The word "men" is supplied, it is not in the manuscript.
Therefore, it is actually "draw all unto me". Which means that one has to determine who the "all" are. And by taking the Bible as a whole, we know that the "all" is all of God's elect.
Otherwise, one would be saying that God is a failure if He is trying to do something(in this case, draw every person who ever lived) and unable to do.
Gods draws all humans, but when a person rejects God, it is the human who fails, not God. His drawing is achieved, but God never forces someone to trust in Christ.
When a hyper-Calvinist engages in evangelism, shares their faith with an unsaved person, what is their hope? How do they mentally frame it?
“God, please open their heart to receive thy Word and get born again.”
OR
“God, I hope this individual is one of the elect, otherwise I’m wasting my time and casting my pearls before swine.”
To me, it seems more biblical to see every person as eligible to enter the kingdom by grace through faith in Christ. That seems to be the basis of much greater zeal to win souls for heaven. Thinking that Jesus died only for the elect seems to be nihilistic. “I can be shy and sluggish about sharing my testimony. If Joe is in the elect, he will be saved in spite of my cowardice or laziness in witnessing.” This apathy would decrease evangelical fervor and missionary effort.
- Hyper-Calvinists believed God had already sovereignly chosen who would be saved, so preaching the Gospel wasn't necessary to bring people to faith, only to locate the already-chosen.
- "God Will Do It" Mentality: They argued God would save the elect in His own time, without human help, famously telling William Carey, "When God wants to convert the heathen, He will do it without your help or mine".
- Historical Examples: This led to anti-missionary movements, like the one led by Baptist Daniel Parker around 1820, who rejected missions and missions societies.