What Did Jesus mean By "All Those that The Father Gives Unto Me?"

[Jerome]

Spurgeon, on the shenanigans some Calvinism enthusiasts undertake when the pesky Scriptures just don't line up with their "grand theory":

[I Tim. 2:4]

"What then? Shall we try to put another meaning into the text than that which it fairly bears? I trow not. You must, most of you, be acquainted with the general method in which our older Calvinistic friends deal with this text. "All men," say they, —"that is, some men": as if the Holy Ghost could not have said "some men" if he had meant some men. "All men," say they; "that is, some of all sorts of men": as if the Lord could not have said "all sorts of men" if he had meant that. The Holy Ghost by the apostle has written "all men," and unquestionably he means all men. I know how to get rid of the force of the "alls" according to that critical method which some time ago was very current, but I do not see how it can be applied here with due regard to truth. I was reading just now the exposition of a very able doctor who explains the text so as to explain it away; he applies grammatical gunpowder to it, and explodes it by way of expounding it. I thought when I read his exposition that it would have been a very capital comment upon the text if it had read, "Who will not have all men to be saved, nor come to a knowledge of the truth." Had such been the inspired language every remark of the learned doctor would have been exactly in keeping, but as it happens to say, "Who will have all men to be saved," his observations are more than a little out of place. My love of consistency with my own doctrinal views is not great enough to allow me knowingly to alter a single text of Scripture. I have great respect for orthodoxy, but my reverence for inspiration is far greater. I would sooner a hundred times over appear to be inconsistent with myself than be inconsistent with the word of God. I never thought it to be any very great crime to seem to be inconsistent with myself, for who am I that I should everlastingly be consistent? But I do think it a great crime to be so inconsistent with the word of God that I should want to lop away a bough or even a twig from so much as a single tree of the forest of Scripture. God forbid that I should cut or shape, even in the least degree, any divine expression. So runs the text, and so we must read it, "God our Saviour; who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth."" —"Salvation By Knowing the Truth"

 

[Rippon]

Congrats Jerome,on posting an excerpt of C.H.S's worst sermon on record.

 

[psalms109:31]

Spurgeon

Thank you Jerome that is the Spurgeon I came to know and love. This is why we should make peace with everyone because of the desire of God. He wasn't lying back then and not today. We know only those that believe trust in Christ and show their faith by what they do have receive it. I will never disagree with the elect nor those who He is including with them

 

[Skandelon]

Yet these people say God loves all?

So did Calvin and many Calvinists, like John MacArthur, and even Luke who you are addressing, has affirmed MacArthur on this point...

 

[psalms109:31]

Spurgeon, on the shenanigans some Calvinism enthusiasts undertake when the pesky Scriptures just don't line up with their "grand theory":

[I Tim. 2:4]

"What then? Shall we try to put another meaning into the text than that which it fairly bears? I trow not. You must, most of you, be acquainted with the general method in which our older Calvinistic friends deal with this text. "All men," say they, —"that is, some men": as if the Holy Ghost could not have said "some men" if he had meant some men. "All men," say they; "that is, some of all sorts of men": as if the Lord could not have said "all sorts of men" if he had meant that. The Holy Ghost by the apostle has written "all men," and unquestionably he means all men. I know how to get rid of the force of the "alls" according to that critical method which some time ago was very current, but I do not see how it can be applied here with due regard to truth. I was reading just now the exposition of a very able doctor who explains the text so as to explain it away; he applies grammatical gunpowder to it, and explodes it by way of expounding it. I thought when I read his exposition that it would have been a very capital comment upon the text if it had read, "Who will not have all men to be saved, nor come to a knowledge of the truth." Had such been the inspired language every remark of the learned doctor would have been exactly in keeping, but as it happens to say, "Who will have all men to be saved," his observations are more than a little out of place. My love of consistency with my own doctrinal views is not great enough to allow me knowingly to alter a single text of Scripture. I have great respect for orthodoxy, but my reverence for inspiration is far greater. I would sooner a hundred times over appear to be inconsistent with myself than be inconsistent with the word of God. I never thought it to be any very great crime to seem to be inconsistent with myself, for who am I that I should everlastingly be consistent? But I do think it a great crime to be so inconsistent with the word of God that I should want to lop away a bough or even a twig from so much as a single tree of the forest of Scripture. God forbid that I should cut or shape, even in the least degree, any divine expression. So runs the text, and so we must read it, "God our Saviour; who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth."" —"Salvation By Knowing the Truth"

Doesn't this show Spurgeon version of the Calvinism that he said is the Gospel is different than what other say is Calvinism that they think is the Gospel? "Salvation By Knowing the Truth" Amen salvation by knowing the truth not by not knowing it, not by not believing it, not by not trusting in Jesus Christ our Lord , our God , and our Saviour.

 

[convicted1]

CALV1 wrote:Then it says that "he who believes not, the WRATH (That is the hatred, the absolute full orbered judgemet of God) ABIDES WITH HIM. Yet these people say God loves all?

Here is the Greek word used for "wrath": orgē G3709

Thayer's definition:

1) anger, the natural disposition, temper, character

2) movement or agitation of the soul, impulse, desire, any violent emotion, but esp. anger

3) anger, wrath, indignation

4) anger exhibited in punishment, hence used for punishment itself

a) of punishments inflicted by magistrates

Here is where I think you are missing the point. It's only because of their unbelief, that God hates anyone. It states that "those who believeth not", the wrath of God abides on him. It is because of their unbelief that God's wrath is poured upon them. I can dig up MANY scriptures where God destroyed many people because they would not do what He told them to do through certain prophets. He didn't destroy them just "willy-nilly", but only after they refused to do what was commanded of them to do.

Gen. 38:8 And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother's wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother.

9 And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother.

10 And the thing which he did displeased the LORD: wherefore he slew him also.

Pro. 1:23 Turn you at my reproof: behold, I will pour out my spirit unto you, I will make known my words unto you.

24 Because I have called, and ye refused; I have stretched out my hand, and no man regarded;

25 But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof:

26 I also will laugh at your calamity; I will mock when your fear cometh;

27 When your fear cometh as desolation, and your destruction cometh as a whirlwind; when distress and anguish cometh upon you.

28 Then shall they call upon me, but I will not answer; they shall seek me early, but they shall not find me:

29 For that they hated knowledge, and did not choose the fear of the LORD:

30 They would none of my counsel: they despised all my reproof.

31 Therefore shall they eat of the fruit of their own way, and be filled with their own devices.

Deut.18:15 The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken;

16 According to all that thou desiredst of the LORD thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not.

17 And the LORD said unto me, They have well spoken that which they have spoken.

18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.

19 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.

God wrath will abide on those who fail to believe after He reveals Himself to them, and not before.

i am I AM's!!

Willis

 

[Calv1]

So did Calvin and many Calvinists, like John MacArthur, and even Luke who you are addressing, has affirmed MacArthur on this point...

And..........

 

[Calv1]

Here is the Greek word used for "wrath": orgē G3709

Thayer's definition:

1) anger, the natural disposition, temper, character

2) movement or agitation of the soul, impulse, desire, any violent emotion, but esp. anger

3) anger, wrath, indignation

4) anger exhibited in punishment, hence used for punishment itself

a) of punishments inflicted by magistrates

Here is where I think you are missing the point. It's only because of their unbelief, that God hates anyone. It states that "those who believeth not", the wrath of God abides on him. It is because of their unbelief that God's wrath is poured upon them. I can dig up MANY scriptures where God destroyed many people because they would not do what He told them to do through certain prophets. He didn't destroy them just "willy-nilly", but only after they refused to do what was commanded of them to do.

Gen. 38:8 And Judah said unto Onan, Go in unto thy brother's wife, and marry her, and raise up seed to thy brother.

9 And Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and it came to pass, when he went in unto his brother's wife, that he spilled it on the ground, lest that he should give seed to his brother.

10 And the thing which he did displeased the LORD: wherefore he slew him also.

Pro. 1:23 Turn you at my reproof: behold, I will pour out my spirit unto you, I will make known my words unto you.

24 Because I have called, and ye refused; I have stretched out my hand, and no man regarded;

25 But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof:

26 I also will laugh at your calamity; I will mock when your fear cometh;

27 When your fear cometh as desolation, and your destruction cometh as a whirlwind; when distress and anguish cometh upon you.

28 Then shall they call upon me, but I will not answer; they shall seek me early, but they shall not find me:

29 For that they hated knowledge, and did not choose the fear of the LORD:

30 They would none of my counsel: they despised all my reproof.

31 Therefore shall they eat of the fruit of their own way, and be filled with their own devices.

Deut.18:15 The LORD thy God will raise up unto thee a Prophet from the midst of thee, of thy brethren, like unto me; unto him ye shall hearken;

16 According to all that thou desiredst of the LORD thy God in Horeb in the day of the assembly, saying, Let me not hear again the voice of the LORD my God, neither let me see this great fire any more, that I die not.

17 And the LORD said unto me, They have well spoken that which they have spoken.

18 I will raise them up a Prophet from among their brethren, like unto thee, and will put my words in his mouth; and he shall speak unto them all that I shall command him.

19 And it shall come to pass, that whosoever will not hearken unto my words which he shall speak in my name, I will require it of him.

God wrath will abide on those who fail to believe after He reveals Himself to them, and not before.

i am I AM's!!

Willis

Try again. You were doing alright with your definition of wrath, then made a generalized statement that God doesn't hate "Willy-Nilly"?

It's very simple, those who do not believe, which is most of the world, the WRATH of God abides in them, period!

You might want to read up on Annanias and Saffaira, notice how Peter never said to them, "Oh, you've sinned, repent, repent"? No, they DIED with no offer to repent. Was God not just? Did God not do everything He could for them? Was He unfair? No! When will man understand that God's only obligation to us is Hell, what is unfair, save the cross, is that we get to go to Heaven, that is unfair, and unjust, again, save the cross.

 

[convicted1]

Try again. You were doing alright with your definition of wrath, then made a generalized statement that God doesn't hate "Willy-Nilly"?

It's very simple, those who do not believe, which is most of the world, the WRATH of God abides in them, period!

You might want to read up on Annanias and Saffaira, notice how Peter never said to them, "Oh, you've sinned, repent, repent"? No, they DIED with no offer to repent. Was God not just? Did God not do everything He could for them? Was He unfair? No! When will man understand that God's only obligation to us is Hell, what is unfair, save the cross, is that we get to go to Heaven, that is unfair, and unjust, again, save the cross.

Bro. Calv1,

So, by the way you are implying, then God's wrath abides on newborn babes, because they can not believe. In the verses I showed you, I showed you plainly that God's wrath abode on them after they failed to believe. I am kinda pressed for time right now, but I will dig up more verses and post them later, good Lord willing!! Have a good week, Brother!!

i am I AM's!!

Willis

 

[Robert Snow]

I would not have taken exception. I am not a hyper by any means.

You are the very definition of Hyper-Calvinism, which has little to do with what the bible teaches.

I believe the Gospel call is to all and all are responsible to repent and believe the Gospel.

Only an evil God would require all men to repent, yet not allow some to do what He commanded.

I believe our primary task on this earth is to preach the Gospel to every creature.

Why? If the Elect will come no matter what, why waste our time doing what will be done regardless? Another error in Calvinism.

 

[Calv1]

Bro. Calv1,

So, by the way you are implying, then God's wrath abides on newborn babes, because they can not believe. In the verses I showed you, I showed you plainly that God's wrath abode on them after they failed to believe. I am kinda pressed for time right now, but I will dig up more verses and post them later, good Lord willing!! Have a good week, Brother!!

i am I AM's!!

Willis

Yea, Romans 5 is clear, as are the other verses that we are sinners from the womb. You have a good week too.

 

[Calv1]

You are the very definition of Hyper-Calvinism, which has little to do with what the bible teaches.

Calv1: Whoa! Whos this? You can label anyone you want, better to study before you accuse people of things you are unaware of.

Only an evil God would require all men to repent, yet not allow some to do what He commanded.

Calv1: You are in extremelly dangerous territory. Did God not require we follow all ten commandments? Has anyone save Christ done that? Didn't Christ command us to be perfect? Are you? Be careful, for you are calling God evil!



Why? If the Elect will come no matter what, why waste our time doing what will be done regardless? Another error in Calvinism.

Calv1: Who says them come regardless, you? God ordains not just the ends, but the means.

 

[TomVols]

Calv, friend, please do not post in all bold. Not only is it generally rude, but it's against BB policy. You've done it more than once.

The bold is used for emphasis. To emphasize your whole post can be interpreted as being something you don't want it to be interpreted as.

Please refrain. Thanks.

 

[Rippon]

Only an evil God would require all men to repent, yet not allow some to do what He commanded.

You need to stop calling God an evil monster. There is only one God --the One described in Holy Writ. You aren't going to be very comfortable on that Great Day when you will be called to account for those nasty remarks about the Lord. You need to tread very lighty before making such charges.

The Lord is within His perfect right to enable only some (namely His elect) to believe and repent. He doesn't gift everyone with saving belief and repentance.

Why? If the Elect will come no matter what, why waste our time doing what will be done regardless?

Because He has commanded us to. That's why. Nothing that we do for His Kingdom will be a waste. The Lord employs means to accoplish His purposes.

Another error in Calvinism.

No,just another glaring sign that you don't know whereof you speak.

 

[Iconoclast]

You need to stop calling God an evil monster. There is only one God --the One described in Holy Writ. You aren't going to be very comfortable on that Great Day when you will be called to account for those nasty remarks about the Lord. You need to tread very lighty before making such charges.

The Lord is within His perfect right to enable only some (namely His elect) to believe and repent. He doesn't gift everyone with saving belief and repentance.




Because He has commanded us to. That's why. Nothing that we do for His Kingdom will be a waste. The Lord employs means to accoplish His purposes.



No,just another glaring sign that you don't know whereof you speak.

Well said:thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

[Osage Bluestem]

He also said that the Apostles did NOT choose Him, but that he did them...

he would receive all those that the Father would give Him, and eternally keep them...

Is this a direct reference by the Lord to divine election of God?

Yes this is a direct reference to the elect.

 

[Rippon]

You need to stop calling God an evil monster. There is only one God --the One described in Holy Writ. You aren't going to be very comfortable on that Great Day when you will be called to account for those nasty remarks about the Lord. You need to tread very lighty before making such charges.

I think the above is apropos regarding certain posters committing that sin frequently on the BB.

 

[Iconoclast]

I think the above is apropos regarding certain posters committing that sin frequently on the BB.

Yes...exceedingly vile....:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

[OldRegular]

He also said that the Apostles did NOT choose Him, but that he did them...

he would receive all those that the Father would give Him, and eternally keep them...

Is this a direct reference by the Lord to divine election of God?

YES it is!

 

[OldRegular]

You need to stop calling God an evil monster. There is only one God --the One described in Holy Writ. You aren't going to be very comfortable on that Great Day when you will be called to account for those nasty remarks about the Lord. You need to tread very lighty before making such charges.

I agree with your remarks but why is it that some people insist that those who reject dispensationalism make GOD a liar and those who reject freewillism make GOD a monster?

GOD is GOD and what we know about HIM is revealed in Scripture.