You have got to be joking?
HP: You really want another response to the same points? OK, here it goes.
You have indeed assumed without proof the means by which the Father gives.
Giving
is the stated means for coming and you cannot deny it! However, what you want to do is REVERSE the order and make coming the means for giving and YOU KNOW IT! Hence, Christ condemns your very eisgetical MO.
So your objection is absolutely condemned by the very text itself.
You have indeed assumed without proof the manner one 'cometh' to the father.
Coming
IS the manner and the coming is not "to the Father" but to the Son. Again, you are attempting to REVERSE the cause and effects explicitly stated. Your question is foolish as it is a denial of the very manner that is being explicitly defined by Christ.
You have assumed without proof that the word 'cometh' demands the necessitated action you say it does.
John 6:37 demands it is a necessitated act for several reasons.
1. It is presented by Christ as a statement of fact
2. It is presented by Christ without conditions
John 6:38 demands it is a necessitated act
1. Verse 37 is presented as the will that Christ was sent by the Father to do
2. Christ NEVER failed to do what the Father sent him to do as that would be "sin" or MISSING THE MARK.
John 6:39 demands it is a necessitated act
1. If it were not then Christ could not say "OF ALL that the Father hath given me I SHALL LOSE NOTHING.
2. Something contingent upon what neither the Son or Father controls would prohibit Christ from saying "OF ALL...I shall lose nothing" and "but should raise it up at the last day."
3. Your position would prohibit Christ from saying "OF ALL...I shall lose nothing" because you believe that many who come shall be lost and shall not be raised up to eternal life at the last day.
4. These are not conditional statements but declarative statements.
5. These statements are not dependent upon the will of man or the actions of man but on the will of the Father and the actions of the Son.
You have indeed assumed without proof that the' will of the Father' is determinate in that it alone 'determines' the outcome of who comes and who and how one is kept by the Father.
1. The text does not restrict it solely to the will of the father but to the will of the Son as well - "
I WILL in now wise cast him out.....I SHALL LOSE NOTHING"
2. The text includes the willingness and ability of the Son to accomplish the Father's will - v. 37
"I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.
3. The text depends upon the ability and veracity of the Son of God to do the Father's will and the veracity of his promise -
"I came...to do....the will of him....I shall lose nothing but raise it up again at the last day."
I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.
IN REALITY, it is NOT context that drives any of your conclusions, but rather you are bringing to the text presuppositions driving your conclusions, or 'reasoning in a circle' as it is commonly called.
You are the one guilty of this very charge of "reasoning in a circle" and reading into the text what is not there. You know very well you are trying to reverse the order given in the text so that coming to Christ is the cause for giving by the Father when the text says the very opposite!
You are trying to READ INTO THE TEXT conditions when no conditions are provided but rather what is provided are DECLARATIONS according to a stated cause and effect order determined by the Father.
You are trying to make this text read and thus mean the very reverse of what it says:
"All that chooseth to come unto me the Father will give to me and he that remains with me I shall in now wise cast out."
But it does not say that! It says the very reverse. They come becuase they are given and ALL that are given do ALL come and none shall be lost.