Giving by the Father - Jn. 6:37-65

[Iconoclast]

BobRyan

God is not WILLING for ANY to perish but for ALL to come to repentance[/COLOR]" 2Peter 3.

2 pet 3 ...does not say this......it says this; you are posting a falsehood each time you post this ...is a lie.

it does say this-
9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.


God is very willing that multitudes will perish Mt 7...

 

[The Biblicist]

"Not one place in that text do we find what you claim John 6:64-65 declares so you just "quote you" when you state "some had NEVER BEEN drawn" and then you preface your own "quote of you" with "John 6:64-65 declares "

Your whole argument rests completely on the veracity of your denial above and you are wrong!

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.

61 When Jesus knew in himself that his disciples murmured at it, he said unto them, Doth this offend you?............64 But there are some of you that believe not. For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were that believed not, and who should betray him.
65 And he said, Therefore said I unto you, that no man can come unto me, except it were given unto him of my Father.
66 From that time many of his disciples went back, and walked no more with him.


FACT #1 - No one can HONESTLY deny that verse 65 is the reassertion of verse 44 by Christ. Indeed, his words "therefore I said unto you" refer to a past statemenet made by him which can be found nowhere in the context but verse 44.

FACT#2 - No one can HONESTLY deny that he is APPLYING verse 44 to "some" of those called his "disciples" (vv. 61,66) in verse 64 BECAUSE OF THEIR UNBELIF.

FACT#3 - No one can HONESTLY deny the issue of verse 64 is UNBELIEF and Jesus is applying verse 44 directly to that issue! However, that is exactly what you are denying.

FACT#4 - Therefore "come to me" in verse 65 is set in direct contrast to "believed not" in verse 64 and verse 44 is applied by Christ to "some" in verse 64 to EXPLAIN why they "believed not." Hence, "come to me" means "come to Christ in faith" as previously defined in Jn. 6:35-36 where again it is contrasted to "believe not" and I quote:

35 And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.
36 But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not.

Note that both "cometh" and "believeth" EQUALLY obtain satisfaction (never hunger, never thirst) but it is "bread" not drink that Christ presents himself as ("I am the bread of life") metaphorically and thus drinking and eating are also metaphors that convey ONE THING and that is PARTAKING OF HIM by faith. Hence, the "thirst" and "hunger" analogies both equally refer to partaking of him as "bread of life" and are simply parallelisms to metaphorically convey PARTAKING of Him by faith. Hence, not to PARTAKE of him by faith is to "believe not" (v. 36)

FACT#5 - The Father NEVER drew "some" of his disciples and He knew this "FROM THE BEGINNING" of their profession of faith as "disciples" and that is precisely why he applied verse 44 to these specified disciples. If they had once truely been drawn/taught/heard and learned of the Father there would be justification for Christ applyinng verse 44 to them specifically as the clear implication of verse 65 is that such ability had not been "given unto" them in the past tense to this point and it is their present words and actions that manifest the fact they were never drawn/taught/heard/learned by the Father.

FACT#6 - Not only "some" of his disciples but many in his audiance had never been drawn/taught/heard/learned by the Father (Jn. 6:36, 41-43). That is precisely why John 6:37-40 is provided by Christ as the response to verse 36 and their refusal to believe in him as only those "given" to the Son shall come to Christ (vv. 37-39) and thus they had not been given as ALL given do come in faith and they did not come in faith. "ALL" drawn do come in faith but "some" did not come in faith (v. 64) and that is why verse 44 is directly applied to them in verse 65 to clearly prove the Father had never "given unto" them the ability to come in faith to Christ.

FACT#7 - Therefore, not ALL men without exception have been drawn/taught/heard/learned of the Father as those in verses 36 had NEVER BEEN GIVEN by the Father to the Son and thus cannot come to him in faith (drawn/taught/heard/learned of the Father) as ALL who are given SHALL COME and they refuse to come. Those in verses 41-43 are the same ones in verse 36. Those in verse 64 did not come to Christ in faith (drawn/taught/heard/learned of the Father) and that is precisely why Jesus applies verse 44 directly to them in verse 65.

FACT#8 - The "all" of John 6:45a, 12:32 is restricted to "ALL" in John 6:37-39 or only those GIVEN by the Father to come to Christ as NONE OTHERS are given by the Father to come to Christ and being given PRECDES coming. Thus ALL drawn equals ALL coming as NONE but those given "SHALL COME" and "EVERY MAN" (gr. pas - all) drawn/taught/heard/learned does in fact come (v. 45).

 

[Van]

All that the father gives me

Understanding the biblical concept of the phrase “all that the Father gives Me” requires careful study of several passages of scripture. First lets look at John 6.

In verse 37, Jesus says (NASB) “All that the Father gives Me shall come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out.” This verse says if a person is given to Christ, it results in salvation 100% of the time; all given come and are not cast out. Second, the sequence seems clear, first if God gives someone they either simultaneously come to Christ or after they are given, they come to Christ, but clearly folks do not come to Christ before they are given.

In verse 44, Jesus says (NASB) “No one can come to Me, unless the Father who sent Me draws Him; and I will raise Him up on the last day.” This verse says two things, no one can come to Jesus unless God draws him, and everyone that comes to Jesus in this manner is saved, for Jesus will raise him up on the last day.

Putting the two verses together, we get (1) God draws people, (2) some or all those drawn are given to Christ, (3) all those given in this manner come to Jesus, and (4) everyone that comes to Jesus in this manner is saved forever.

In verse 45, Jesus says (NASB) “It is written in the prophets, “And they shall all be taught of God.” Everyone who has heard and learned from the Father comes to Me.”
So everyone who comes to Jesus must first have heard of God, which I think refers to hearing the gospel message. Then, everyone that comes to Jesus must have learned of God from God’s message. I think this learning refers to accepting and trusting in Christ.

Putting all three verses from John 6 together we get, (1) God draws people with the gospel message, (2) some of these hear (understand) the message and believe (having learned), (3) God gives those whose faith He credits as righteousness to Christ, (4) all those God gives in this matter are spiritually placed in Christ (arrive in Christ), and (5) everyone that comes to Jesus in this manner is saved forever.

So based on these verses from John 6 we have a working hypothesis of the meaning of the phrase, “all that the Father gives to Me.”

In verse 65, Jesus says (NASB) “For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to me, unless it has been granted Him from the Father.” If God has hardened the hearts of some, they will not understand the gospel and they will be unable to learn from it, is how I understand the verse - using “granted” to mean allowed. If God hardens a person’s heart, like Judas in this passage, then it has not been granted to come to Jesus. Judas certainly heard the message but just as certainly did not learn from it and put his faith in Christ. So it appears to me that this verse is consistent with my working hypothesis.

In John 12:32, Jesus says (NASB) “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself.” Christ crucified is the center of the gospel message, so this is somewhat consistent with the working hypothesis. However, to fit, I must understand “all men” to refer to all men who have heard and understood the gospel, because the message of Christ being “lifted up” would not it seems to me to draw folks who either did not hear or understand the gospel. In Matthew 13, the parable of the four soils, Jesus explains that some people have hardened themselves, rather than being hardened by God for His purpose such as Judas or Pharaoh, and it appears to me that those who have hardened their heart to the degree they cannot understand the gospel, will not be drawn by the gospel, Matt. 13:19. Clearly my understanding requires a difference between being drawn to Jesus (John 12:32) and coming to Jesus (John 6:37; 44 and 45).

In order to accept this view as consistent with all scripture, one must accept that to be drawn means understanding a persuasive argument and accepting it to some degree, although not necessarily making a full commitment, i.e. the other soils of Matthew 13.
An alternate view, which I think mistaken, is to view draw as meaning to be compelled irresistibly. Matthew 13 clearly indicated folks could be attracted to the gospel, i.e. receive it with joy, and yet not believe from the heart or with all their heart.

In John 10:29 (NASB) Jesus says, “My Father who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand.” First, the “them” refers back to verse 28 and to the ones Christ gives eternal life. In verse 28 Jesus says no one can snatch them out of His (Christ’s) hand and in verse 29 Jesus says no one can snatch them out of His Father’s hand. Thus when we are spiritually placed in Christ, we are in both the Father’s and the Son’s hand, saved forever. To make this clear, Jesus says, (verse 30) “I and My Father are one.” This verse, too, is consistent with the working hypothesis.

In John 17:4 we see that God gives other things to Christ, in this case His work to accomplish, and so we need to look at context to verify that people are being given to Christ for the purpose of their salvation, as opposed to something or someone being given to Christ for some other purpose.

In John 17:6 we see that the Father has given some individuals to Christ, but the purpose was for them to receive the words God had given to Christ (verse 8). We see that these men were given to Christ out of the world, so out of the “kosmos of man” God gave these to Christ for a purpose. These men believed God had sent Jesus, that Jesus was the Messiah.

In verses 9 – 12 we see that Jesus asks in behalf of these men, His disciples, for God to keep them in His name, indicating they were believers and Jesus is asking God to protect their faith, sanctify them in truth so to speak. Jesus says not one of them perished, but the son of Perdition, again indicating these were not given for the purpose of salvation. Jesus then says, verse 20, that He is not asking in behalf of the disciples only, but also for those who will believe in Christ through the message Christ gave them from God.

In John 17:24 (NASB) Jesus says, "Father, I desire that they also, whom You have given Me, be with Me where I am, so that they may see My glory which You have given Me, for You loved Me before the foundation of the world.” This also refers to Christ’s disciples given to Christ for the purpose of passing on the gospel to the world. To be with Me, again refers to being with Christ as a faithful servant, rather than apart from Christ spreading less than the pure gospel.

If we back up a bit and return to verse 17:6, we see that in these verses, the Father is giving to the Son people who belong to the Father. This begs the question, in what way did the disciples belong to the Father before they were given to the Son. All but Judas were “of God” meaning under the influence of God, looking for the Messiah, trusting in God’s word (Old Testament revelation). From this I conclude Jesus is referring to the eleven, Jesus was not praying in behalf of Judas, and therefore Jesus is saying they belonged to God because they believed in God and were committed to following God as best they knew how.

1 John 5:1 says (NASB), “Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and whoever loves the Father loves the child born of Him. Based on the Greek tenses, this verse says that everyone who believes in the present has been born of God in the past. It is God who determines whether or not a person “believes” (Romans 4:5). John 1:12-13 says whoever believes in Christ is given by God the right to become children of God, born by the will of God. So if we put those three verses together we get (3) God gives 100% of those whose faith He credits as righteous to Christ, and (5) everyone that arrives in Christ in this manner is then born again by the will of God and saved forever

In John 3:3 scripture teaches we must have been born again to see the kingdom of God. In John 3:5 scripture teaches we must be born of the Spirit to enter the kingdom of God.

In summary, I have found no passage of scripture that conflicts with this understanding of John 6:37 - (1) God draws people with the gospel message, (2) some of these hear (understand) the message and believe (having learned), (3) God gives those whose faith He credits as righteousness to Christ, (4) all those God gives in this matter are spiritually placed in Christ (arrive in Christ), and (5) everyone that comes to Jesus in this manner is saved forever.

Steps 2 and 3 comprise our individual election unto salvation, according to 2 Thessalonians 2:13-14, which says “… God has chosen you from the beginning [of the New Covenant] for salvation through sanctification by the Spirit and faith in the Truth. And it was for this He called you through our gospel, that you may gain the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.” When God chooses to credit our faith as righteousness (Romans 4:5) He then gives us to Christ by spiritually placing us in Christ, thus “all that the Father gives Me” are saved forever.

 

[The Biblicist]

you will be pleased then with "God is not WILLING for ANY to perish but for ALL to come to repentance" 2Peter 3.

For "God sent His Son ... to be the Savior of the World" 1John 4

"He came to HIS OWN and His OWN received Him not" John 1.

in Christ,

Bob

Read verses 38-39 more closely. The Father's will is not made dependent upon men at all but upon Christ's faithfulness to do his will. Christ is the one that is being held responsible to do the Father's will NOT YOU OR ME!

38 For I came down from heaven, not to do mine own will, but the will of him that sent me.
39 And this is the Father’s will which hath sent me, that of all which he hath given me I should lose nothing, but should raise it up again at the last day.

You did not come down from heaven to do the Father's will!

If you claim that Christ failed to do the Father's will in this matter then Christ is a sinner unfit to be the Savior. He did and will continue to do the Father's will in this matter.

It is not YOUR ABILITY but CHRIST's ABILITY that is in view. Christ says "I SHALL LOSE NOTHING" and this is all based upon His willingnes and His ability NOT YOURS

 

[Van]

Hi Biblicist

Your personal opinion above has already been thoroughly repudiated

Blah blah

If you don't remember, then go look at Jn. 17:2

Not sure why the Calvinist even bothers to post. Misrepresentation and misdirection is all that is offered.

1) When the Father gives someone to the Son for salvation, He transfers the person from the realm of darkness into the kingdom of His Son, He puts them in Christ through the sanctification by the Spirit, setting us apart in Christ. This view is consistent with all scripture, including John 6:37 where those given will not be cast out.

2) John 17:2 Everyone placed in Christ will not be cast out (eternal security!) and will be raised up on the last day (our resurrection to life eternal). The power and authority over the flesh refers to the circumcision of Christ, which occurs when we are set apart in Christ, where our body of flesh (our sin burden) is removed. John 17:2 and all other scriptures are completely consistent with "given to Me" meaning "being set apart in Me."

 

[Van]

Calvinism simply rewrites word definitions to alter the text. We get John 6:35 and the meaning of "come" redefined to mean trusting in Christ. "Erchomai" is used of persons as "to come from one place into another, and is used of persons "arriving." Thus when a person "believes in Me" according to God's judgment, God puts the person in Christ, giving the person to Christ, and causing the person given "to come to Me" i.e. to arrive in Me.

 

[The Biblicist]

Understanding the biblical concept of the phrase “all that the Father gives Me” requires careful study of several passages of scripture. First lets look at John 6.

In verse 37, Jesus says (NASB) “All that the Father gives Me shall come to Me, and the one who comes to Me I will certainly not cast out.” This verse says if a person is given to Christ, it results in salvation 100% of the time;

Verse 37-39 are given in response to verses 35-36 where PARTAKING OF CHRIST by faith is represented under metaphors of partaking "drinketh.....eateth" where "come" and "believe" are also parallel. However, those in verse 36 refuse to PARTAKE OF CHRIST BY FAITH or "come to me" by faith.

Hence, verses 37-39 are given as EXPLANATORY of their refusal. They were NEVER GIVEN by the Father to the Son because ALL whom the Father gives "shall come to me." Their refusal manifests they were NEVER GIVEN to the Son by the Father.

Second, the sequence seems clear, first if God gives someone they either simultaneously come to Christ or after they are given, they come to Christ, but clearly folks do not come to Christ before they are given.

There is no "or" as giveth is a present tense verb and ""shall come" is a future tense verb. If it were simeletaneous both would be the same tense. Being given ALWAYS precedes coming. They "ARE" those given by the Father to Christ as they had been given to the Son before the world began unto salvation which is sanctification by the Spirit and belief of the truth. Therefore "ALL" the given "shall come" to Christ and NONE shall be lost.

In verse 44, Jesus says (NASB) “No one can come to Me, unless the Father who sent Me draws Him; and I will raise Him up on the last day.” This verse says two things, no one can come to Jesus unless God draws him, and everyone that comes to Jesus in this manner is saved, for Jesus will raise him up on the last day.

Correct but you next remarks give another "or" which cannot be found in this text:

(2) some or all

Neither verses 37-39 or verses 44-45 contain any "OR" but both are statements of facts as neither set forth ANY CONDITIONS to be met BY MEN or provide any ALTERNATIVES as you READ INTO this text by your "or".

I think.... I think

It does not matter what you think! It only matters what Jesus said and he says no such thing.

The scripture quotation is being explained by Christ NOT BY YOUR EXPLANATION! Christ quotes Isaiah to affirm his own statement in verse 44 thus "TAUGHT" is regarded by Christ as synonmous with "taught." In Christ's explanation of Isaiah he defines what it means to be TAUGHT/DRAWN. It means to "HAVE heard and...HAVE LEARNED" as completed actions. He is not placing any "OR" neither is he making these things OUR CONDITIONS to be drawn/taught but rather is defiing what "DRAW..TAUGHT" means.

Secondly, "ALL" shall be taught or drawn by God NOT SOME of all as YOU READ INTO this text. This is the same "ALL" in verses 37-39 of which those in verses 36, 41-43 and 64 are not part since they do not come to Christ in faith. That is precisely why Jesus APPLIES verse 44 in verse 65 to those in verse 64 because they had NEVER BEEN DRAWN/TAUGHT/HEARD/LEARNED of the Father.

Finally, this work of being drawn/taught/heard/learned is the work of the Father not of men. "have heard....have learned" is the consequence of having been drawn/taught without which there is nothing drawn/taught.

This is the EFFECTUAL work of God and not of men as Jesus makes this clear to Peter in Matthew 16:17 as the DRAWING/TEACHING work of the Father is INTERNAL and a CREATIVE work of God as Paul expresses clearly in 2 Cor. 4:6which neither preachers or men can do:

And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. - Mt. 16:17

The substance of faith in Christ (v. 16) is only obtained by divine revelation and is not "REVEALED" by flesh and blood! Get that point! IT IS NOT REVEALED BY FLESH AND BLOOD.

For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. - 2 Cor. 4:6

The context is the preaching of the gospel by men but Paul denies any credit for INTERNAL REVELATION as this is strictly the CREATIVE WORK of God alone and which knowledge is the "SUBSTANCE" of saving faith and it is not derived by merely preaching by men of the gospel in word only but it is the creative act of God within man when the gospel comes only IN POWER and IN THE SPIRIT:

4 Knowing, brethren beloved, your election of God.
5 For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost,

 

[The Biblicist]

Verse 37-39 are given in response to verses 35-36 where PARTAKING OF CHRIST by faith is represented under metaphors of partaking "drinketh.....eateth" where "come" and "believe" are also parallel. However, those in verse 36 refuse to PARTAKE OF CHRIST BY FAITH or "come to me" by faith.

Hence, verses 37-39 are given as EXPLANATORY of their refusal. They were NEVER GIVEN by the Father to the Son because ALL whom the Father gives "shall come to me." Their refusal manifests they were NEVER GIVEN to the Son by the Father.




There is no "or" as giveth is a present tense verb and ""shall come" is a future tense verb. If it were simeletaneous both would be the same tense. Being given ALWAYS precedes coming. They "ARE" those given by the Father to Christ as they had been given to the Son before the world began unto salvation which is sanctification by the Spirit and belief of the truth. Therefore "ALL" the given "shall come" to Christ and NONE shall be lost.




Correct but you next remarks give another "or" which cannot be found in this text:



Neither verses 37-39 or verses 44-45 contain any "OR" but both are statements of facts as neither set forth ANY CONDITIONS to be met BY MEN or provide any ALTERNATIVES as you READ INTO this text by your "or".




It does not matter what you think! It only matters what Jesus said and he says no such thing.

The scripture quotation is being explained by Christ NOT BY YOUR EXPLANATION! Christ quotes Isaiah to affirm his own statement in verse 44 thus "TAUGHT" is regarded by Christ as synonmous with "taught." In Christ's explanation of Isaiah he defines what it means to be TAUGHT/DRAWN. It means to "HAVE heard and...HAVE LEARNED" as completed actions. He is not placing any "OR" neither is he making these things OUR CONDITIONS to be drawn/taught but rather is defiing what "DRAW..TAUGHT" means.

Secondly, "ALL" shall be taught or drawn by God NOT SOME of all as YOU READ INTO this text. This is the same "ALL" in verses 37-39 of which those in verses 36, 41-43 and 64 are not part since they do not come to Christ in faith. That is precisely why Jesus APPLIES verse 44 in verse 65 to those in verse 64 because they had NEVER BEEN DRAWN/TAUGHT/HEARD/LEARNED of the Father.

Finally, this work of being drawn/taught/heard/learned is the work of the Father not of men. "have heard....have learned" is the consequence of having been drawn/taught without which there is nothing drawn/taught.

This is the EFFECTUAL work of God and not of men as Jesus makes this clear to Peter in Matthew 16:17 as the DRAWING/TEACHING work of the Father is INTERNAL and a CREATIVE work of God as Paul expresses clearly in 2 Cor. 4:6which neither preachers or men can do:

And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona: for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven. - Mt. 16:17

The substance of faith in Christ (v. 16) is only obtained by divine revelation and is not "REVEALED" by flesh and blood! Get that point! IT IS NOT REVEALED BY FLESH AND BLOOD.

For God, who commanded the light to shine out of darkness, hath shined in our hearts, to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ. - 2 Cor. 4:6

The context is the preaching of the gospel by men but Paul denies any credit for INTERNAL REVELATION as this is strictly the CREATIVE WORK of God alone and which knowledge is the "SUBSTANCE" of saving faith and it is not derived by merely preaching by men of the gospel in word only but it is the creative act of God within man when the gospel comes only IN POWER and IN THE SPIRIT:

4 Knowing, brethren beloved, your election of God.
5 For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost,

Putting all three verses from John 6 together we get, (1) God draws people with the gospel message, (2) some of these hear (understand) the message and believe (having learned), (3) God gives those whose faith He credits as righteousness to Christ, (4) all those God gives in this matter are spiritually placed in Christ (arrive in Christ), and (5) everyone that comes to Jesus in this manner is saved forever.

Readers, notice that Van's chronological arrangement is exactly opposite of Christ's arrangement in John 6:37-45! EXACTLY OPPOSITE! Why? Because Van teaches the EXACT OPPOSITE of what Christ taught here.

Here is the correct order (1) One must first be given by the Father to come to Christ in faith and "ALL" given shall and do come and NONE of the "ALL" are lost - Jn. 6:37-39; (2) One must be drawn by the Father in order to come to Christ in faith and to be drawn means to be taught and "ALL" shall be taught by God. To be taught by God means to "HAVE heard and...HAVE learned" and "ALL" ("every man" translates the same Greek word translated "all" in verse 45a) TAUGHT shall and do come to Christ in faith. (3) Not "ALL" men are given or drawn as "some" were never given (Jn. 6:36,41-43) or drawn/taught (Jn. 6:64-65) and Christ knows who they are from the beginning just as He knows the elect from the beginning (2 thes. 2:13 -"from the beginniing").

In verse 65, Jesus says (NASB) “For this reason I have said to you, that no one can come to me, unless it has been granted Him from the Father.” If God has hardened the hearts of some, they will not understand the gospel and they will be unable to learn from it, is how I understand the verse - using “granted” to mean allowed. If God hardens a person’s heart, like Judas in this passage, then it has not been granted to come to Jesus. Judas certainly heard the message but just as certainly did not learn from it and put his faith in Christ. So it appears to me that this verse is consistent with my working hypothesis.

You just freely READ INTO THE TEXT anything your little heart wants to read into it in order to pervert the Word of God and escape what it does say.

The purpose of quoting verse 44 is to prove they were never DRAWN by the Father in the first place and that is why they respond in unbelief just as those in verse 36 were never given by the Father in the first place and that is why they respond in unbelief. Hence, not "ALL" men without exception are drawn just as "ALL" men without exception are not given to the Son. The same "all" in verses 37-39 is the same "all" of verses 45 and John 12:32.

In John 12:32, Jesus says (NASB) “And I, if I be lifted up from the earth, will draw all men to Myself.” Christ crucified is the center of the gospel message, so this is somewhat consistent with the working hypothesis.

Jerked out of context! John 12:32 is a direct contextual result of verse 21 and everything said between verse 21-31 is in reference to "greeks" whom were rejected as equal to the Jews in salvation or service. The "all" here refers to all races, classes and genders which constitute the "ALL" which are given to the Son by the Father to believe in him (Jn. 6:37-39) and of which are the "ALL" taught/drawn by the Father to believe in him (Jn. 6:45a).

 

[The Biblicist]

2) John 17:2 Everyone placed in Christ will not be cast out (eternal security!) and will be raised up on the last day (our resurrection to life eternal). The power and authority over the flesh refers to the circumcision of Christ, which occurs when we are set apart in Christ, where our body of flesh (our sin burden) is removed. John 17:2 and all other scriptures are completely consistent with "given to Me" meaning "being set apart in Me."

Read the text and know its content before making such foolish comments. John 17:2 gives a precise order: (1) ONLY as many as are given to the Son by the Father; (2) will be given eternal life by the Son or don't you understand the limitation of "as many as" or can't you discern the difference between "all flesh" and "as many as" were given from among "all flesh"???

Second, being given "eternal life" is consequential to being given by the Father as the Son only gives eternal life to "as many as" the Father gave him! Hence, being "given" cannot refer to being PLACED IN CHRIST SPIRITUALLY prior to being given eternal life which is SPIRITUAL UNION with Christ or the opposite of SPIRITUAL DEATH or being "alienated from the life of God" (Eph. 2:1; 4:18).

Being "given" refers to election by the Father before the world began or "from the beginning" (2 Thes. 2:13) and that is why Jesus knew "FROM THE BEGINNING" those particular disicples, along with Judas" had never been "given" the ability to come to Christ in faith (Jn. 6:64-65).

 

[The Biblicist]

Calvinism simply rewrites word definitions to alter the text. We get John 6:35 and the meaning of "come" redefined to mean trusting in Christ. "Erchomai" is used of persons as "to come from one place into another, and is used of persons "arriving." Thus when a person "believes in Me" according to God's judgment, God puts the person in Christ, giving the person to Christ, and causing the person given "to come to Me" i.e. to arrive in Me.

Immediate context defines "come" in John 6! It is defined in verse 35 positively and defined negatively in verses 64-65.

35 And Jesus said unto them, I am the bread of life: he that cometh to me shall never hunger; and he that believeth on me shall never thirst.
36 But I said unto you, That ye also have seen me, and believe not.


1. Note there is nothing in the text or immediate preceding context of any LIQUID to drink. Christ is presented as "bread of life" at the beginning of verse 35. Hence, the words "hunger" and "thirst" both are metaphors meaning the very SAME THING - to metaphorical PARTAKE of Christ by faith.

2. Thus the words "cometh" and "believeth" mean the very SAME THING in connection with the metaphors they represent "thirst" and "hunger" WHICH ALSO MEAN THE VERY SAME THING.

CONCLUSION: Contextually to "come" to Christ means to PARTAKE OF CHRIST BY FAITH. Those in verse 64 are defined by UNBELIEF and verse 65 quotes verse 44 in order to explain their UNBELIEF rather than THEIR POSITION IN CHRIST! What they were not "given" is the ability to PARTAKE OF CHRIST BY FAITH which is being drawn/taught/heard/learned of the Father.

Those who COME TO CHRIST BY FAITH find rest for their souls (Mt. 11:33) as we have "peace with God" when we are justified "BY FAITH" - Rom. 5:1

 

[The Biblicist]

Foolish Logic

If we want to speak about logic or foolish logic, then how foolish would it be for Christ first to claim that men must first be GIVEN by the Father as the condition or in order to come to Christ by faith (Jn. 6:37-39) and then turn around in verses 44-45 and claim all can come to the Father regardless if the Father gives them to the Son or not because all are drawn by the Father thus placing "given" and "draw" in direct contradiction to each other????

If being given is conditional for any man coming and "ALL" who are given do in fact come to Christ, then does the Father contradict Himself by claiming "ALL" (v. 45) can come to the Son whether they are "given" or not????????

The truth is that "ALL" given equal "ALL" drawn or else you have the Father contradicting Himself by claiming He must give "ALL" to the son as the condition for coming to the Son but neverthless "ALL" can come to the Son regardless if they are given because the Father draws "ALL" to the Son. That is pure nonsense!

The first "ALL" in regard to the Father work necessary for coming in John 6:37 is the same "ALL" in verse 45a and the same "ALL" in John 12:32 or the Father is in contradiction to the Father.

 

[Skandelon]

The SAME gospel was preached before and after the cross (Heb. 4:2; Acts 10:43; 26:22-23; etc.). The same way of salvation and the same Savior (Mt. 7:13-14; Jn. 14:6; Acts 4:12).

I agree that there is only one way for anyone to be saved. I agree there is only one gospel. But, just as Paul CLEARLY said and I JUST quoted, there is a mystery that just now being revealed. You have yet to really address the concept of Israel being cut off the vine and the Gentiles being grafted into the vine, for that is the heart of our view of corporate election. The gospel being sent first to the Jew and then the Gentiles (not my words, but scripture), is indicating the concept of corporate election, which is what this discussion is about.

Paul said, "But now a righteousness from God, apart from law, has been made known, to which the Law and the Prophets testify."

Notice that though the law and prophets testified to this true means of righteousness, but Paul still acknowledges that it is just "NOW" really being made KNOWN. That is REVELATION. That is what the VINE in Romans 11 is all about...and that is what election is all about. Israel was REVEALED to first (they were IN THE VINE), but then they were cut off (blinded from revelation), and the revelation was sent to the Gentiles (they were grafted in).

That is representing our perspective of divine election. You can disagree with that perspective but it would be nice to know that you understood it first.

 

[Skandelon]

If we want to speak about logic or foolish logic, then how foolish would it be for Christ first to claim that men must first be GIVEN by the Father as the condition or in order to come to Christ by faith (Jn. 6:37-39) and then turn around in verses 44-45 and claim all can come to the Father regardless if the Father gives them to the Son or not because all are drawn by the Father thus placing "given" and "draw" in direct contradiction to each other????

John 17 contains your answer: At the beginning of Jesus' prayer he speaks of the apostles being 'given to him by the father' and later he prays also for those who will believe in Him through their message. This shows that God's purpose in giving this remnant from Israel to Christ was so that the world may believe in Christ through their message.

God gave Christ His messengers so that the world may hear and believe His message.

 

[The Biblicist]

I agree that there is only one way for anyone to be saved. I agree there is only one gospel. But, just as Paul CLEARLY said and I JUST quoted, there is a mystery that just now being revealed.

The "mystery" is in regard to the "middle wall of partition" in the PUBLIC HOUSE OF WORSHIP as this wall declared Jewish believers SUPERIOR to Gentile BELEIVERS. This wall of division within the PUBLIC HOUSE OF WORSHIP has been removed so that no baptized believer in God's new PUBLIC HOUSE OF WORSHIP is to be regarded by their race, class or gender in regard to EQUAL membership but all are "spiritual" stones built up a holy priesthood as "spiritual" or a "heavenly" people.


Romans 11 deals with something completely different! It deals with God's purpose of election with specific reference to Israel as a nation, its generational "remnant" versus the Gentile elect in connection to God's promise to Abraham. This is in regard to God's timetable with regard to ORDER, VOLUME and SPHERE only.

1. God first worked among Israel (order) in calling out an elect (remnant) before moving from the Jewish sphere to the Gentile sphere in calling out the elect gentile seed promised to Abraham. This refers to the MAJOR spheres of redemptive operation in calling out His elect seed.

2. God will change major spheres of redemptive activity again back to the nation of Israel at the close of the age when he shall save "all Israel" in a national sense - meaning - in reverse to rejection of Christ in a national sense. The nation as a WHOLE rejected Christ and as a WHOLE they will be saved by Christ (Rom. 11:25-28). The nation as a WHOLE rejected him as individuals and the nation as a WHOLE will receive him as individuals.

 

[The Biblicist]

John 17 contains your answer: At the beginning of Jesus' prayer he speaks of the apostles being 'given to him by the father' and later he prays also for those who will believe in Him through their message. This shows that God's purpose in giving this remnant from Israel to Christ was so that the world may believe in Christ through their message.

God gave Christ His messengers so that the world may hear and believe His message.

I do not see any logical response here at all to the dilemma I presented - Nothing!

1. The giving in John 6:37-39 has NOTHING to do with the apostolic office or the nation of Israel but about INDIVIDUALS coming to Christ for eternal life as clearly spelled out in verse 40.

2. The drawing in John 6:44-45,64-65 has nothing to do with the Apostolic office or the nation of Israel but with individuals who refuse to believe versus faith being "given" unto them through drawing.

3. Finally the "remnant" or apostles serve no better than the "churches" in preaching the gospel BEFORE OR AFTER the cross but the issue of Jn 6:35-64 is about what is necessary for people to even receive the gospel BEFORE OR AFTER the cross and that is not determined by what any man, apostle or nation does but on what the Father does in giving and drawing people to Christ. You are confusing cause with effects and this text is defining the cause and the cause has nothing to do with men, nations, churches or preaching but solely the work of the Father as cause and coming as effects. John 6:37-39 has to do with the Father's PURPOSE WILL OF CHOICE (vv. 38-39) in regard to coming and John 6:44-65 has to do with the Father POWER in regard to coming to Christ in faith.

Your comments make no sense and so I repeat the dilemma again:

If we want to speak about logic or foolish logic, then how foolish would it be for Christ first to claim that men must first be GIVEN by the Father as the condition or in order to come to Christ by faith (Jn. 6:37-39) and then turn around in verses 44-45 and claim all can come to the Father regardless if the Father gives them to the Son or not because all are drawn by the Father thus placing "given" and "draw" in direct contradiction to each other????

If being given is conditional for any man coming and "ALL" who are given do in fact come to Christ, then does the Father contradict Himself by claiming "ALL" (v. 45) can come to the Son whether they are "given" or not????????

The truth is that "ALL" given equal "ALL" drawn or else you have the Father contradicting Himself by claiming He must give "ALL" to the son as the condition for coming to the Son but neverthless "ALL" can come to the Son regardless if they are given because the Father draws "ALL" to the Son. That is pure nonsense!

The first "ALL" in regard to the Father work necessary for coming in John 6:37 is the same "ALL" in verse 45a and the same "ALL" in John 12:32 or the Father is in contradiction to the Father.

 

[The Biblicist]

God gave Christ His messengers so that the world may hear and believe His message.

John 6:37-39 reveal what is the necessary condition for any man to come to Christ in faith, therefore,

1. Whether the gospel was preached and received by men BEFORE Israel became a nation (Gen. 1-11) or during the time when it was being formed, or by its prophets before Christ, or by the Jewish remnant after Christ or by Christians and churches now MAKES NO DIFFERENCE in the conditional cause for coming to Christ in faith at ANY TIME.

2. These passages are dealing directly with the FATHER's Work in connection with coming to Christ NOT the preachers work (Rom. 10:14-16) or the gospel's relationship with coming to Christ. The Father's work involves giving and drawing by revelation that cannot be "REVEALED" by men (Mt. 16:16-17) that is only a CREATIVE work of God (2 Cor. 4:6) and no man, nor the gospel, nor any church, remnant or prophet can "REVEAL" this INWARDLY (2 Cor. 4:6) or else that would be the case every time the gospel is preached (1 Thes. 1:4-5) and that is not the case as Mt. 13:9-10 reveals that God does not indiscrimately reveal such to all men but only those "given" by the Father and drawn by the Father and that is not all men without exception (Jn. 6:36,41-43,64-65; 10:26; etc.).

3. Hence, the work of the Father described in John 6:35-65 is the work that must PRECEDE any gospel reception and it is not the work of man but "of the Father."

If we want to speak about logic or foolish logic, then how foolish would it be for Christ first to claim that men must first be GIVEN by the Father as the condition or in order to come to Christ by faith (Jn. 6:37-39) and then turn around in verses 44-45 and claim all can come to the Father regardless if the Father gives them to the Son or not because all are drawn by the Father thus placing "given" and "draw" in direct contradiction to each other????

If being given is conditional for any man coming and "ALL" who are given do in fact come to Christ, then does the Father contradict Himself by claiming "ALL" (v. 45) can come to the Son whether they are "given" or not????????

The truth is that "ALL" given equal "ALL" drawn or else you have the Father contradicting Himself by claiming He must give "ALL" to the son as the condition for coming to the Son but neverthless "ALL" can come to the Son regardless if they are given because the Father draws "ALL" to the Son. That is pure nonsense!

The first "ALL" in regard to the Father work necessary for coming in John 6:37 is the same "ALL" in verse 45a and the same "ALL" in John 12:32 or the Father is in contradiction to the Father.

 

[Van]

If we want to speak about logic or foolish logic, then how foolish would it be for Christ first to claim that men must first be GIVEN by the Father as the condition or in order to come to Christ by faith (Jn. 6:37-39) and then turn around in verses 44-45 and claim all can come to the Father regardless if the Father gives them to the Son or not because all are drawn by the Father thus placing "given" and "draw" in direct contradiction to each other????

The Calvinist continues his assault on the truth!!!!

1) To be given by the Father to Christ for salvation is to be set apart spiritually in Christ, thus to come to Jesus refers to this transfer from the realm of darkness to the kingdom of God. Not one before the other, or one following the other, but both referring to the same thing. Thus the Calvinist provides misinformation again and again, simply trying to obfuscate the truth.

2) Next, the Calvinist says my view is "all can come to Father!" What complete falsehood. Truth has no meaning to the Calvinist.

3) Next the Calvinist claims all can come regardless if the Father gives them. Being given transfers the person into Christ, thus all given for salvation do come to and arrive in Christ. Therefore if not given by God, no one is transferred into Christ, thus no one comes to and arrives in Christ unless given.

4) Next the Calvinist contrasts being drawn (attracted by the gospel) with being given (God putting someone spiritually in Christ.) Two entirely different things.

On and on it goes with the Calvinist posting nonsense no stop.

Calvinism is clueless as to Chapter 6 of John. They confuse perceiving and believing in Christ, a mental action of men, with God crediting or not that faith as righteousness and placing the person spiritually in Christ, making our belief in Christ a prerequisite to being put in Christ by God if He credits our faith as righteousness.

Do not loose sight of John 6:37 where all given arrive in Christ because you must be in Christ to be cast out or not. Thus spiritual transfer by God is in view, not the mental action of men.

 

[Van]

I see the Calvinist continues his assault on the truth, cluelessly claiming being drawn equals being given. What utter nonsense.

As has been shown dozens of times now, "to draw" when used metaphorically refers to attract by the power of persuasion. Thus the lovingkindness shown in the gospel, i.e. Christ dying for us, attracts (draws) us to Christ. Christ said if I be high and lifted up, referring to dying for us on the cross, I will draw all men. The prerequisite of course is to hear and understand the gospel, to "behold" Christ high and lifted up.

Calvinism relies on redefining words to pour the man-made doctrine into the text. "Come to Me" is redefined to mean "come to know" and "draw all men" is redefined to mean "give to Me." Endless nonsense in post after post after post.

 

[The Biblicist]

I see the Calvinist continues his assault on the truth, cluelessly claiming being drawn equals being given. What utter nonsense.

If you can't respond with an intelligent answer then I guess the best next thing is just rant?

As has been shown dozens of times now, "to draw" when used metaphorically refers to attract by the power of persuasion.

That is simply false! You have not proved that even ONCE much less "dozens of times." Those in verse 64 were attracted by the power of persuasion to become Christ's disciples but NEVER WERE DRAWN BY THE FATHER - v. 65

Calvinism relies on redefining words to pour the man-made doctrine into the text. "Come to Me" is redefined to mean "come to know" and "draw all men" is redefined to mean "give to Me." Endless nonsense in post after post after post.

I provided the absolutely contextual based detailed proof that "come" means "believe" - vv. 35-36 and the best you can do is simply rant as a response.

If we want to speak about logic or foolish logic, then how foolish would it be for Christ first to claim that men must first be GIVEN by the Father as the condition to come to Christ by faith (Jn. 6:37-39) and then turn around in verses 44-45 and claim all can come to the Father regardless if the Father gives them to the Son or not because all are drawn by the Father thus placing "given" and "draw" in direct contradiction to each other????

If being given is conditional for any man coming and "ALL" who are given do in fact come to Christ, then does the Father contradict Himself by claiming "ALL" (v. 45) can come to the Son whether they are "given" or not????????

The truth is that "ALL" given equal "ALL" drawn or else you have the Father contradicting Himself by claiming He must give "ALL" to the son as the condition for coming to the Son but neverthless "ALL" can come to the Son regardless if they are given because the Father draws "ALL" to the Son. That is pure nonsense!

The first "ALL" in regard to the Father work necessary for coming in John 6:37 is the same "ALL" in verse 45a and the same "ALL" in John 12:32 or the Father is in contradiction to the Father.

 

[Protestant]

HUH???? Is there a difference in how logic works for Catholics and "Protestants"??

I see you have limited your posts since they number in the hundreds rather than in the multi-thousands as do your comrades in arms.

This is a most wise decision on your part. For the more you attempt to display ‘logical genius’, the higher you hoist yourself on your own petard.

Scripture is logical. However, it is also spiritual, written by the Spirit of God.

Therein lies the rub, Inspector.

“But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.”

“the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.”

Kreeft and the billions of Roman Catholics before, during and since the Inquisition have this in common: They understand the text of John 6 to be taken literally.

As a result, they are forever eating the literal flesh and drinking the literal blood of Jesus Christ. And let us not forget they also swallow His soul and divinity in this ‘celebration.’
Of course, before Kreeft and his fellow Jesus-eaters can partake of this ongoing ‘sacrifice’, their priest must first conjure up their false Jesus, their wafer-God.

Protestants throughout history refuted this blasphemy called the Mass.

Though they used irrefutable biblical 'logic', they were murdered by the millions for their godly efforts.

This, Inspector, is but one of numerous examples as to how Catholic ‘logic’ works.

I can only hope the logic of Peter Kreeft has not totally dissipated your rational mind, the gift given by the true light which lighteth every man that cometh into the world.