Unconditional Election

You are forced to teach the absolute rediculous and silly notion that "come unto me" and/or "come to me" means being placed "in Christ" when the act of coming is what "all" DO whereas being placed "in Christ" is only something God can do:

1 Cor. 1:30 But of him are ye in Christ Jesus,

Eph. 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus

So you hairbrain interpretation that to "come to me" means being placed in Christ is refuted by the Scripture as that is something no man can do and coming is what you do. Only God can place someone "in Christ."

Therefore "come to me" does not refer to being placed "in Christ" but is what the "all" do as evidence they have been "given" by the Father to come to Christ.

If you want to make "give to me" mean "in Christ" then fine! As that is the act of God but coming is the act of man and in context coming to Christ is beleiving in him as the contrast between verse 36 with verse 37 clearly shows and as the contrast between verse 36 and verse 40 shows as "saw and believe not" is precisely parallel with "see and believeth".

 

Oh sure it is "personal attacks" to point out you were not quoting scripture but making your own paraphase?????? try honesty for a change!

 

Exactly! It is YOUR commentary, YOUR paraphase and that is what you are FORCED to do because the Word of God itself cannot be forced to say the absolute nonsense found in YOUR commentary and that is precisely why you must FLEE God's Word and INVENT your own paraphrase.

Please point out where God's Word in verse 36 uses the words "come to see him"? Nowhere! Nor does "come" in verse 37 mean "come to see me" as even you reject that by insisting it means being "placed in him" or "arrive IN ME". So make up your mind whilch false rendition do you believe "come" means? Does it mean "come to see him" or does it mean "being placed in him"???????

It means neither as the context repudiates both of your false ideas. No man can place themselves "in him" and nowhere in scripture does "come to me" ever mean such nonsense.

You are spiritually blind to the Word of God and cannot see no matter what evidence is placed before you.

 

Jesus promises that he WILL raise up in the End ALL those whom the Father granted unto Him to have ...


cannot be any clearer that ALL whoa re really saved by god will be kept by god, and will be receiving their fullness of salvation when this perishable flesh puts on/clothed in Immortality!

 

Both Romans and John deal with God determining who really believes from the heart.

Not one lexicon says coming means faith. The phrase come to Him in faith is what you have rewritten the text to say. Not how it reads.

How if they never arrived in Jesus could they be cast out? Of course the word, the first "come" in the verse means "arrive in."

No content here, just the usual personal attack from Calvinists.

Denial of the obvious. Of course it equates come to me with see me. Can you not read? Verse 40 shows that coming to Jesus and seeing him does not equate with believing, they must do both. This is simple English.

Folks behold the rewrite of scripture. Here we have the complete rewrite of the text. Try coupling come and see, rather than see and believe, because in the context, many came and saw but did not believe. You exegetical effort is a joke.

It does not matter the mode of transport, if a person is being placed in Jesus, it is God alone who does the transfer. When you arrive in Jesus you have come to Jesus and God did it. John 6:37.

I have explained what the verse says. No amount of personal attacks will deflect the truth. All that the Father gives to Me comes to (arrives in) Me, and I will not cast them out. This is crystal.

More nonsense. #3 says we do not come to Jesus to be given, but we who are given come to, arrive in, Christ. No contradiction, thus a strawman evasion. Typical Calvinist tactic.

More incoherent nonsense. All who are given come to (arrive in) Jesus. This is really simple.

Folks, now we have the total misrepresentation of my position. God puts us in Christ, we do not put ourselves in Christ.

Bottom line the Calvinist view of John 6:37 has been shown to be a rewrite,i.e. all that are given come to faith, when it reads all that are given come to (arrive in) Me. Post after post full of personal attacks will not change this simple truth.

 

Nonsense times two

All that the Father gives Me shall come to (arrive in) Me, and I shall not cast them out. Unless they arrived in Christ, they could not be cast out. Therefore that is the meaning. Duh.

I can read, but apparently you think someone can be cast out of something they are not in. Irrational nonsense times two.

It is God who transfers us out of the realm of darkness into the kingdom of His Son. This change in location results in the person coming to Jesus meaning arriving in Christ.

 

Pitchback yet again.

I told you what I think the passage says and gave the basis. Rather than address the content, you try to disparage me because I did not waste space printing the passage again. Weak

First you accept that I have presented my understanding of the verse, then complain I did not just quote the verse without explaining my view of it. Weak. You have seen Me means they have come to the proximity of Jesus to hear His gospel. They could not have seen Him if they had not traveled to see Him. This is just another effort to muddy the waters and argue about the obvious.

More evasion of the obvious. When they came to see Him, they had not heard the gospel and believed, therefore when they came to see Him they had not been given by the Father. Now after they believed as determined by the Father, then All that the Father gives to me shall come to (arrive in) Me, and I will certainly not cast out.

More misrepresentation, only God gives us to Christ by placing us in Christ, the sanctification by the Spirit through faith in the truth.

One personal attack after another, devoid of content.

 

God the father elects those whom he chooses to be saved by trhe Cross of Christ, sends the Holy Spirit unto them to enable them to receive jesus by faith!

the entire trinity involved in saving us from spiritual death to spiritual life, and jesus comment is just to point out to us that God secures us in christ, that its HIS Will that we are now his, and that NO ONE can overcome the will of God and have us lost!

 

Both Romans and John deal with MANY DIFFERENT THINGS! Have you ever heard of a thing called immediate context???? Apparently not! The immeidiate context of Romans 4 is justification not election. The immediate context of John 6:29-70 is faith in Christ and how it occurs. You can deny this but you have not, and cannot deal with the IMMEDIATE contextual evidence. To "come" to Christ in John 6:35-40 means to believe in him. It is something done by a person whereas election and being placed "in Christ" is something done by God. You cannot deal with these facts. You ignore them, you pervert them, but they remain facts.

Never said the word "come" or the Greek term that translates it has a LEXICAL meaning of faith. I said it is a METAPHOR for faith, just "eat" and "drink" in this context is a metaphor of partaking of Christ by faith. It is contextually set in contrast to "believed not" in verse 36. It is contextually set in contrast to "saw and believe not" (v. 36) to "see and believeth" in verse 40. It is set in contrast to "beleved not" (v. 64) to "come" in verse 65 and "it" is what only God can give (v. 65).

You may not like these FACTS but they are indisputable contextual facts.

Your explanation is self-contradictory as you set forth two contrasting definitions for "come" in John 6:36-40

1. "come to see me"
2. "arrive in me"

Neither is correct. The second contradicts other plain scripture (1 Cor. 1:30; Eph. 2:10; Eph. 1;4; 2 Thes. 2:13) as only God can place someone "in Christ" and "come" refers to the action of the person not to God.

Your second is rediculous because those rejecting Christ and some disciples all had "come to see" Christ but Jesus says no man "can come to me" except the Father gave him to him and all these "came to see him."

Again, "come" is something the "all" do but placing someone in Christ is only something God can do. Cast out refers to being among the "all" whom are given to Christ and who will come to faith in Christ.

So you are making the absolute rediculous claim that no human being can "see" Christ except it be given to him to see Christ by God - v. 40??? You say "see" equates to "come" do you not??

So you are making the rediculous claim that those in verse 36 "saw" him, meaning they did come to him which you define as "arrive in him" and so they are "in Christ" as unbelievers?

You talk about denying the obvious - it obviously means "come to me" in faith. The entire context demands it as your meanings are absurd and contradictory to the text, context and to themselves.

Here is the joke! They were already PRESENT and John DOES NOT use the word "come" to decribe any action of those in verse 36. You INSERT something that the Bible does not say, use or mean! You have to INSERT the term "come" in order to escape its obvious contextual use and meaning.

This is the way you interpet scripture - you INSERT your own words, omit the words used by Christ, change the meanings and then present n contradicting and aburd meanings.

The term "come" cannot mean both "arrive in him" and "see" and "come to see." That is your desperation at work.

1. It cannot mean "arrive in him" as the term "come" is descriptive of man's action but putting someone in Christ is God's action.

2. It cannot mean "see" or "come to see me" as John 6:40 says no man can "come to me" except it is given of him by the Father.

So you can "arrive in him" WITHOUT FAITH??? There are unbelievers "in him"? You claimed those in John 6:36 also did "come" to him and they are unbelievers! This is the kind of absurdity you are forced to embrace.

Oh please cut out the martyr complex. It is not a PERSONAL attack on you to claim your interpetation is nonsense! It is your interpetation that is being attacked not your person and your interpretation has been shown to be rediculous.

The placing into Christ occurred "before the world began" (Eph. 1:4) and even the restricted meaning "from the beginning" of creation (2 Thes. 2:13) rules out any contribution by those given to the Son for "arriving in him" as that is a CREATIVE act of God (Eph. 2:10).

Besides you cannot claim the same term means "arrive in him" and equates to "see" him.

You don't deal with scripture honestly or fairly but do whatever it takes to make it mean what you want and everyone reading our discussion can clearly see that.

 

You did not address the content of the text! I am the only one in this debate that sticks to the context. You fled the content and substituted YOUR COMMENTARY because the content won't fit your theory and contradicts YOUR commentary.

This is simply false! First, we are debating the usage of the word "come" in John 6 and that term is simply not used in verse 36 but you INSERT it by your own reasoning. Verse 36 says nothing about any trip, any arrival, they are already PRESENT.

Second, those in verse 36 are NEVER said to have believed but you say "therefore when they came to see him they had not been given by the Father, Now after they believed" - THAT IS FALSE - There is nothing in this context that even hints those in verse 36 EVER believed.

Third, you cannot manke "come" mean "see" AND "arrive in me" but that is the rediculousness you are forced to in your above explanation of verse 36 where you make it mean "come to see me" and then in verse 37 make it mean "arrive in me." Both are rediculous, both are wrong and both contradict the context and other scriptures.

 

Pitchback

God elects those whose faith in the truth He credits as righteousness by placing them spiritually in Christ, the sanctification by the Spirit.

We have already shown unregenerate men receive the gospel with joy, therefore they had been enabled or never disabled. Please address scripture rather than make mistaken assertions.

 

Yet another long repetitive mistaken post!!

Nonsense yet again. Context means context. Please stop redefining words. The context of Romans 4 is justification through faith. When God chooses to credit our faith in Christ as righteousness, He puts us spiritually in Christ, our individual election for salvation.

To come to Christ in John 6:35-40 refers to changing location, whether physically by our effort or spiritually by God's action.

Come to me cannot be a metaphor for come to faith. Jesus said people had seen Him yet did not believe. But all the ones who do believe, the Father gives to Christ, and those who come to me will not be cast out. This is obvious.

News flash, two different Greek words appear in John 6:37, the first one means arrive and the second mean travel. Just saying.

Yet another repeat of the silly idea God cannot transfer a person from being in the realm of darkness, in Adam, to being in the kingdom of His Son, in Christ. Utter nonsense repeated and repeated.

Nonsense times two. The disciples had come to see and to hear the gospel, but not all believed. This is so obvious. Just read the passage folks.

The all refers to all those given to Christ, they all arrive in Christ and are not cast out. Again this is obvious.

More misrepresentation. The traveled to the proximity of Jesus to see Jesus and hear His message. Some did not believe. Verse 36, some came and saw Jesus but did not believe. This is obvious.

Note the effort to simply say the opposite of what I said. LOL

More assertions of obviously mistaken views. We have have what scripture says, All the Father gives to Me shall come to Me, with the word translated come meaning to arrive in. And this must be the correct view, because only if a person had arrived in Jesus, could they be cast out of Jesus. This is inescapable.

Here we have the denial that the people in verse 24 came to Jesus to see Him. Talk about fiction.

Here we have the usual Calvinistic tactic of charging their opponent with whatever they are doing. I say come to me means come to me, and Calvinism says no it means come to faith. They remove me and insert faith. Then they charge me with inserting words. Go figure.

Two different Greek words are translated "come" in verse 37. Folks, look it up in an interlinear. Calvinism is based on shoddy bible study.

 

More stonewalling from the Calvinist.

22 On the next day, the multitude that stood on the other side of the sea saw that there was no other boat there, except the one in which his disciples had embarked, and that Jesus hadn’t entered with his disciples into the boat, but his disciples had gone away alone. 23 However boats from Tiberias came near to the place where they ate the bread after the Lord had given thanks. 24 When the multitude therefore saw that Jesus wasn’t there, nor his disciples, they themselves got into the boats, and came to Capernaum, seeking Jesus. 25 When they found him on the other side of the sea, they asked him, “Rabbi, when did you come here?”
26 Jesus answered them, “Most certainly I tell you, you seek me, not because you saw signs, but because you ate of the loaves, and were filled. 27 Don’t work for the food which perishes, but for the food which remains to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give to you. For God the Father has sealed him.”
28 They said therefore to him, “What must we do, that we may work the works of God?”
29 Jesus answered them, “This is the work of God, that you believe in him whom he has sent.”
30 They said therefore to him, “What then do you do for a sign, that we may see, and believe you? What work do you do? 31 Our fathers ate the manna in the wilderness. As it is written, ‘He gave them bread out of heaven‡ to eat.’”✡
32 Jesus therefore said to them, “Most certainly, I tell you, it wasn’t Moses who gave you the bread out of heaven, but my Father gives you the true bread out of heaven. 33 For the bread of God is that which comes down out of heaven, and gives life to the world.”
34 They said therefore to him, “Lord, always give us this bread.”
35 Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life. He who comes to me will not be hungry, and he who believes in me will never be thirsty. 36 But I told you that you have seen me, and yet you don’t believe. 37 All those whom the Father gives me will come to me. He who comes to me I will in no way throw out. 38 For I have come down from heaven, not to do my own will, but the will of him who sent me. 39 This is the will of my Father who sent me, that of all he has given to me I should lose nothing, but should raise him up at the last day. 40 This is the will of the one who sent me, that everyone who sees the Son, and believes in him, should have eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day.” (John 6:22-40 WEB)

Lets review the passage:

John 6:26, Jesus tells the multitude, they are seeking Jesus because of the wrong reason, i.e. the material sustenance provided by the miracle of the bread.

27: Jesus say they should not make efforts to gain temporal sustenance, but instead should seek eternal life.

28: They ask what they need to do to obtain this eternal life.

29: Jesus tells them that the work God requires of them is to believe in Jesus.

30: They said, give us a miracles so that we will believe. Thus they understand that the work is theirs and not God's.

31: They try to support the validity of their request for a miracle by referring to God providing manna from heaven.

32-34 They again ask for the bread of eternal life.

35: Jesus says he who comes to me will never hunger and he who believes in me will never thirst. The idea here is that coming to Jesus is to gather around Him and so to hear His gospel.

36: Those that have come ( to see Him) do not believe. Thus coming to Jesus does not equate with believing in Jesus.
But refers to being in proximity with Jesus.

37: However, the ones the Father gives to Me, shall come to (arrive in) Me. This then is not referring to our effort to be in the proximity of Jesus, but God's action to put us in Christ, where we will not be cast out.

So the bottom line is a change in location effected by God, not our believing.

 

Justification has NOTHING to do with placing us "spiritually in Christ" but has to do with our LEGAL position in Christ. It is regeneration that "spiritually" unites us to Christ (Eph. 2:1,6,10).

Justification is God imputing/crediting the righteousness of Christ to our account because of our faith in him.

The context of Roman 4 is justification NOT election or regeneration. The context of John 6 is electiong (Father giving) and faith (coming to Christ)

It is sad to say, but you don't even understand the difference between justification and regeneration - one is purely LEGAL POSITION in Christ while the other is SPIRITUAL position in Christ.

 

This is the classic CULTIC method of incorporating two contrary definitions in order to escape contextual condemnation.

1. Please point out just ONE USAGE of "come to me" in John 6:36-65 where it refers to change of physical location. Where the word "come" is actually found in the text rather than you inserting it by YOUR interpretation.

2. God's actionn is defined by the words "give" and "draw" but never once by the word "come" in John 6. Please point out to us where the word "come" is ever used to describe God's action in John 6. Where the word "come" is actually found in the text describing God's action rather than you inserting it or inferring it by YOUR interpetatation.

 

You are perverting scriptures by your rash hands.

1. You reverse the stated cause and effect by placing beleiving as the cause of the Father giving when you say: "All the ones who do believe, the Father gives to Christ" when the text reverses that and attributes coming to Christ as a conseuqence of first being given by the Father to Christ. You have no right to reverse the cause and effect in Christ's words in verse 37 and 39. But you must to support your false doctrine.

2. If "come" is not a metaphor for coming to Christ in faith then how do you explain what is the bridge that connects between being given and not being cast out?? Where does faith in Christ fit between being given and not being cast out? Is faith then found in being given?

3. John 6:36-40 is an obvious contrast between those who "saw and did not believe" (v. 36) and those that "seeth and believeth" (v. 40). Verse 37-39 define the difference between the two. Those in verse 36 were not given by the Father to the Son because "ALL" the Father gives do come to the Son and so it is obvious that those in verse 36 did not "come to me" in that sense even though they did come to Christ in the sense you define the word "come" for if they had "come to me" in the sense of verses 37,39 then they could not have been cast out. Hence, you definition of "come" is obviously false.

4. Those in verse 36 did come to him physically but they could not have "come to me" in the sense the word "come" means in verses 37,39. Hence, the only other contrast that "come" can mean in this context is between the words "believe not" and "believeth" as both came physically and saw him but the contrast is between "believe not" and "believeth on him".

5. Likewise, in verses 64-65 where the same contrast is between "not believed" and "come to me".

 

You are correct that there are two differnt Greek terms used in verse 37. The first is a future tense demonstating that this coming is future from being given thus establishing grammatically the cause for coming as being given and thus arriving to be the future effect. This grammatically repudiates your reversal of believing to be the cause of being given.

The second Greek term is present tense showing that this is a continuing action just like believeth is a continuing action. This repudiates you interpretation that it refers to either physical arrival and/or spiritual placement in Christ as both of these ideas demand a completed action verb as being placed in Christ is not a ongoing action but always represented in scriptures as a completed action.

The idea is simple. The bridge between those being given and not being cast out is that "ALL" who are given shall arrive (completed action) by faith in Christ and all who shall arrive by faith continue to believe in him and that is why they shall never be cast out.

 

You don't like God's choice of terms and grammar do you, so you deny, pervert, and change His words to suit yourself. The word "come to me" grammatically refer to the action of the "all" not to the action of the Father no matter how much you would like it to refer to the actions fo the Father.

The action of placing a person in Christ is NEVER attributed to person but always to God. It is an action that the person being placed in Christ can NEVER contribute to becuase it is a CREATIVE action by God alone:

"For we are HIS WORKMANSHIP CREATED in Christ Jesus" - Eph. 2:10

"For OF HIM are we in Christ" - 1 Cor. 1:30

"He hath chosen us in him BEFORE THE FOUNDATION OF THE WORLD" - Eph. 1:4

"FROM THE BEGINNING God hath chosen us" - 2 Thes. 2:13

Being placed in Christ is NEVER attributed to us and NEVER does the Bible use language that attributes that action to us.

However, this is what you are forced to believe and forced to pervert God's Word to teach.

 

You are ignoring the fact that Jesus denied they had "come to me" in verse 65 and could not "come to me" in the sense Jesus means except it be given of him to "come to me" by the Father.

Hence, the meaning Jesus gives to "come" cannot be your meaning as they never did "come to me" in the sense Jesus used and defined the term "come" in this passage.

The passage itself provides the meaning intended for the reader. Verse 64 clearly tells the readers what they did not do - "believed not" and that is precisely what Jesus claimed they did not do in verse 65 "no man can COME TO ME".

This is so obvious that coming means actually believing in him as Peter understood it precisely that way when he saw some disciples depart from Christ after hearing these words, he responded when Christ asked will ye leave also:


Jn. 6:69 And we believe and are sure that thou art that Christ, the Son of the living God.

 

You claimed that "come equates to see" did you not? I can reference your post if I need to! Or have you changed your mind?

It is plain that "come" cannot possibly equate to "see" in verses 37,39,40,65 as it is defined there as something those in verses 36 and 65 NEVER did and cannot do except the Father give them and draw them. Yet in verse 36 they "saw" him but did not "come" in the sense that Jesus used the word. Thus your definition of come to equate "see" is pure folly and false.

Those in verse 36 and in verse 64 NEVER believed in Christ and NEVER did "come to me" in the sense Jesus uses the term "come."