"All"

KenH · Apr 8, 2025

And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me." John 12:32

"I will draw all men unto me." What a favourite expression for a universal-redemption Papist. What a favourite expression for proud, free will Arminianism. "All men?" "All men," to be sure. Jesus Christ is drawing them all, only there are some of them that won't come. Why? Because they are so much stronger than He is! Now, will you believe that? And yet that is the only inference. If He is drawing every child of Adam, how is it that so many thousands are drawn into hell? If He is drawing every child of Adam, how is it that they draw iniquity and wickedness, "as with a cart rope?" For that is the prophet's expression, as it is positively set down. If He is drawing every child of Adam, how is it that a large majority of the human race are, "drawn away by their own lusts, and enticed?" Drawn away by their own covetousness and love of money, drawn away by their own pride and evil affections, so drawn away as to be, "led captive by the devil at his will?" Now if I were a free willer, I should roundly declare that man is stronger than God. And though Christ would draw him, He cannot. That the devil is stronger than Christ. That though Christ would draw them, the devil will lead them into eternity, captive at his will. What an abominable system of infidelity this would be!

"Well," say you, "if this be not the meaning, what is?" I will tell you. I think it must appear to every man's common sense that this is not the meaning. "What, then," say you, "is the meaning of drawing all men?" The term, "all men," is used in the New Testament language, generally as descriptive of men of all nations, all descriptions of men, whether Jew or Gentile, (that is the idea), whether old or young, rich or poor, all descriptions of men. And if you cast an eye upon the text, you will see that the word men is in Italics, and is not in the original at all. It should be read, "I, if I be lifted up, will draw all unto me." There are a certain set of materialists that would put in here what their caprice suggests for their own use, though not for the honour of God. "Yes, all beasts are to be drawn to Him, and all made Christians of." Another race of beings would say, "Oh, no! It is all human beings." While before their eyes they see far more drawn away from Him than drawn to Him, and living and dying so. Now, if people have a right to put in the word, "men," or the word, "beasts," or, as it is termed in the 8th of Romans, "creatures," and many give this explanation, I have a right to put in a word too. And I should say, "If I be lifted up, will draw all mine," (it is a very little transposition of the word from, "men," to, "mine)." "I, if I be lifted up, will draw all mine unto me." Then I know I am right; then there will be no failure. I shall not ask whether they live in America, or in Australia, or in England. "All mine." Yes. "All mine are thine, and thine are mine, and I am glorified in them;" and, "All that the Father gave me shall come to me." This is the, "all," intended in my text.

- excerpt from a sermon entitled, "Gospel Exhibition", by Joseph Irons, preached at Grove Chapel in Camberwell, on April 13, 1851.

Silverhair · Apr 8, 2025

KenH said:
And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me." John 12:32

"I will draw all men unto me." What a favourite expression for a universal-redemption Papist. What a favourite expression for proud, free will Arminianism. "All men?" "All men," to be sure. Jesus Christ is drawing them all, only there are some of them that won't come. Why? Because they are so much stronger than He is! Now, will you believe that? And yet that is the only inference. If He is drawing every child of Adam, how is it that so many thousands are drawn into hell? If He is drawing every child of Adam, how is it that they draw iniquity and wickedness, "as with a cart rope?" For that is the prophet's expression, as it is positively set down. If He is drawing every child of Adam, how is it that a large majority of the human race are, "drawn away by their own lusts, and enticed?" Drawn away by their own covetousness and love of money, drawn away by their own pride and evil affections, so drawn away as to be, "led captive by the devil at his will?" Now if I were a free willer, I should roundly declare that man is stronger than God. And though Christ would draw him, He cannot. That the devil is stronger than Christ. That though Christ would draw them, the devil will lead them into eternity, captive at his will. What an abominable system of infidelity this would be!

"Well," say you, "if this be not the meaning, what is?" I will tell you. I think it must appear to every man's common sense that this is not the meaning. "What, then," say you, "is the meaning of drawing all men?" The term, "all men," is used in the New Testament language, generally as descriptive of men of all nations, all descriptions of men, whether Jew or Gentile, (that is the idea), whether old or young, rich or poor, all descriptions of men. And if you cast an eye upon the text, you will see that the word men is in Italics, and is not in the original at all. It should be read, "I, if I be lifted up, will draw all unto me." There are a certain set of materialists that would put in here what their caprice suggests for their own use, though not for the honour of God. "Yes, all beasts are to be drawn to Him, and all made Christians of." Another race of beings would say, "Oh, no! It is all human beings." While before their eyes they see far more drawn away from Him than drawn to Him, and living and dying so. Now, if people have a right to put in the word, "men," or the word, "beasts," or, as it is termed in the 8th of Romans, "creatures," and many give this explanation, I have a right to put in a word too. And I should say, "If I be lifted up, will draw all mine," (it is a very little transposition of the word from, "men," to, "mine)." "I, if I be lifted up, will draw all mine unto me." Then I know I am right; then there will be no failure. I shall not ask whether they live in America, or in Australia, or in England. "All mine." Yes. "All mine are thine, and thine are mine, and I am glorified in them;" and, "All that the Father gave me shall come to me." This is the, "all," intended in my text.

- excerpt from a sermon entitled, "Gospel Exhibition", by Joseph Irons, preached at Grove Chapel in Camberwell, on April 13, 1851.

Well we can see that Joseph Irons did not really understand the bible in relation to John 12:32 and the drawing of man by Christ.

Charlie24 · Apr 8, 2025

KenH said:
And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me." John 12:32

"I will draw all men unto me." What a favourite expression for a universal-redemption Papist. What a favourite expression for proud, free will Arminianism. "All men?" "All men," to be sure. Jesus Christ is drawing them all, only there are some of them that won't come. Why? Because they are so much stronger than He is! Now, will you believe that? And yet that is the only inference. If He is drawing every child of Adam, how is it that so many thousands are drawn into hell? If He is drawing every child of Adam, how is it that they draw iniquity and wickedness, "as with a cart rope?" For that is the prophet's expression, as it is positively set down. If He is drawing every child of Adam, how is it that a large majority of the human race are, "drawn away by their own lusts, and enticed?" Drawn away by their own covetousness and love of money, drawn away by their own pride and evil affections, so drawn away as to be, "led captive by the devil at his will?" Now if I were a free willer, I should roundly declare that man is stronger than God. And though Christ would draw him, He cannot. That the devil is stronger than Christ. That though Christ would draw them, the devil will lead them into eternity, captive at his will. What an abominable system of infidelity this would be!

"Well," say you, "if this be not the meaning, what is?" I will tell you. I think it must appear to every man's common sense that this is not the meaning. "What, then," say you, "is the meaning of drawing all men?" The term, "all men," is used in the New Testament language, generally as descriptive of men of all nations, all descriptions of men, whether Jew or Gentile, (that is the idea), whether old or young, rich or poor, all descriptions of men. And if you cast an eye upon the text, you will see that the word men is in Italics, and is not in the original at all. It should be read, "I, if I be lifted up, will draw all unto me." There are a certain set of materialists that would put in here what their caprice suggests for their own use, though not for the honour of God. "Yes, all beasts are to be drawn to Him, and all made Christians of." Another race of beings would say, "Oh, no! It is all human beings." While before their eyes they see far more drawn away from Him than drawn to Him, and living and dying so. Now, if people have a right to put in the word, "men," or the word, "beasts," or, as it is termed in the 8th of Romans, "creatures," and many give this explanation, I have a right to put in a word too. And I should say, "If I be lifted up, will draw all mine," (it is a very little transposition of the word from, "men," to, "mine)." "I, if I be lifted up, will draw all mine unto me." Then I know I am right; then there will be no failure. I shall not ask whether they live in America, or in Australia, or in England. "All mine." Yes. "All mine are thine, and thine are mine, and I am glorified in them;" and, "All that the Father gave me shall come to me." This is the, "all," intended in my text.

- excerpt from a sermon entitled, "Gospel Exhibition", by Joseph Irons, preached at Grove Chapel in Camberwell, on April 13, 1851.

When Paul was arrested and carried to Rome in Acts 28, the Romans so trusted Paul that they gave him special favors. He was allowed to live with a Roman soldier and receive visitors at will, rather than placed in prison. The Roman Centurion that traveled with Paul and witnessed all that happened and Paul foretelling him what would take place on the trip, had much to do with these special favors by Rome.

When the Jewish leaders in Rome heard that Paul was in the city, they wanted to see Paul and hear what he thought of this "sect" -- Christianity. For they knew that this new sect was being spoken of everywhere and that Paul was in the very middle of it.

So these Jewish leaders set a time with Paul to come hear him.

Acts 28: 23-24

"And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him into his lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets, from morning till evening.

And some believed the things which were spoken, and some believed not."

Answer me this, Ken. When Paul preached to this crowd, "persuading them concerning Jesus" did the Holy Spirit choose out who He wanted to draw, or did He draw all of them, with some accepting that call, and some rejecting?

When this crowd left, Luke quoted Isiah saying,

vs. 26-27

"Saying, Go unto this people, and say, Hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and not perceive:

For the heart of this people is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them."

The Holy drew all this crowd with some rejecting, refusing to believe. A willful hardening of the heart against God.

Tenchi · Apr 8, 2025

KenH said:
And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men unto me." John 12:32

"I will draw all men unto me." What a favourite expression for a universal-redemption Papist. What a favourite expression for proud, free will Arminianism.

It's amazing the rhetorical sliminess employed in this one sentence. "A universal-redemption Papist"? "Proud, free-will Arminianism"? Why the pejorative language? What purpose is it supposed to serve except to "vent a bitter spleen"and promote a partisan, contentious attitude?

KenH said:
"All men," to be sure. Jesus Christ is drawing them all, only there are some of them that won't come. Why? Because they are so much stronger than He is! Now, will you believe that? And yet that is the only inference.

It isn't the "only inference." God has allowed all men the freedom to choose Him, or not. Doing so no more diminishes His power than a prison Warden allowing inmates to walk the yard for two hours (which the Warden would prefer the inmates did), or watch a movie instead (which the Warden thinks is a foolish waste of time), diminishes the power the Warden holds over every inmate. Our free choice for, or against, God exists only because God has so ordained that it should, and He could unilaterally withdraw the choice instantly, if it served His purposes to do so. That men, then, make a free choice according to the liberty God has granted them in no way makes them stronger than He is. Obviously.

KenH said:
If He is drawing every child of Adam, how is it that so many thousands are drawn into hell?

This is only a question if one assumes a Calvinist systematic. For the rest of us, God's drawing is not coercive or irresistible.

KenH said:
Now if I were a free willer, I should roundly declare that man is stronger than God. And though Christ would draw him, He cannot. That the devil is stronger than Christ. That though Christ would draw them, the devil will lead them into eternity, captive at his will. What an abominable system of infidelity this would be!

This sort of silliness demonstrates either a purposeful desire to misrepresent the Arminian view of human free agency, or a profound ignorance of the view. In either case, the above quotation deserves an eye-roll and snort, nothing more.

KenH said:
"Well," say you, "if this be not the meaning, what is?" I will tell you. I think it must appear to every man's common sense that this is not the meaning.

At this point, the writer has established he is not a good source of "common sense." Instead, he's shown himself to be a propagandist rather than a careful thinker.

KenH said:
There are a certain set of materialists that would put in here what their caprice suggests for their own use, though not for the honour of God.

See? Just more ad hominem to add to his Strawman arguing, false dichotomies, and Begging the Question - all of which are fallacious forms of reasoning and the stock-in-trade of the propagandist.

KenH said:
Now, if people have a right to put in the word, "men," or the word, "beasts," or, as it is termed in the 8th of Romans, "creatures," and many give this explanation, I have a right to put in a word too. And I should say, "If I be lifted up, will draw all mine," (it is a very little transposition of the word from, "men," to, "mine)." "I, if I be lifted up, will draw all mine unto me." Then I know I am right; then there will be no failure.

??? If it is wrong for the "papists" and "proud Arminians" to play fast-and-loose with Scripture, as the writer (wrongly) asserts, it is wrong for him, as well. Obviously.

Silverhair · Apr 8, 2025

Tenchi said:
It's amazing the rhetorical sliminess employed in this one sentence. "A universal-redemption Papist"? "Proud, free-will Arminianism"? Why the pejorative language? What purpose is it supposed to serve except to "vent a bitter spleen"and promote a partisan, contentious attitude?

It isn't the "only inference." God has allowed all men the freedom to choose Him, or not. Doing so no more diminishes His power than a prison Warden allowing inmates to walk the yard for two hours (which the Warden would prefer the inmates did), or watch a movie instead (which the Warden thinks is a foolish waste of time), diminishes the power the Warden holds over every inmate. Our free choice for, or against, God exists only because God has so ordained that it should, and He could unilaterally withdraw the choice instantly, if it served His purposes to do so. That men, then, make a free choice according to the liberty God has granted them in no way makes them stronger than He is. Obviously.

This is only a question if one assumes a Calvinist systematic. For the rest of us, God's drawing is not coercive or irresistible.

This sort of silliness demonstrates either a purposeful desire to misrepresent the Arminian view of human free agency, or a profound ignorance of the view. In either case, the above quotation deserves an eye-roll and snort, nothing more.

At this point, the writer has established he is not a good source of "common sense." Instead, he's shown himself to be a propagandist rather than a careful thinker.

See? Just more ad hominem to add to his Strawman arguing, false dichotomies, and Begging the Question - all of which are fallacious forms of reasoning and the stock-in-trade of the propagandist.

??? If it is wrong for the "papists" and "proud Arminians" to play fast-and-loose with Scripture, as the writer (wrongly) asserts, it is wrong for him, as well. Obviously.

Many of the calvinist/reformed view cannot or rather will not see the obvious problems with that philosophy.

I struggle to call it a biblical view as they have abused the word of God to such a great extent.

To use the words of R.C. Sproul we could conclude that calvinists/reformed are "barely saved ... by what we call a felicitous inconsistency,"

Alan Dale Gross · Apr 8, 2025

Tenchi said:
"A universal-redemption Papist"?

They are who they are and teach what they teach.

Tenchi said:
"Proud, free-will Arminianism"?

They are who and what they are proud to be and proud of it and wouldn't be any other way.

Tenchi said:
It's amazing the rhetorical sliminess employed in this one sentence.

So, I see the reason for your fear that Satan is able to influence you with and where the fear of man he threatens you with, results in you making the decision to form your beliefs, based on doing whatever it takes to avoid the common sense reading of literature, like that plainly revealed in Scripture.

Because, look what would happen, if you professed the teaching God has Revealed, regarding who and how He Saves souls.

Think for a second about what would happen, for sure, knowing that people are going to find the Message of The Gospel offensive, much less that Jesus' Atonement is Distinctly Applicable to those who God Gave Him to Redeem, alone, while the entire remainder of the human race is simply left in their sin, exactly in the same condition they were in to start with, where they love darkness and would never have it any other way and so they won't.

You know right now that you are going to be rejected by the carnal flesh and reasonings of sin-cursed lost sinners and many who profess to be saved and very well may be, who in their weakness, will accuse you of being a person of 'sliminess', or that your common every day descriptions of different groups that they own themselves, wholeheartedly, are going to be called 'pejorative', like this name-calling stupidity below;

Tenchi said:
Why the pejorative language?

There is nothing slimy or pejorative about either of those two descriptions of those groups and what they believe, "in one sentence".

But, you are afraid.

That same kind of rejection could happen to you, if you believed the plain teaching of Scripture and that might mike you feel sorry for yourself, because rejection would hurt you, so you defend yourself against that by simply rejecting God, instead.

How extremely disappointed in yourself you are, because you know you are not about to go about saying you believe something that could cause another person, or lots of them, to not like you, which forces you into a wholesale abandonment of any semblance of attempting to employ any rules of Interpretation, as you allow yourself to ignore any alternatives to whatever you decide will make you the safest bet, to stay happy, in your comfort zone, without God bothering you with His Bible Business, exactly the way it is stated, for all the world to see.

Tenchi said:
What purpose is it supposed to serve except to "vent a bitter spleen" and promote a partisan, contentious attitude?

Therefore, you are called upon, in self defense of your self-absorbed, self-centered, self-seeking, selfish self, to vent your bitter
spleen and promote a partisan, contentious attitude, by accusing someone who is not, and say that they are serving their purpose to "vent a bitter spleen" and promote a partisan, contentious attitude.

Strong work. You showed them. You came to bring peace and not a sword.

Only thing is, Jesus Came not to Bring Peace, but a Sword.

Your flesh lashing out and busying yourself coming up with words, to fight against those who believe what you can't afford to and still stay in good with the lost religious world, isn't fooling God.

Too cheap to talk about. Give it up. Repent.

Tenchi · Apr 9, 2025

Alan Dale Gross said:
They are who they are and teach what they teach.

And your point is? Does the initial quotation of this thread use the term "papist" in a winsome way, after the manner of the servant of the Lord in 2 Timothy 2:24-25 who seeks, with gentleness and patience, to teach God's truth? It's hard to see that this is the case with polemical descriptions like "papist."

Alan Dale Gross said:
They are who and what they are proud to be and proud of it and wouldn't be any other way.

How do you know this? How many "proud Arminians" do you know personally? How many of them have indicated to you that they are "proud" of their free will perspective such that it is a feature worthy of note? Are you doing with Arminians as the racist does with those he hates, painting them all with the same brush?

Alan Dale Gross said:
So, I see the reason for your fear that Satan is able to influence you with and where the fear of man he threatens you with, results in you making the decision to form your beliefs, based on doing whatever it takes to avoid the common sense reading of literature, like that plainly revealed in Scripture.

??? Uh huh.

Alan Dale Gross said:
Because, look what would happen, if you professed the teaching God has Revealed, regarding who and how He Saves souls.

Think for a second about what would happen, for sure, knowing that people are going to find the Message of The Gospel offensive, much less that Jesus' Atonement is Distinctly Applicable to those who God Gave Him to Redeem, alone, while the entire remainder of the human race is simply left in their sin, exactly in the same condition they were in to start with, where they love darkness and would never have it any other way and so they won't.

You know right now that you are going to be rejected by the carnal flesh and reasonings of sin-cursed lost sinners and many who profess to be saved and very well may be, who in their weakness, will accuse you of being a person of 'sliminess', or that your common every day descriptions of different groups that they own themselves, wholeheartedly, are going to be called 'pejorative', like this name-calling stupidity below;

I profess the teaching God has revealed concerning salvation. But it's not Calvinism; it's the Gospel of God's word.

I've thought very carefully about what the consequences of Calvinist doctrine are. And so, I'm not a Calvinist. Here are better soteriological alternatives:

www.soteriology101.com - Provisionism
www.evangelicalarminians.org - Arminianism
www.reasonablefaith.org - Molinism

It simply isn't the case that those who reject Calvinism do so because of "carnal flesh and reasonings of sin-cursed lost sinners," or "weakness," but because Calvinism is logically and scripturally bankrupt.

I didn't call anyone slimy, I described the character of the sentence Joseph Irons wrote.

And my remarks weren't "name-calling stupidity" but the plain facts of the matter.

Alan Dale Gross said:
There is nothing slimy or pejorative about either of those two descriptions of those groups and what they believe, "in one sentence".

But, you are afraid.

Well, obviously, I disagree and simply contradicting my view doesn't defeat it, or justify yours.

How old are you? This "you are afraid" thing is rather like the argumentation of children on the playground...

Alan Dale Gross said:
That same kind of rejection could happen to you, if you believed the plain teaching of Scripture and that might mike you feel sorry for yourself, because rejection would hurt you, so you defend yourself against that by simply rejecting God, instead.

This is some imaginative psycho-analysis! Do you often tell yourself these kinds of stories about others?

Alan Dale Gross said:
How extremely disappointed in yourself you are, because you know you are not about to go about saying you believe something that could cause another person, or lots of them, to not like you, which forces you into a wholesale abandonment of any semblance of attempting to employ any rules of Interpretation, as you allow yourself to ignore any alternatives to whatever you decide will make you the safest bet, to stay happy, in your comfort zone, without God bothering you with His Bible Business, exactly the way it is stated, for all the world to see.

Whew. It's impressive how fertile your imaginations about others is. I wonder if you actually ever see people as they are if you're working up these stories about them.

Alan Dale Gross said:
Therefore, you are called upon, in self defense of your self-absorbed, self-centered, self-seeking, selfish self, to vent your bitter
spleen and promote a partisan, contentious attitude, by accusing someone who is not, and say that they are serving their purpose to "vent a bitter spleen" and promote a partisan, contentious attitude.

Strong work. You showed them. You came to bring peace and not a sword.

??? Do you know what projection is, psychologically speaking? If not, you'd do yourself a favor if you looked it up.

Alan Dale Gross said:
Only thing is, Jesus Came not to Bring Peace, but a Sword.

Your flesh lashing out and busying yourself coming up with words, to fight against those who believe what you can't afford to and still stay in good with the lost religious world, isn't fooling God.

Too cheap to talk about. Give it up. Repent.

See above concerning psychological projection.

KenH · Apr 9, 2025

Charlie24 said:
Answer me this, Ken. When Paul preached to this crowd, "persuading them concerning Jesus" did the Holy Spirit choose out who He wanted to draw, or did He draw all of them, with some accepting that call, and some rejecting?

Anyone who was regenerated, while hearing the apostle Paul preach the gospel of the sovereign grace of God in the finished work of Christ, was regenerated by the power of the Holy Spirit, and not regenerated due to their own human self-effort.

KenH · Apr 9, 2025

Tenchi said:
If it is wrong for the "papists" and "proud Arminians" to play fast-and-loose with Scripture, as the writer (wrongly) asserts, it is wrong for him, as well. Obviously.

Maybe you overlooked this in the OP:

"if people have a right". Obviously, the translators of the King James Version added the word "men".

Charlie24 · Apr 9, 2025

KenH said:
Anyone who was regenerated, while hearing the apostle Paul preach the gospel of the sovereign grace of God in the finished work of Christ, was regenerated by the power of the Holy Spirit, and not regenerated due to their own human self-effort.

Did He (the Holy Spirit) call "all" in that crowd or some, Ken?

atpollard · Apr 9, 2025

Silverhair said:
Well we can see that Joseph Irons did not really understand the bible in relation to John 12:32 and the drawing of man by Christ.

So here is the whole paragraph…

John 12:27-38 [ESV]
27 "Now is my soul troubled. And what shall I say? 'Father, save me from this hour'? But for this purpose I have come to this hour. 28 Father, glorify your name." Then a voice came from heaven: "I have glorified it, and I will glorify it again." 29 The crowd that stood there and heard it said that it had thundered. Others said, "An angel has spoken to him." 30 Jesus answered, "This voice has come for your sake, not mine. 31 Now is the judgment of this world; now will the ruler of this world be cast out. 32 And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself." 33 He said this to show by what kind of death he was going to die. 34 So the crowd answered him, "We have heard from the Law that the Christ remains forever. How can you say that the Son of Man must be lifted up? Who is this Son of Man?" 35 So Jesus said to them, "The light is among you for a little while longer. Walk while you have the light, lest darkness overtake you. The one who walks in the darkness does not know where he is going. 36 While you have the light, believe in the light, that you may become sons of light." When Jesus had said these things, he departed and hid himself from them. 37 Though he had done so many signs before them, they still did not believe in him, 38 so that the word spoken by the prophet Isaiah might be fulfilled: "Lord, who has believed what he heard from us, and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?"

Given the fact that the very next verse claims “He said this to show by what kind of death he was going to die” and ultimately, “they still did not believe in him” (v.37) … in what sense did Jesus draw “all without exception“ to salvation or himself? How did Joseph Irons get it wrong?

Charlie24 · Apr 9, 2025

atpollard said:
So here is the whole paragraph…

John 12:27-38 [ESV]
27 "Now is my soul troubled. And what shall I say? 'Father, save me from this hour'? But for this purpose I have come to this hour. 28 Father, glorify your name." Then a voice came from heaven: "I have glorified it, and I will glorify it again." 29 The crowd that stood there and heard it said that it had thundered. Others said, "An angel has spoken to him." 30 Jesus answered, "This voice has come for your sake, not mine. 31 Now is the judgment of this world; now will the ruler of this world be cast out. 32 And I, when I am lifted up from the earth, will draw all people to myself." 33 He said this to show by what kind of death he was going to die. 34 So the crowd answered him, "We have heard from the Law that the Christ remains forever. How can you say that the Son of Man must be lifted up? Who is this Son of Man?" 35 So Jesus said to them, "The light is among you for a little while longer. Walk while you have the light, lest darkness overtake you. The one who walks in the darkness does not know where he is going. 36 While you have the light, believe in the light, that you may become sons of light." When Jesus had said these things, he departed and hid himself from them. 37 Though he had done so many signs before them, they still did not believe in him, 38 so that the word spoken by the prophet Isaiah might be fulfilled: "Lord, who has believed what he heard from us, and to whom has the arm of the Lord been revealed?"

Given the fact that the very next verse claims “He said this to show by what kind of death he was going to die” and ultimately, “they still did not believe in him” (v.37) … in what sense did Jesus draw “all without exception“ to salvation or himself? How did Joseph Irons get it wrong?

Irons assumes irresistible grace in the calling. That is incorrect!

Isaiah 1:18-20

"Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.

If ye be willing and obedient, ye shall eat the good of the land:

But if ye refuse and rebel, ye shall be devoured with the sword: for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it."

Can't you see that God is working with man, giving him a choice?

atpollard · Apr 9, 2025

Charlie24 said:
When Paul was arrested and carried to Rome in Acts 28, the Romans so trusted Paul that they gave him special favors. He was allowed to live with a Roman soldier and receive visitors at will, rather than placed in prison. The Roman Centurion that traveled with Paul and witnessed all that happened and Paul foretelling him what would take place on the trip, had much to do with these special favors by Rome.

When the Jewish leaders in Rome heard that Paul was in the city, they wanted to see Paul and hear what he thought of this "sect" -- Christianity. For they knew that this new sect was being spoken of everywhere and that Paul was in the very middle of it.

So these Jewish leaders set a time with Paul to come hear him.

Acts 28: 23-24

"And when they had appointed him a day, there came many to him into his lodging; to whom he expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning Jesus, both out of the law of Moses, and out of the prophets, from morning till evening.

And some believed the things which were spoken, and some believed not."

Answer me this, Ken. When Paul preached to this crowd, "persuading them concerning Jesus" did the Holy Spirit choose out who He wanted to draw, or did He draw all of them, with some accepting that call, and some rejecting?

When this crowd left, Luke quoted Isiah saying,

vs. 26-27

"Saying, Go unto this people, and say, Hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and not perceive:

For the heart of this people is waxed gross, and their ears are dull of hearing, and their eyes have they closed; lest they should see with their eyes, and hear with their ears, and understand with their heart, and should be converted, and I should heal them."

The Holy drew all this crowd with some rejecting, refusing to believe. A willful hardening of the heart against God.

Are you advocating that this was a simple prophecy that was fully fulfilled in the First Century and says NOTHING about salvation (calling and justification) in our current times? [I am just seeking clarification of your point.]

Charlie24 · Apr 9, 2025

atpollard said:
Are you advocating that this was a simple prophecy that was fully fulfilled in the First Century and says NOTHING about salvation (calling and justification) in our current times? [I am just seeking clarification of your point.]

What prophecy, what are you talking about?

atpollard · Apr 9, 2025

Charlie24 said:
Irons assumes irresistible grace in the calling. That is incorrect!

Isaiah 1:18-20

"Come now, and let us reason together, saith the Lord: though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they be red like crimson, they shall be as wool.

If ye be willing and obedient, ye shall eat the good of the land:

But if ye refuse and rebel, ye shall be devoured with the sword: for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it."

Can't you see that God is working with man, giving him a choice?

While probably an accurate appraisal of what Irons holds in his theology, his only real claim in the quoted OP is that “ALL” of John 12:32 is more accurately understood as “all mine” than “all men without exception”. Isaiah 1 does nothing to affirm that “all men without exception” are either drawn to Christ or the intended meaning of “all” (with no other word) in John 12:32.

atpollard · Apr 9, 2025

Tenchi said:
It's amazing the rhetorical sliminess employed in this one sentence. "A universal-redemption Papist"? "Proud, free-will Arminianism"? Why the pejorative language? What purpose is it supposed to serve except to "vent a bitter spleen"and promote a partisan, contentious attitude?

I agree that the deliberate confrontational attitude seemed unnecessary. Of course, Ken was just quoting and we don’t know what was happening in Camberwell in April of 1851 when Joseph Irons wrote that. Like the fiery rhetoric of Luther and Calvin, it may have been part of a tit-for-tat exchange that was just how things were done in that time and place. (Which we find offensive today.)

Charlie24 · Apr 9, 2025

atpollard said:
While probably an accurate appraisal of what Irons holds in his theology, his only real claim in the quoted OP is that “ALL” of John 12:32 is more accurately understood as “all mine” than “all men without exception”. Isaiah 1 does nothing to affirm that “all men without exception” are either drawn to Christ or the intended meaning of “all” (with no other word) in John 12:32.

More Calvinist rhetoric! That's not even common sense Irons is throwing out there.

I'm sure Irons never seen the choice in Isaiah 1 either.

atpollard · Apr 9, 2025

Charlie24 said:
Did He (the Holy Spirit) call "all" in that crowd or some, Ken?

Some.

Acts 16:11-15 [ESV]
So, setting sail from Troas, we made a direct voyage to Samothrace, and the following day to Neapolis, and from there to Philippi, which is a leading city of the district of Macedonia and a Roman colony. We remained in this city some days. And on the Sabbath day we went outside the gate to the riverside, where we supposed there was a place of prayer, and we sat down and spoke to the women who had come together. One who heard us was a woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple goods, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to pay attention to what was said by Paul. And after she was baptized, and her household as well, she urged us, saying, "If you have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come to my house and stay." And she prevailed upon us.

Paul spoke to SOME (many) women, but God opened the heart of ONE (few) to listen and be saved.

Matthew 22:14 [ESV] “For many are called, but few are chosen."

Luke 8:10 [ESV] he said, "To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of God, but for others they are in parables, so that 'seeing they may not see, and hearing they may not understand.'”

atpollard · Apr 9, 2025

Charlie24 said:
More Calvinist rhetoric! That's not even common sense Irons is throwing out there.

I'm sure Irons never seen the choice in Isaiah 1 either.

I notice that you are ignoring the actual scripture of the OP (John 12:32) and just shouting “Taint so” before playing Scripture Pong in place of any attempt at exegesis.

What about Mr. Irons’ other point … Jesus cannot compel salvation (by dragging people to salvation) according to you … they must freely choose as God merely attempts to reason with them … but scripture says that men are drawn into sin by both “their desires” and “Satan” making BOTH forces stronger than God!

Perhaps you would care to address that argument and the scriptures referenced by implication?

Charlie24 · Apr 9, 2025

atpollard said:
Some.

Acts 16:11-15 [ESV]
So, setting sail from Troas, we made a direct voyage to Samothrace, and the following day to Neapolis, and from there to Philippi, which is a leading city of the district of Macedonia and a Roman colony. We remained in this city some days. And on the Sabbath day we went outside the gate to the riverside, where we supposed there was a place of prayer, and we sat down and spoke to the women who had come together. One who heard us was a woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple goods, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to pay attention to what was said by Paul. And after she was baptized, and her household as well, she urged us, saying, "If you have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come to my house and stay." And she prevailed upon us.

Paul spoke to SOME (many) women, but God opened the heart of ONE (few) to listen and be saved.

Matthew 22:14 [ESV] “For many are called, but few are chosen."

Luke 8:10 [ESV] he said, "To you it has been given to know the secrets of the kingdom of God, but for others they are in parables, so that 'seeing they may not see, and hearing they may not understand.'”

Yes, many are called, and only the ones who accept (the few) are chosen.

Heb. 3:15
"While it is said, To day if ye will hear his voice, harden not your hearts, as in the provocation."

"All"

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

​

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Active Member