Featured Jn 6:45 "all" = "every man" = come unto me

Jn 6:44 No man can come to me, except the Father which hath sent me draw him: and I will raise him up at the last day.
45 It is written in the prophets, And they shall be all taught of God. Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.

In verse 45 Jesus further explains what it means for the Father to "draw" a person to him. It involves personal one on one instruction by the Father so that the person drawn has both "heard" and "learned" of the Father. Thus the person that has been drawn by the Father has been taught by the Father and teaching is impossible apart from having both "heard" and "learned" of the Father. Hence, "taught" = having heard and having learned. If one has not "heard" and has not "learned" they have not been taught by the Father.

Now, the question is HOW is this personal instruction conducted? Jesus denies that it is a VISIBLE circucstance where the one who has been taught visibly sees the Father:

46 Not that any man hath seen the Father, save he which is of God, he hath seen the Father.

So this instruction is invisible and conducted WITHIN the one being taught by the Father.

But the anointing which ye have received of him abideth in you, and ye need not that any man teach you: but as the same anointing teacheth you of all things, and is truth, and is no lie, and even as it hath taught you, ye shall abide in him. - 1 Jn. 2:27


What is it that the one being taught has "heard" and hath "learned" of the Father? We believe it is the internal revelation of the knowledge of God in the Person of Jesus Christ that results in eternal llife so that the one taught is "raised up" to the resurrecction of life in the last day:

47 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that believeth on me hath everlasting life.

God Himself reveals His Son inside this person by a creative act:

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

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

Gal. 1:15 But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb, and called me by his grace,
16 To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood:

How many of those who have been taught this way by God come to Jesus Christ in faith?

Every man therefore that hath heard, and hath learned of the Father, cometh unto me.

NONE taught/drawn by the Father fail to come in faith to the Son. "EVERY MAN" thus taught/drawn "cometh unto me"

This means that the "him" that is drawn in verse 44 = the "him" that is raised up to the resurrection of life.

This means that "ALL" the Father gives to the Son "OF ALL" none fail to come to the Son (v. 37) and "OF ALL" that come to the Son "I SHALL LOSE NOTHING" (v. 39). Thus coming to the Son MUST mean coming in faith to the Son because Christ does not raise up unbeleivers in the resurrection of life.

This means that "ALL" the Father gives to the Son are "ALL" taught/drawn by God = meaning God reveals the Son IN THEM by a creative act that causes them to believe in Christ because "EVERY MAN" thus taught by God "cometh unto me" in faith.

This is irrefutable as the only way to escape this conclusion is to deny or pervert Christ's words.

CONCLUSION Jesus explains what it means to be drawn by the Father in verse 45. It means that the Father personally instructs a person, not visibly (v. 46) but invisibly within that person so that they have "heard" and "learned" from the Father. What they have "learned" and "heard" from the Father is what brings them to a savining knowledge of Jesus Christ so that they "come unto me' in faith. EVERY MAN that the Father teaches in this manner "cometh unto me." That means this drawing is always effectual to the saving a person. In context, ALL the Father gives to Christ do come unto him (vv. 37) so that NONE given are lost (v. 39). Drawing/teaching by the Father is the means that accomplishes this end result. All those given are all taught by the Father so that they all come to the Son in faith. This is irresistable grace, effectual calling and eternal security "OF ALL" and "EVERY MAN" both given and taught by the Father.

 

To simply this OP, I have proven by the immediate context that Christ defines the nature of drawing by the Father to be internal revelation by God so that a person both hears and learns of Christ and that "every man" thus taught comes to Christ in faith. This internal revelation is a creative act by God whereby He speaks light of knowlege into existence within the darknessness of the unregenerated mind (2 Cor. 4:6 with Eph. 4;18).

 

In another thread (now closed) I made this assessment of the two different positions concerning "faith" and how it is perceived to originate by two opposing views:

The problem that no one has yet rightly addressed is that the fallen human nature will not believe or come to Christ by faith (Rom. 8:7-8) as it is in a state of war and resistance. Hence, faith in Christ is not something that can originate with fallen man due to man's nature. Here lies the problem with common faith that lost people exercise every day in regard to many other things.

Arminians who acknowledge total depravity admit that a special work of the Holy Spirit is necessary to deal with this impasse of the fallen nature. Hence, they argue that some kind of enablement occurs when the gospel is preached that provides the freedom of the fallen man to come to Christ.

Hence we both agree that some kind of enablement occurs due to intervention by God in some way so that the will is freed from its bondage to sin to come to Christ.

However, it is the nature of that enablement that divides us. We say that enablement is the work of God in giving and drawing a person to Christ which is always effectual while in other cases it is "worldly sorrow" that results in denial or false professions.

We say that the ability of fallen man to come to Christ by faith is due to the direct word of command by God (Rom. 10:17 "rhema") that creates a beleiving heart within his elect (2 Cor. 4:6; Ezek. 26:26-27; 2 Cor. 3:3) in connection with the preaching of the gospel (1 Thes. 1:4-5).

Revmitchell agreed with this assessment with the exception to the use of "Arminian" and of course my view of it.

That being said, I believe that I have offered evidence from John 6:45 that repudiates the view held by those who side with Revmitchell. That evidence is how Jesus defines "draw" in verse 45 to be that act of the Father that causes a person to hear and learn of Jesus Christ by INTERNAL revealtion or teaching by the Father so that "EVERY MAN" who has heard and learned of the Father in this mannner does come to Christ by faith.

This is the Biblical answer to how faith is derived within a fallen man. It is the work of God and it is effectual in that "EVERY MAN' not merely SOME but "EVERY MAN" thus taugth do in fact "cometh unto me" in faith.

This internal revelation by God is "the light of knowledge" created by God by direct command as explicitly stated by Paul in 2 Cor. 4:6 in relationship with the preaching of the gospel:

5 For we preach not ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord; and ourselves your servants for Jesus’ sake.
6 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.
7 But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us.

This is how faith comes in Romans 10:17 by "hearing" that God provides in John 6:45 ("hath heard") by the word of command ("rhema" - Rm. 10:17).

 

Apparently you did not read the OP because that is exactly what verse 45 does say - "EVERY MAN" thus taught by the Father comes to Christ. Not SOME but "EVERY MAN". Jesus defines what he means by "draw" in verse 45 and its is to be "taught" by the Father and "EVERY MAN" thus taught or that has "heard" from the Father and "learned" from the Father does in fact come to Christ.

More evidence you either did not read the OP or simply ignored the evidence provided in the OP. Drawn is defined in verse 45 as those being "taught" by the Father and "EVERY MAN" thus drawn/taught does come to the Son. NONE come to Christ that are not taught/drawn.

They are "EVERY MAN" who has "heard" and "learned" from the Father, which is how Christ defines "draw" - "EVERY MAN" thus taught does come to Christ.

So far so good!

FALSE! You say "Not all" but Christ says "EVERY MAN"! Who shall we believe your words which are not found in verse 45 or Christ's words which are found in verse 45???

a. NO man can come to Christ but those drawn - v. 44
b. Drawing by the Father is defined as being "taught" by God - v. 45a
c. Taught by God means "heard" and "learned" as none can be taught that do neither hear or learn. - v. 45b
d. EVERY MAN thus taught/drawn by the Father comes to Christ - v. 45b
e. ALL DRAWN ALL COME no exceptions.

That is not what the scriptures say Van! Christ says "EVERY MAN" taught which defines "draw" comes to Christ. If a man neither hears or learns they have never been TAUGHT by God or anyone else as NO MAN can come to Christ who has NEVER HEARD and NEVER LEARNED of the Father , but "EVERY MAN" who has been taught (heard, learned) , comes to Christ without exception.

Who substitued "Not all" for "EVERY MAN" - YOU DID!
Who substitued "THOSE" for "EVERY MAN""? - YOU DID!

So don't tell me that Calvinism rewrites scripture when we have black and white evidence from your own post that you REJECTED the words of Christ and REPLACED them by your own words.

 

It refers to "ALL" taught by God in the previous clause which is the quotation of Isaiah 54:13. How many were "taught"?? ANSWER: "ALL"! The words "every man" is a translation of the exact same Greek term translated "ALL" in the scripture quotation!

Can "ALL" be taught if "ALL" have not "heard" what is taught? No! Can "all" be taught if they have not "learned" what is taught? No! So "EVERY MAN" thus "taught" comes to Christ and "ALL" are taught!

Incomplete and thus inaccurate. "No man can come unto me except the father draw HIM; and HIM will I raise up at the last day" Who is the "him" he raises up at the last day? The contet only supplies the "him" that is drawn and supplies NTHER "him." Van READS INTO THE TEXT (eisgesis) another "him" that is not mentioned.

Another perversion of the text as the text says no such thing! The "him" drawn" is the ONLY "him" in the text that can be raised up and that is why there is no other prequalificaitons added but simple repetition of the same "him" in the second clause. Van ADDS prequalifications by saying "all that do come" when the text sticks to the singular "him" that is enabled to come by drawing is the "him" that is raised.

Another perversion and re-wording of the text. The text does not say "They" or "those who are raised up" but it says "ALL" and it is the object of the verb "taught" which demands every single one is taught by God and NONE can be taught by God who have not "heard" and "learned" but ALL who have "heard' and "learned" come to Christ in faith

5

Another perversion of the text and context. Van draws this conclusion ONLY because he ignores that "him" in the second clause of verse 44 cannot be any one other than the "him" drawn in the first clause of verse 44. In addition he reads into the verse a PLURAL noun in order that he can distinguish between ALL those drawn from "him" that is raised up as though ALL those drawn are not "him" that is raised. This is simply eisgesis pure and simple.

Correct, and none of "ALL" in the Isaiah quotation fail to hear, learn and come to Christ.

Wrong!

1. All that come to me have both heard and learned of the Father.

2. ALL that have learned and heard of the Father are "ALL" that the Father taught.

3. All that the Father taught are individually considered the "him" raised up at the last day.

4. Him that is raised up at the last day is only "Him" drawn by the Father.​

 

Look how Van freely rejects the words Jesus used and replace them with his own words. He must, as that is the only way he can force the text to fit his theolog.

First, he poses his question by treating the verse in reverse order by asking who (singular) will God raise up? He then inserts a PLURAL into his answer "those" in order to avoid the only answer provided by Jesus in the first clause which is the singular "him" that is drawn being the same singular "him" that comes being the singular "him" that is raised up. However, the intentional insertion of the plural is designed to create the illustion that more are drawn then actually come or are raised up. This is intentional perversion of Christ's words simply to make it fit his theology.

Second, he repudiates the cause and effect order in the verse between draw and come. Instead he places them on an equal level "drawn OR...come" thus denying the cause and consequential order. Comiing is the consequence of being drawn and ONLY "him" drawn actually comes and no others. Thus only "him" that comes can possibly be "him" that is raised up as Christ does not raise up unbelievers to life eternal. Again, another intentional perversion of Christ's words simply to make it fit his theology.

CONCLUSION: Who is it that is raised up to life? The same "him" that is drawn as that is the only "him" that can come to Christ and therefore can only be the same "him" which is raised up. However, Van's theology requires him to insert a plural at some point in his explanation/interpretation in order to create the allusion that more are drawn than actually come and are raised up.

 

Clever! Don't quote my words but comment on them so no one can see how you misreprsent what I have said.

Another perversion of the text. The text does not say "All of them who heard" because NONE did not hear because "ALL" were taught by God. So the wording does not provide for ANY EXCEPTIONS but your wording does.

Here is the evil of your perversion of Christ's words. That is precisely why you take the verse in reverse order to avoid the cause versus effect order in this text. NONE come but "him" drawn and so it is the 'HIM" drawn that comes. None are raised up but the "Him' which comes which is "him" drawn. You rewrite the text by REPLACING "him" with the words "all who come" in order to create the false allusion that more are drawn than actually come. However, the singular "him" is the only "him" that comes and therefore can be the only "him" that is raised up. Readers, follow the cause and effect relationship by beginning where Christ begins in the verse and stick with his singular choice of "him" throughout this cause and consequence relationship and that totally repudiates Van's interpretation.

It most certainly does mean that because the cause and consequence order provided in the text demands that. NONE can come but "HIM" drawn thus it is ONLY "Him" drawn that comes. Who is raised up? "HIM" that comes which is "HIM" that is drawn. NONE are drawn who do not come because the cause and consequence relationship with the singular "him" demand that. Period!

That is not the issue. The issue is that "they" equal "all" which again equal "every man"! There is no greater group from which only "they" are taught but others are not. However, that is the implication of your words.

Here is the outright perversion of the text! The "him" drawn is the ONLY POSSIBLE "him" that can come to Christ and be raised up to life as NONE else can come. Hence, the only "Him" raised MUST BE the "him" drawn as NONE else can "come to me."

 

A fallacious illustration because it is not exactly parallel with the words of Jesus.

You should have said, "no person can come into the book store but the man that the owner allows in.

Again, you READ INTO THE TEXT a plural that is drawn so you can give the allusion that more is drawn then actually come. There is no plural drawn but only the singular "him" and therefore none come but that "him" which is drawn. Another perverted and false analogy.

Deal with the grammar and structure and leave your flawed illustrations and philsophy at the door.

 

However, your very argument condemns your position as well. It does not say more than "him" that is drawn will come either! The burden of proof is on your position not mine for two simple reasons. The only "him" in the text that can possibly come is the "him" drawn. Second, the only "him" that can possibly be raised to life eternal is the "him" drawn.

Those who oppose my exposition of this text must READ INTO this text "OF THEM" which are drawn by the Father only him that comes shall be raised to eternal life.

The text not only does not say that, but it repudiates that idea. It denies any one can come to Christ except for "him" that is drawn. It is that same "him" drawn which is then promised to be raised again as there are no other options provided by the text but the "him" drawn.

Jesus approaches this from a universal NEGATIVE "no man can" and then limits it to one possible exception to that universal negative - none but "him" drawn can come to the Father. Therefore, there are no other alternatives offered in the text but that ONE exception "him" which can be raised to eternal life.

Indeed, this text repudiates the possibility that anyone but "him" drawn can come and "him" is singular not plural. Your position absolutely requires you to READ INTO the text the idea "OF THEM" that are drawn only "him" that comes will be raised up. But it says no such thing! Indeed, it repudiates that idea.

 

Notice again your use of the plural when the text uses only a singular. Try to use a singular and see how it works for your theory? Try saying "him" that is drawn is "him" who comes to Christ. See! It destroys your interpretation completley!

Your interpetation demands a PLURAL POTENTAL drawn that can be REDUCED to a smaller number that comes. However, the singular "HIM" repudiates that attempt.

Wrong! the universal SINGULAR negative "no man" denies that it is possible that any indivdiual can come to Christ but ONE singular exception - "him". The context offers no other alternative but the singular "him" drawn which comes to Christ and that is precisely why Jesus continues to use the same singular "him" as the only possible person to be raised to life eternal but the "him" drawn.

The consistent singular repudiates any interpretation that there is a GREATER NUMBER drawn to Christ of which only a REDUCED number actually come to Christ.

Proof? Is there any other "him" in the first clause that can come to Christ but the singular "him" drawn? No! Where can you get a PLURAL POTENTIAL from then that is drawn which do not come to Christ???

 

The verse eliminates any other man provided in this text but this one exception that can come to Christ. Find any other alternative in this verse that can or will come to Christ and I will cease arguing. You can't! Precisely the purpose Jesus limited the noun and pronouns to the singular to rule out any other possibility. In the Father' work of giving he worded so that there is no possiblity to deny "all" drawn would fail to come to Christ or be lost. In the Father's work of teaching he worded so that there is no possibility that all taught would not come to Christ. He worded in the Father's work of drawing that "him" drawn" would be the only possible option to come to Christ and be raised.