raised to life eternal.

 

[Winman]

Either we have a complete contradiction between scriptures if your inference is correct or we have God demanding from man what only God can do, thus providing man with no other alternative to accomplish this command then reliance upon God?

I believe it is the latter not the former as you are inferring because:

1. Scriptures deny it is possible for man to remove his transgressions and thus impossible for man to cleanse his own heart and spirit from sin.

2. Scriptures deny it is possible for man to produce a new heart and spirit as that is a creative act that only God can do.

Hence, this command falls into the same category as "do this and live" in regard to the Mosaic Law or "be ye therefore perfect even as Your Father in heaven is perfect." Neither is possible for any man to do which drives man away from himself, his own power, his own works to acheive these ends. That is the point of giving the law to reveal inability to do these things and direct them toward God through Christ to accomplish all of these things.

Calvinist do not see any conflict with these statements as the natural state of the fallen depraved nature is to harden the heart to whatever light in whatever area of their life they are being exposed to light (Rom. 8:7-8; Jn. 3:19-20).

This an individual commandment. This does not prove or disprove Calvinism as among the children of Israel there were saved persons in whom the Lord created a new heart and spirit (Moses, Caleb, Joshua, Aaron, Miriam, etc.) while others would not be willing.

This has nothing to do with personal salvation but with the direction which God had told them to travel. There could be mulitude of reasons why they would or would not obey this which would have nothing to do with defining individual salvaiton status.

You need to read the context better. He is saying IN CONTEXT that they in rebellion against God and are acting soverignly, thus replacing the heart of God with their own heart as though they are God.

This is man's duty but it does not say anything about his ability to perform this duty. This falls in the same category as removing their transgressions from their hearts and spirit, and "do this and live" and "be ye therefore perfect even as your Father in heaven is perfect." None of these commandments are possible for fallen man or regenerated man as they are creative acts of God and or conditions of sinlessness that fallen man has already violated.

This post is why you should question Calvinism Willis. Do you not see that Calvinism has to "explain away" scripture after scripture after scripture? You can't read the Bible naturally as a Calvinist, because scripture is constantly in conflict with and contradicts the doctrines of Calvinism. So Calvinists must go through each of these many hundreds (if not thousands) of obvious dilemmas and explain each one away. Words don't mean what they commonly mean, scripture that tells men to make his heart new cannot really mean that, scripture written to "all men" can only mean the elect, etc...

If this is not a huge red flag for you, I do not know what to tell you, you are truly overlooking the OBVIOUS.

 

[The Biblicist]

This post is why you should question Calvinism Willis. Do you not see that Calvinism has to "explain away" scripture after scripture after scripture? You can't read the Bible naturally as a Calvinist, because scripture is constantly in conflict with and contradicts the doctrines of Calvinism. So Calvinists must go through each of these many hundreds (if not thousands) of obvious dilemmas and explain each one away. Words don't mean what they commonly mean, scripture that tells men to make his heart new cannot really mean that, scripture written to "all men" can only mean the elect, etc...

If this is not a huge red flag for you, I do not know what to tell you, you are truly overlooking the OBVIOUS.

More missed baskets. No attempt to deal with the simple and common sense responses I gave. Why? Because they have no rational responses that can fit with the immeidate and overall context of scriptures. Just that simple. My answers still stand unscathed by ridicule and will continue to stand unscathed until are Arminian opponents can provide substance instead of air balls.

 

[convicted1]

Nevertheless Willis, action was required on their part. And in the NT we are told that God commands all men everywhere to repent.

Acts 17:30 And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:

God commands all men everywhere to repent, or he will not save them. So participation and cooperation is commanded from men. To deny this is to deny much scripture Willis.

You can't simply focus on scripture showing God's part in salvation and ignore all the scripture that shows man plays a part in salvation, but this is what you and many other Calvinists attempt to do.

Do you really think that is the proper way to interpret scripture Willis??

You're missing my/our point. We are NOT denying man's responsibility whatsoever. It's just that God has to quicken the spiritually dead to be able to respond. I am not saying a corpse dead, but dead to righteousness.

 

[convicted1]

This post is why you should question Calvinism Willis. Do you not see that Calvinism has to "explain away" scripture after scripture after scripture? You can't read the Bible naturally as a Calvinist, because scripture is constantly in conflict with and contradicts the doctrines of Calvinism. So Calvinists must go through each of these many hundreds (if not thousands) of obvious dilemmas and explain each one away. Words don't mean what they commonly mean, scripture that tells men to make his heart new cannot really mean that, scripture written to "all men" can only mean the elect, etc...

If this is not a huge red flag for you, I do not know what to tell you, you are truly overlooking the OBVIOUS.

Brother, that post was spot on. If man can make himself a new heart and a new spirit, then why does God need to do anything?

 

[convicted1]

If Jesus did not die for every man, then you have no idea if Jesus died for you. Those persons in Matthew 7 prophesied in Jesus's name, cast out devils, in his name, and did many wonderful works in his name, yet they were not saved. Your works prove NOTHING.

And if Jesus did die for every man and will draw everyone w/o exception, He's the biggest failure the bible ever speaks about. Because waaaay more go to torment than heaven.

 

[Yeshua1]

This post is why you should question Calvinism Willis. Do you not see that Calvinism has to "explain away" scripture after scripture after scripture? You can't read the Bible naturally as a Calvinist, because scripture is constantly in conflict with and contradicts the doctrines of Calvinism. So Calvinists must go through each of these many hundreds (if not thousands) of obvious dilemmas and explain each one away. Words don't mean what they commonly mean, scripture that tells men to make his heart new cannot really mean that, scripture written to "all men" can only mean the elect, etc...

If this is not a huge red flag for you, I do not know what to tell you, you are truly overlooking the OBVIOUS.

why do you avoid the obvious truths concerning Original Sin, fallen sinnatures etc though?

 

[Winman]

You're missing my/our point. We are NOT denying man's responsibility whatsoever. It's just that God has to quicken the spiritually dead to be able to respond. I am not saying a corpse dead, but dead to righteousness.

No, it is you that is missing MY point. There are literally hundreds of scriptures that demand participation from man in salvation. Men are not commanded to sit idle until God ZAPS them with regeneration, men everywhere are commanded to repent.

And this bogus argument that Calvinism gives that God commands men to do what they are unable to do is pure rubbish. This argument is only true if you ASSUME Calvinism is correct. If you realize Calvinism is a lie, then you realize men are able to respond to God.

Were Adam and Eve lost when they sinned in the garden Willis? YES, nevertheless, were they able to come to God when he called? YESSIREE!!!! as you would say, they were not only able, they were WILLING. And they got saved, that is why God made coats and covered them representing the righteousness imputed those who believe.

But Calvinism will tell you Adam and Eve and everyone born since cannot come to God when he calls.

Open your eyes Willis.

 

[Yeshua1]

No, it is you that is missing MY point. There are literally hundreds of scriptures that demand participation from man in salvation. Men are not commanded to sit idle until God ZAPS them with regeneration, men everywhere are commanded to repent.

And this bogus argument that Calvinism gives that God commands men to do what they are unable to do is pure rubbish. This argument is only true if you ASSUME Calvinism is correct. If you realize Calvinism is a lie, then you realize men are able to respond to God.

Were Adam and Eve lost when they sinned in the garden Willis? YES, nevertheless, were they able to come to God when he called? YESSIREE!!!! as you would say, they were not only able, they were WILLING. And they got saved, that is why God made coats and covered them representing the righteousness imputed those who believe.

But Calvinism will tell you Adam and Eve and everyone born since cannot come to God when he calls.

Open your eyes Willis.

So jeremiah was wrong with us having wicked hearts, isaiah/paul that we are all lost, none seek after the Lord on their own, peter stated all have desert and left Him...

Seems that they disagree with you too!

 

[convicted1]

No, it is you that is missing MY point. There are literally hundreds of scriptures that demand participation from man in salvation. Men are not commanded to sit idle until God ZAPS them with regeneration, men everywhere are commanded to repent.

And this bogus argument that Calvinism gives that God commands men to do what they are unable to do is pure rubbish. This argument is only true if you ASSUME Calvinism is correct. If you realize Calvinism is a lie, then you realize men are able to respond to God.

Were Adam and Eve lost when they sinned in the garden Willis? YES, nevertheless, were they able to come to God when he called? YESSIREE!!!! as you would say, they were not only able, they were WILLING. And they got saved, that is why God made coats and covered them representing the righteousness imputed those who believe.

But Calvinism will tell you Adam and Eve and everyone born since cannot come to God when he calls.

Open your eyes Willis.

My eyes are wide open. If man can clean himself up, if he can change his heart, can make a new spirit within himself, then he is self-sufficient, and needs nothing from God. The heart is despritely(sp?) wicked and who can know it? Who can bring a clean thing from an unclean thing? The answer is not one.

 

[Winman]

My eyes are wide open. If man can clean himself up, if he can change his heart, can make a new spirit within himself, then he is self-sufficient, and needs nothing from God. The heart is despritely(sp?) wicked and who can know it? Who can bring a clean thing from an unclean thing? The answer is not one.

You are misrepresenting what I am saying. Man cannot clean himself from his sins, that is why Jesus died on the cross and rose from the dead. But man can repent and turn to Jesus and receive him as Saviour. And unless he does, he will die lost.

When the scriptures tell a man to make himself a new heart and spirit, God is telling that man to turn to God for forgiveness, something the man is completely able to do.

You didn't answer Willis, did Adam and Eve come to God when he called them? That is a simple yes or no.

 

[convicted1]

No, it is you that is missing MY point. There are literally hundreds of scriptures that demand participation from man in salvation. Men are not commanded to sit idle until God ZAPS them with regeneration, men everywhere are commanded to repent.

And this bogus argument that Calvinism gives that God commands men to do what they are unable to do is pure rubbish. This argument is only true if you ASSUME Calvinism is correct. If you realize Calvinism is a lie, then you realize men are able to respond to God.

Were Adam and Eve lost when they sinned in the garden Willis? YES, nevertheless, were they able to come to God when he called? YESSIREE!!!! as you would say, they were not only able, they were WILLING. And they got saved, that is why God made coats and covered them representing the righteousness imputed those who believe.

But Calvinism will tell you Adam and Eve and everyone born since cannot come to God when he calls.

Open your eyes Willis.

Absolutely they could come to God...never denied that. But go back and read what they did when they first heard His voice in the cool of the day. They ran and hid. God sought them out. They hid. God sought. Same way today.

You have sinful man perched on a pedestal he doesn't belong on, Brother.

 

[convicted1]

You are misrepresenting what I am saying. Man cannot clean himself from his sins, that is why Jesus died on the cross and rose from the dead. But man can repent and turn to Jesus and receive him as Saviour. And unless he does, he will die lost.

When the scriptures tell men to make himself a new heart and spirit, God is telling that man to turn to God for forgiveness, something the man is completely able to do.

You didn't answer Willis, did Adam and Eve come to God when he called them? That is a simple yes or no.

I just answered concerning Adam and Eve...

 

[Winman]

Absolutely they could come to God...never denied that. But go back and read what they did when they first heard His voice in the cool of the day. They ran and hid. God sought them out. They hid. God sought. Same way today.

You have sinful man perched on a pedestal he doesn't belong on, Brother.

Nevertheless, eventually they trusted God and came to him. There is no record that God zapped them or regenerated them. They trusted God of their own free will and were forgiven, God making coats to represent the righteousness imputed them.

But how about Cain, could Cain do good?

Gen 4:6 And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen?
7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

Did God say Cain was unable to do good in verse 7 Willis? Or did God imply that Cain was ABLE to do good and be accepted??

 

[convicted1]

Nevertheless, eventually they trusted God and came to him. There is no record that God zapped them or regenerated them. They trusted God of their own free will and were forgiven, God making coats to represent the righteousness imputed them.

But how about Cain, could Cain do good?

Gen 4:6 And the LORD said unto Cain, Why art thou wroth? and why is thy countenance fallen?
7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

Did God say Cain was unable to do good in verse 7 Willis? Or did God imply that Cain was ABLE to do good and be accepted??

Look at the corresponding verses, Brother. In verse 7, the one you quote, God stated "if thou doest well". But did Cain "doest well"? He did that which was in his fallen nature, sin. Now, not everyone kills like Cain did his brother, but our inclination is bent towards sin, and when he grew jealous over Able's sacrifice being accepted by God, he killed him.

God commanded Israel to keep the Law, knowing w/o a doubt they couldn't. He's commanded us to be holy as He is holy. He has commanded all men everywhere to repent. He has continually commanded mankind to do that which he is incapable of doing.

 

[convicted1]

If not everyone w/o exception since the ascension of Christ will hear the name of Christ, how can He draw them that never knew He existed? You've stated that those drawn are those that hear and learn are drawn. How can they be drawn by One they have not heard or learned about(John 6:45)??

 

[Winman]

Look at the corresponding verses, Brother. In verse 7, the one you quote, God stated "if thou doest well". But did Cain "doest well"? He did that which was in his fallen nature, sin. Now, not everyone kills like Cain did his brother, but our inclination is bent towards sin, and when he grew jealous over Able's sacrifice being accepted by God, he killed him.

The fact that Cain did not do well is irrelevant Willis. Did God imply Cain could do well and be accepted, or did God imply that it was impossible for Cain to do well? That is an important question Willis.

If Calvinism is true, and God had no intention of regenerating Cain, then would it be honest to imply he could do well and be accepted Willis? That is the question you MUST ask if you are a Calvinist.

Or do you believe God was simply mocking Cain, implying he could do good and be accepted when God knew that was impossible?

This is the kind of problem you run into on every page of scripture with Calvinism. The words God spoke to Cain make absolutely no sense whatsoever if Calvinism is true.

God commanded Israel to keep the Law, knowing w/o a doubt they couldn't. He's commanded us to be holy as He is holy. He has commanded all men everywhere to repent. He has continually commanded mankind to do that which he is incapable of doing.

You can in fact obey the law. Tell me what law you MUST break. The fact that you and I and everyone else has broken the law does not prove we lack the ability to obey.

Are you unable to tell the truth? Are you unable to resist the temptation to steal?

The very fact that you are not as bad as you could be PROVES that you are not a slave to sin. If you were a slave to sin, you would always be just as evil as you could possibly be.