John 6:44 and ability to come to Christ

Answer the question! You simply ignored the question! Does the term "drew" in regard to the fish net mean that the net or the fish simply were influenced by the Fisherman and they came in of their own will rather than FORCEFULLY being pulled in?

ANswer the question! You simply ingnored the question! Does the term "drew" in regard to Peter's sword mean that Peter simply influenced it and it of its own accord came out of his belt and cut the ear of the servant off OR does the term mean that Peter FORCEFULLY "drew" it out and FORCEFULLY cut of the ear of the man???

Answer the question! The context shows they had no choice but the text says they were "CAUGHT" and it was the crowd which "drew" them into the court. The text says they were"TAKEN" out of the temple and brought to the court.

You are simply dealing with these scriptures and the meaning of "drew" dishonestly and YOU KNOW IT! Why be deceitful? Only a false doctrine requires deceit to defend it.

You are the one who is obviously ignoring and then perverting the meaning of "drew" in all the above texts. You are simply being dishonest. If you think that is a false charge then prove it and answer the above questions.

First, the Hebrew text you are using is dealing with saved persons not lost persons. Second, the term "draw" is not isolated but is directly associated with "nigh" and means to come come close and so does the Greek term it translates.

I am not saying God forcefully makes a person do anything. The point of the term "draw" is that God excises power that changes the want to of a sinner from resistance to willingness - Psa. 110:3. Jeremiah 31:3 is speaking of the same eternal elective love of God before the foundation of the world.

So dropping half of Mark 16 make no difference? Omitting part of John 8 makes no difference? Omitting the word "God" from 1 Timothy 3:16 makes no difference, and I could go on and on!


[/QUOTE]Of course, God inspires me. I have the spirit of prophecy, as do all who have the testimony of Jesus. Revelation 19:10 For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy." [/QUOTE]

No you don't! YOu are no prophet and you are not inspired. The spirit of prophecy is subject to the tests of a prophet and there is not a man living who can or has passed those tests of the spirit of prophecy.

 

Until you answer the questions I will just keep repeating the questions. You are not an honest man because you do not answer the questions but then pretend you have.

 

You speak absolute falsehoods and that is what I do not like.

You don't understand my position and that is why you distort and pervert it. I believe that God gives a new heart to sinners (Ezek. 36:26). This is a heart created in true holiness and righteousness and loves light and hates darkness. The will is simply the servant of the heart. When God gives a new heart a new disposition of the will is given so that the person willingly embraces the light and rejects the darkness.

Psalms 110:3 says, "Thy people shall be willing in the day of thy power, "

This is what Jesus means by "draw" in John 6:44 so that all who are drawn come to Christ.

The fact that ALL who are drawn come to Christ proves your interpretation and position are false.

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.

Not one single solitary person the Father draws fails to come and be saved beause the "him" that the Father draws is the "him" that "I will raise HIM up at the last day."

EVERYONE that learns of the Father "cometh unto me"

Your theory has God drawing and teaching but many rejecting him but that is not the case with what Jesus teaches about giving, drawing or teaching by the Father.

Note that "Jesus IS" not Moriah is! Second, take note that Jesus IS the spirit of prophecy"! He is not saying Jesus is the Spirit as in Holy Spirit but rather "spirit" is used here to refer to the heart of a matter or focus of a matter. Prophecy has for its central theme the testimony of Jesus Christ from Genesis to Revelation.

 

If you really think you have even attempted to answer the questions I set forth THREE TIMES then this is hopeless conversation. You have not yet given a direct answer to the first three questions I asked and to say you have is simply a falsehood.

 

You have not! I asked you point blank if the net being drawn by the fisherman fits your defintion of draw.

I asked you point blank if the mobs TOOK HOLD of them and "drew" them into the court could fit your definition of "draw" and you have not responded.

I asked you point blank if the mobs that Luke said had TAKEN them and drew them out of the temple could fit your defintion of "draw" and you have not responded.

I asked you point bland if drawing the sword by Peter meant he talked the sword into coming out or wooed it to come out and you have not responded.

It does not take a rocket scientist to see that the context in which the term "draw" and "drew" are placed in these examples cannot possibly fit your defintion but you are too proud to simply admit that fact.

In all three examples the language associated with the term "drew" cannot possibly mean simply to "infuence" or to "woo" the net, the apostles into the court because they were said to have been "TAKEN" by the crowd in every case.

 

Whether you like it or not and whether you agree with it or not - all these texts use the word "drew" in the exact same sense and NONE use it according to your definition.

Any so-called Bible student that refuses to use a Bible concordance to define terms but instead goes to a English Dictionary is a hopeless case to discuss anything with.

 

There would be no English Bible without the Hebrew and Greek Bible. Your bibleis merely a TRANSLATION and the Bible does not promise that translator's are inspired.

You need a good Bible concordance to see if the translators of your version were honest. A good bible concordance will not only show you what Greek term is being translated but how it is translated throughout the scriptures.

Your translation may have chosen an English word that does not properly translate the Greek term it is being used to represent. Theological bias may well have influenced how the translators chose their terms.

Most Bible students know these things as they are fundementals and they are obvious when you compare English Versions as one version picks one word but another picks another word to represent the same Greek term.

What are you going to do when you quote one version that chooses a word that means one thing but another person chooses another version which uses a different word and both of you accept your chosen version by faith and reject the other person's version and neither will use a concordance to see which translator is being dishonest???

I am not going to discuss anything with you because you are choosing to be willingly ignorant. You won't even use common sense study practices. Think about this, don't you have to learn English before you can read an English version? What if a person argued they will just trust their preacher to learn the truth of God's Word and they don't need to learn English. What would you tell them when you pointed out that a certain biblical word was a verb and they replied "My Bible don't have no verbs and nouns." I had that said to me when sharing Matthew 28:19 while pointing out that "teach" is the primary verb. You are illustrating the same kind of ignorance when you claim you do not have to study any further than the English when the Bible was not given in English but in Hebrew and Greek but your response is you will trust your translators.