Being a former Limited Atonementist and believer of other Calvinisms, I understand sky's eagerness to combat the theology of Calvinism but in this case I don't believe his construct is accurate, but more importantly it is not necessary in
John 6.
Most often it is the interpretation of verses 35-50 that Calvinists believe lend weight to their doctrine, particularly that of election.
However, the passage itself need not be strained
in order to challenge the Calvinist view.
Specifically, our Lord's statement:
Is the source of grief for many due to its misunderstanding.
Unfortunately instead of dealing with the context of His words, those hunting for proof texts to fit a theological grid have lifted them from their surroundings and placed them in the midst of their theological edifice (so they believe it to be anyway).
Their method is to first remove and then impose upon the words that which is not present.
Take the statement "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him".
What does this mean?
Just what it says.
It is a testimony by God a declaration by God that man is in need of God's help and direction to find him.
God must draw that man, all men.
However, beyond what is clear is what others wish to force here and that is the concept that the reality that men must have God's providential draw, His Divine help in coming to Him, is that some how this means God chooses who will and won't be saved.
Nothing in the text suggests this at all.
Nothing.
Zero.
It is a conclusion drawn from supposition and not the text.
It is an imposition on what is present.
But this is how the Calvinist is taught and exampled; to approach the Bible with such the expectation and demand to find that which supports their system of theology though texts fail to reasonably support it.
And in that search any even seeming inference is seized upon and immediately enlisted as an aid to their theology though in reality a verse or passage simply stands indifferent or contrary to Calvinism.
Verse 37 is even more perplexing for some.
Instantly the Calvinist has been programmed to see and accept this automatically means "ELECTION".
The first and most obvious question is by-passed, rendering the textual injury to the Calvinist.
To our Lord, Jesus, whom does the Father give?
Those that believe on Christ as Savior.
Believers are the Father's gift to the Son.
Hence, all that the Father gives Him, will certainly come to Him and He (Jesus) will never drive away.
Does God give unbelievers to Christ?
Of course not, but this obvious question must be asked.
The point here is not election, as some hope in their claim but the certainty salvation in Christ.
And here is where the context is critical.
Previous to the passage I quoted is the event.
The event of feeding the 5,000 and the subsequent hunt for Jesus.
Those looking for Him find Him and our Lord makes it clear:
The context is them wanting a kind of eternal life without truly desiring the truth.
The response by them shows this:
This is not about establishing some mysterious doctrine of God only electing certain people to be saved.
This is about the spiritual blindness of man in His sinful and fallen state and the nature of redemption.
And here it is particularly emphasized because our Lord was dealing with the children of Israel whose claim to salvation was still tied to their national identity and through doctrinal ignorance had gone from understanding the prophecy of the coming Messiah 500 years before to now believing their Jewishness and their religious forms of righteousness could save them.
(Bible quotes from the NIV)
Click to expand...